Is Quark Coin worth a Buy?

[Spoetnik]

I want to bump this to go with my point on another topic showing your incessant Lying and Trolling OP.
Every day for a week or two you have been pounding this places with lies and games and bs about Quark
in defense of criticism on NXT and more specifically about a common way NXT works..

Both have ANN topics that lay out the truth for all to see so your lying is stupid and pointless.  

[quarkfx]

I don´t mind people posting that Quark is dead. Bad news is good news - people keep telling that since January and no, it´s still not dead, particularly the community.

I understood that people complained about the "Quark premine scam". It was false from the very beginning and a bad observation of a real problem that is false market cap assumptions: Quark bumped to the top 5 coins because it was distributing quicker than other coins and that´s why people would call it premine. This way people believed it was more valuable and there went the snowball effect. It wasn´t a scam though. I believe that few people earned money from the pump, but then I find it ridiculous to blame people for pumping as this is the main activity of 90% of all people in Altcoin. I hate it as well, but it´s a fact and the people who earn from this are usually not miners but traders who didn´t contribute to the currency in any way.

People keep repeating shit (especially speculators) and some people even thought it was true and repeated it as well over and over again but Quark was never premined, it was only one of the first coins with a quick distribution scheme. In some sense it is funny that Quark is still getting this kind of shit storms (or rather shit breeze) while other coins like Darkcoinwere actually premining and distributing in a way quicker manner.

I think Quark was told to be dead over and over again and it´s true that this scares off people, but I don´t see why it shouldn´t recover.

Btw. Kolin is not Quark, he is neither the developer nor an official spokesperson. Also, he never killed anybody as was told be the OP. I also think that this talking about "NXT sockpuppets" needs to stop. It feels like reading conspiracy theories.

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

Let me quote me on this one:

For the people that is reading the stupid replies of digitalindustry please, read this before:

http://kolinevans.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/on-po-proof-of-scam-defining-the-rational-crypto-currency-exclusive-socioeconomic-dynamic/
http://kolinevans.wordpress.com/2014/07/04/why-has-litecoin-decoupled-from-bitcoin-and-is-on-a-price-decline-and-why-is-this-important-for-quark-and-other-free-market-crypto-currencies/

Arrgh.  You wasted my time!  Shame on you.

If it wasn't a clear attempt to promote a shitcoin, I'd think it is some automatically generated content.

These quotes come from 2 respected and well known members of this forum, nothing close to "sockpuppets".

Thus, please people, consider it 2times before wasting time reading this mentally-sick individual called digitalindustry.

 My suggest? Ignore button.

[metap2pool]

I don't know if it was a scam. What I do think is that Quark was a clever idea badly executed.
Me and a few other guys took over a quark clone (metacoin). We're trying to come with a better execution and focus on innovation.

[quarkfx]

I don't know if it was a scam. What I do think is that Quark was a clever idea badly executed.
Me and a few other guys took over a quark clone (metacoin). We're trying to come with a better execution and focus on innovation.

I don´t mind people disagreeing with the attempt to go for a quick decrease of inflation and I don´t see why it shouldn´t be done in a year or even more instead of 6 months. Fact is that even if it would be 10 years then the main criticism that has been brought to Quark would still apply to every clone and every other crypto: given the fact that crypto is still far away from mainstream every launch gives huge advantages to current miners.
That´s why I think it is not really intelligent to talk about a "badly executed" idea. What matters is if you can get enough creative and powerful people behind you to get your idea going. Every Alt has compared to Bitcoin these problem as it has a good headstart but as long as people are motivated I don´t see why any project with some dozens of supporters can´t be successful in the end.

Good luck to your project anyway!

[cinnamon_carter]

note the original title of this thread when I posted to it was the guy asking if he should buy quark, now I see he changed the topic of the thread obviously on purpose, 

[smoothie]

Tell me how much % of the total supply of QRK will exist has already been mined...

Then you will see why it is a scam.

[From Above]

Tell me how much % of the total supply of QRK will exist has already been mined...

Then you will see why it is a scam.

99.999%?

[cinnamon_carter]

note my earlier comment / we are  on the same path here/ i just stop short of calling it a scam

that is for others to decide,  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=678410.msg7689514#msg7689514

Tell me how much % of the total supply of QRK will exist has already been mined...

