[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos

[Startstar]

This coin is not saved

[1714949440]

1714949440

[1714949440]

1714949440

[Sabretooth]

To avoid dumping its a matter of sequence.

1. First do your internal share offering for the holders of XC currency where they are 'given' shares based on how many XC they hold.  Close off 1.
2. Then allow the wider community to purchase shares using XC currency only - you could recycle the currency almost straight back to market to avoid price exploding beyond what is sustainable.
3. Then allow the wider community to purchase shares using any currency.

This should give a softer landing for XC.  IMHO I would skip 3 and only do 1 & 2, much better for everyone.

Just bumping this because its partly relevant to the current discussion.

[synechist]

To avoid dumping its a matter of sequence.

1. First do your internal share offering for the holders of XC currency where they are 'given' shares based on how many XC they hold.  Close off 1.
2. Then allow the wider community to purchase shares using XC currency only - you could recycle the currency almost straight back to market to avoid price exploding beyond what is sustainable.
3. Then allow the wider community to purchase shares using any currency.

This should give a softer landing for XC.  IMHO I would skip 3 and only do 1 & 2, much better for everyone.

Just bumping this because its partly relevant to the current discussion.

Yeah I really like this idea.

My only concern with it at the moment is that if people buy shares with XC, then this will cause XC Inc. to hold a lot of the currency.

I'd prefer it to remain well-distributed.

[synechist]

Let's sketch a scenario:

My biggest concern at the moment is to avoid causing an XC pump and dump.

The question we'll need to ask ourselves is whether traders will be incentivised to sell XC after ITO. I think it comes down to the following scenario:

- If owning XC before the ITO means I get XC + XC Inc. shares,
- but then holding XC after the ITO means only holding currency,
- does XCurrency thereby lose value after the ITO?

The answer, I think, is that from now until the ITO, XC has double value (i.e. XC + XC Inc. shares), after which it'll go back to having its usual value.

However, this will not provoke me to dump, because:
- if I dump before the ITO I don't get to redeem XC's double-value
- if I dump after the ITO my coins have gone back to their usual value already, so the incentive to dump disappears.

So after the ITO, I imagine that traders will simply choose to hold or dump based on the currency's prospects.

prospects is the magic word here, they won't dump if they realise that shares and XC give them different kinds of value in the future.

XC: stake money, xmixer fees . probably web 3.0 serving fees

shares: actual owning part of the company, probably divident payments in the future.

If you can communicate the pros of each and don't tie them in any way i'm not afraid of a dump.

Yes. To my mind this works.

That said, my poor mind has been awake way too much. I only got 3 1/2 hours sleep due to all the excitement here.

I need to take a nap. See you later folks. :-)

[swannsonite]

XC should not be linked to the XC Inc. tokens past distribution.
I think if there is enough reason to have a "stock" then there is enough reason for them to be separate.

If coins are time locked to get the tokens. How would that affect the network since it is POS?
If a large holder decided not to trade for tokens would they get a larger percent of the blocks making 51% type attacks easier? Or does the lock just prevent sending but not staking?

[KimmyF]

Let's sketch a scenario:

My biggest concern at the moment is to avoid causing an XC pump and dump.

The question we'll need to ask ourselves is whether traders will be incentivised to sell XC after ITO. I think it comes down to the following scenario:

- If owning XC before the ITO means I get XC + XC Inc. shares,
- but then holding XC after the ITO means only holding currency,
- does XCurrency thereby lose value after the ITO?

The answer, I think, is that from now until the ITO, XC has double value (i.e. XC + XC Inc. shares), after which it'll go back to having its usual value.

However, this will not provoke me to dump, because:
- if I dump before the ITO I don't get to redeem XC's double-value
- if I dump after the ITO my coins have gone back to their usual value already, so the incentive to dump disappears.

So after the ITO, I imagine that traders will simply choose to hold or dump based on the currency's prospects.

prospects is the magic word here, they won't dump if they realise that shares and XC give them different kinds of value in the future.

XC: stake money, xmixer fees . probably web 3.0 serving fees

shares: actual owning part of the company, probably divident payments in the future.

If you can communicate the pros of each and don't tie them in any way i'm not afraid of a dump.