Then you will see why it is a scam.

99.999%?

[Stench]

Kolin isn't Quark.
Kolin does make some points on his blog regarding NXT and Litecoin. Its hard for some to admit but he has been right about Litecoin. You can see it now. Even Dogecoin.  Shit, after Kolin's post about NXT I went and bought some. Why? Well my rational is, if people can forget about Bitcoin's premine, accuse Quark of having one, and then forget about pre-mining again with Darkcoin, Blackcoin, and NXT, then there is money to be made.  He brought a lot of heat to Quark with the way he handles himself on posts, yes. But again, Kolin isn't Quark. If you ask him, he will tell you flat out what he believes is wrong with Quark and needs work. If your like me, you can read between the 'trolling' when regarding Cryptos. Social manipulation is strong in the Crypto community. Of course it is, money is at stake.

But no OP, Quark isn't a scam.
Here, the problems with Quark has been the Dev's communication with the community. This has gotten better in the last few months since there was an outcry and IMO the biggest problem is Quark's hashrate. Though a solution is in the works right now from the development team. Time will tell.
I'm no Quark bag holder, nor a heavy crypto miner. Just a long term investor and I stick to my crypto investment plan. With that said,  I've bought enough Quark at this time. There is no denying that Quark is unique still to this day and can have a great future. Buy, mine or forget about it, your choice.

[quarkfx]

Tell me how much % of the total supply of QRK will exist has already been mined...

Then you will see why it is a scam.

99.999%?

The statement is wrong and demonstrates ignorance with regard to crypto distribution schemes:

People argue that the main part of Quark is already distributed and they are right in some way: If you started mining directly after release you had a huge advantage over a person who starts mining now. Is that unfair? Maybe. However, this problem will always exist. In fact, it exists with Bitcoin and will exist with every other cryptocurrency. You should realize that the people who are mining now are avant-garde and a tiny percentage of the population we expect to adopt crypto - once the mainstream adopts crypto every PoW coin that exists today will be sort of "distributed" with only small chances to mine a stake.

And no, Quark isn´t mined 99,999% because you can´t apply disitrbution percentage if there is no final distribution. You can only apply this argument only if you set a final distribution set as in most PoW coins. Bitcoin's final distribution ends in 2140 but Quark will be distributed afterwards.

However, just for a moment let´s assume that Quark´s distribution would end in the same year where Bitcoin´s final coin is distributed. You´ll find out that currently ~ 60.5% of all BTC are already distributed and only slightly more Quark (65.2%)

Bitcoins total: 21,000,000
Bitcoins already distributed: 12,715,024
Bitcoins distributed in 2140: 21,000,000
percentage distributed: 60.5%

Quark total: ∞
Quarks already distributed: 247,813,937
Quarks distributed in 2140: 380,113,937
percentage distributed (calculated for 2140): 65.2%

Do your own math and you will find out there are many other coins with a "worse" distribution scheme. Anyway the debates we have now will be irrelevant in the future because with regard to future miners all current coins can be considered 99% or even 100% distributed. It simply doesn´t matter. It only matters if you are miner who missed the start of a coin (of any coin) and this argument isn´t really convincing to me.

[digitalindustry]

Tell me how much % of the total supply of QRK will exist has already been mined...

Then you will see why it is a scam.

How are those ASICs working out for you chump?

: D

Think about this ...

Combination of ASICs + a better distribution than complete mining control = Dogecoin ?

Ha ha ha !

[digitalindustry]

Are all those LTC in that bag getting heavy Smoothie?

Hopefully your load will lighten as the price drops?

: )

[digitalindustry]

Quarkfx - if you are a bit new to the monkey jungle "dead" means :

we stopped scamming the trade volume and we want to to buy our new scam.

NXT is far from "dead" - LTC is really Healthy based on this.

ha ha .

[Spoetnik]

The question ? hmmmm

well i say yes and no..
yes right now because coins have tanked in value and i think a rebound is coming.
otherwise i am not so sure "it's worth a buy"
based on what criteria ?
Will it have a short term rise in value ? i doubt it..
long term ? maybe i dunno.

But hey nobody wants a real answer..



Topic Translation:
digitalindustry pointed out how NXT and other coins that are similar are scammy
and the cheerleaders decided to troll on him non stop with lies about Quark coin.

nothing more to it..