In my logic you are saying the same as me. They both have there own value & there must be no link between them. So why create a link in the first place?

I think the base of the current discussion is how current XC holders can get some shares (btw: thanks for this)
The risk of P&D is imo based on a timeframe, call it the ICO period or the lock period after coins where used to get shares but it still is just a time period with a fancy name.
Its good to have XC before that timeframe (get shares) and that single purpose will vanish after that time. I know there are many more reasons to hold XC but after that time one of those reasons will go away.

So why not reward XC holders continuously with XC when appropriate (XC inc had its first good year) by sending XC (generates buy pressure) to XC holders at that time?
All i see is added value to a XC coin that can transfer same as the coins itself so only adds value that will not go away.
And no legal link

Or am i missing something, are share/tokens equivalent to something more than monetary gain?
Im dutch so sometimes thats the only thing i think of:)

[onealfa]

One poster before me (I can not find the post anymore) claimed that the userbase is not growing. I made a screenshot on 09/10/14 (5329 Top N addresses) and 09/20/14 (6241 Top-N addresses). The number of used wallets has grown 17% in 11 days!!!!
Please check these screenshots:
http://imgur.com/OOrHoaK
http://imgur.com/FeivKzz
You can also see that the wealth of the Top-N addresses is decreasing. The distribution of XC is improving dramatically. Around 70k XC moved from the Top 10 addresses to the userbase.

1) The userbase is growing
2) Wealth distribution is going south   ....

And here we are 4 days later - TOP 10 still shrinking (and dumping on exchanges?):

[newguy12]

I don't know where this discussion is going but I based my buy on the following tweet:

XC ‏@XCurrency  19h
$XC holders will automatically own shares in the #XCurrency ICO without selling #XC!

Was this statement misleading?

[jibble]

I don't know where this discussion is going but I based my buy on the following tweet:

XC ‏@XCurrency  19h
$XC holders will automatically own shares in the #XCurrency ICO without selling #XC!

Was this statement misleading?

No , you will get 1 Xinc share per 10 xc you hold.

[onealfa]

Xnode 1002 XC (4x250) online 2 days nonstop, port 32348 open, latest v0.9.2.49.06.XCurrency-REV2., wallet [autonode] ok, 68 active connections, two WAN's 300 Mbps, ping 2-3 msec to ISP,
and ... not even one single mixing transaction in 48 hours !  
?!
hmmm...is this just a bad luck?
Or shall I dig deeper for a reason it all goes this way?

[battbot]

I don't know where this discussion is going but I based my buy on the following tweet:

XC ‏@XCurrency  19h
$XC holders will automatically own shares in the #XCurrency ICO without selling #XC!

Was this statement misleading?

No , you will get 1 Xinc share per 10 xc you hold.

Yes, this is correct. Discussion has been ongoing regarding the process and parameters of the ico

[Teka]

Let's sketch a scenario:

My biggest concern at the moment is to avoid causing an XC pump and dump.

The question we'll need to ask ourselves is whether traders will be incentivised to sell XC after ITO. I think it comes down to the following scenario:

- If owning XC before the ITO means I get XC + XC Inc. shares,
- but then holding XC after the ITO means only holding currency,
- does XCurrency thereby lose value after the ITO?

The answer, I think, is that from now until the ITO, XC has double value (i.e. XC + XC Inc. shares), after which it'll go back to having its usual value.

However, this will not provoke me to dump, because:
- if I dump before the ITO I don't get to redeem XC's double-value
- if I dump after the ITO my coins have gone back to their usual value already, so the incentive to dump disappears.

So after the ITO, I imagine that traders will simply choose to hold or dump based on the currency's prospects.

prospects is the magic word here, they won't dump if they realise that shares and XC give them different kinds of value in the future.

XC: stake money, xmixer fees . probably web 3.0 serving fees

shares: actual owning part of the company, probably divident payments in the future.

If you can communicate the pros of each and don't tie them in any way i'm not afraid of a dump.

I really like that point, holding at least 1000xc already gets you 'divdends'.

[cryptico]

Xnode 1002 XC (4x250) online 2 days nonstop, port 32348 open, latest v0.9.2.49.06.XCurrency-REV2., wallet [autonode] ok, 68 active connections, two WAN's 300 Mbps, ping 2-3 msec to ISP,
and ... not even one single mixing transaction in 48 hours !  
?!
hmmm...is this just a bad luck?
Or shall I dig deeper for a reason it all goes this way?

No for me is the same I've got One transaction fee since the beginning of the last rev and nothing in the last 48 Hours but at least the negative fee problem seem resolved... maybe not so many people are doing anon transactions right now as it is still limited by tiny XC amounts.

[reebokasss]

whos the fuck is dumping on mintpal?? yesterday after news price was 150+ and now price is the same like yesterday before news (135) ... i cant understand what need to happen that price would start to rise...

[Dungor]

Xnode 1002 XC (4x250) online 2 days nonstop, port 32348 open, latest v0.9.2.49.06.XCurrency-REV2., wallet [autonode] ok, 68 active connections, two WAN's 300 Mbps, ping 2-3 msec to ISP,
and ... not even one single mixing transaction in 48 hours !  
?!
hmmm...is this just a bad luck?
Or shall I dig deeper for a reason it all goes this way?

No for me is the same I've got One transaction fee since the beginning of the last rev and nothing in the last 48 Hours but at least the negative fee problem seem resolved... maybe not so many people are doing anon transactions right now as it is still limited by tiny XC amounts.

I don't think many will use anon transactions for the foreseeable future, the adoption of XCurrency is simply not great enough yet. It will come once XC is the token to purchase services on the XCplatform, or later when there perhaps is a XCmarked like craigslist.

[cryptico]

Xnode 1002 XC (4x250) online 2 days nonstop, port 32348 open, latest v0.9.2.49.06.XCurrency-REV2., wallet [autonode] ok, 68 active connections, two WAN's 300 Mbps, ping 2-3 msec to ISP,
and ... not even one single mixing transaction in 48 hours !  
?!
hmmm...is this just a bad luck?
Or shall I dig deeper for a reason it all goes this way?

No for me is the same I've got One transaction fee since the beginning of the last rev and nothing in the last 48 Hours but at least the negative fee problem seem resolved... maybe not so many people are doing anon transactions right now as it is still limited by tiny XC amounts.

I don't think many will use anon transactions for the foreseeable future, the adoption of XCurrency is simply not great enough yet. It will come once XC is the token to purchase services on the XCplatform, or later when there perhaps is a XCmarked like craigslist.

People with big amounts will benefit from anon transactions already by moving their coins in other addresses and Hiding the link between them and the blockchain. for this You need to be able to send large amounts imo.

[MemoryShock]

Our digital relationships breaking down boarders

So after XC's tech matures, how about we replace governments with this?

It'll scale from grassroots, anywhere, run on phones, and due to its privacy there'll be no way of stopping it.

Yes please.

[SouthernBTC]

Still seems to me there will be a conflict of interest between Dan's role as XCeo and XCdev. As a ceo there will be pressure on him to make profit for his shareholders (and lets not be naive enough to assume we early adopters will be a majority of the shareholders) and his responsibility to build and improve on xc the currency and its blockchain.

[KimmyF]

Still seems to me there will be a conflict of interest between Dan's role as XCeo and XCdev. As a ceo there will be pressure on him to make profit for his shareholders (and lets not be naive enough to assume we early adopters will be a majority of the shareholders) and his responsibility to build and improve on xc the currency and its blockchain.

The second is the base needed for the first. That's no problem but an advantage.

[policymaker]

Really liking the constant pressure on more ITO info and general arguments made conerning the nature of the company.

I am also seing people worrying about the price? Really people? We know we r closing on rev2.5 and after that release, the ITO was announced ALONG with news regarding several code-review procedures(standard ones and suprises as well), and I STILL see negativity. This is crypto world for fucks sake and the volume is still low. ALSO BY THE WAY DID ANY1 NOTICE OUR ANNON WAS RIGHT AFTER THE PAYPAL ONE? Doesn't that ring any freaking bells, meaning it would pretty much "conceal" the XC annon? All im saying is that the crypto scene is recovering from the positive paypal news and they havent yet joined our party!