[From Above]

SPOETNIK AND DIGITALINDUSTY u guys cant stay away with the nxt junk from my topic cant u? this topic is about quark and not ur nxt shit. get it already

is it bcuz u dont have any arguments that u have to promote the nxt? . . . lame . . .

~CfA~

[metap2pool]

I don´t mind people disagreeing with the attempt to go for a quick decrease of inflation and I don´t see why it shouldn´t be done in a year or even more instead of 6 months. Fact is that even if it would be 10 years then the main criticism that has been brought to Quark would still apply to every clone and every other crypto: given the fact that crypto is still far away from mainstream every launch gives huge advantages to current miners.
That´s why I think it is not really intelligent to talk about a "badly executed" idea. What matters is if you can get enough creative and powerful people behind you to get your idea going. Every Alt has compared to Bitcoin these problem as it has a good headstart but as long as people are motivated I don´t see why any project with some dozens of supporters can´t be successful in the end.

Good luck to your project anyway!

Let me explain some points:

Decrease of inflation is good because otherwise the currency isn't viable. But quark and other bitcoin-like crypto because of their design are not threatened by inflation (at least in long term), therefore the main concern should be broad adoption and not inflation. If 99% of bitcoins were distributed in the first 6 months it wouldn't have worked. Don't think that it's problem of the timeframe of coin distribution, because if quarkcoin was released by let's say apple or facebook, 6 months or one year would have been enough, but quark devs are not famous or mainstream, so yes 6 month is extremely short.

I don't blame the premine, it's non-sense. A premined currency can work. It's just that early adopters tend to dislike premined currencies, especially because devs endup by dumping and destroy their currency.

And yes a motivated project team can be successful in the end as long as more and more people get involved and embrace the project.

[GogglesPisano]

[BitRock]

I don´t mind people disagreeing with the attempt to go for a quick decrease of inflation and I don´t see why it shouldn´t be done in a year or even more instead of 6 months. Fact is that even if it would be 10 years then the main criticism that has been brought to Quark would still apply to every clone and every other crypto: given the fact that crypto is still far away from mainstream every launch gives huge advantages to current miners.
That´s why I think it is not really intelligent to talk about a "badly executed" idea. What matters is if you can get enough creative and powerful people behind you to get your idea going. Every Alt has compared to Bitcoin these problem as it has a good headstart but as long as people are motivated I don´t see why any project with some dozens of supporters can´t be successful in the end.

Good luck to your project anyway!

Let me explain some points:

Decrease of inflation is good because otherwise the currency isn't viable. But quark and other bitcoin-like crypto because of their design are not threatened by inflation (at least in long term), therefore the main concern should be broad adoption and not inflation. If 99% of bitcoins were distributed in the first 6 months it wouldn't have worked. Don't think that it's problem of the timeframe of coin distribution, because if quarkcoin was released by let's say apple or facebook, 6 months or one year would have been enough, but quark devs are not famous or mainstream, so yes 6 month is extremely short.

I don't blame the premine, it's non-sense. A premined currency can work. It's just that early adopters tend to dislike premined currencies, especially because devs endup by dumping and destroy their currency.

And yes a motivated project team can be successful in the end as long as more and more people get involved and embrace the project.

I guess everybody will shut up if quark was distributed in the one week as blackcoin did.

[digitalindustry]

Let me explain some points:

Decrease of inflation is good because otherwise the currency isn't viable. But quark and other bitcoin-like crypto because of their design are not threatened by inflation (at least in long term), therefore the main concern should be broad adoption and not inflation. If 99% of bitcoins were distributed in the first 6 months it wouldn't have worked. Don't think that it's problem of the timeframe of coin distribution, because if quarkcoin was released by let's say apple or facebook, 6 months or one year would have been enough, but quark devs are not famous or mainstream, so yes 6 month is extremely short.

Wow a sensible new account?

very relevant points here - however lets certainly define some important points:

- Quark PoW distribution period was via CPU no one challenges that.
- it was dumped on to the exchange market and went very low (in theory giving anyone a chance to buy)

however what i will concede to you is:

- yes the "Anybody" is not a large part of the market - this comes back to your "Apple" statements

- so I then tried to at the lowest point  in valuation "broaden that base" of "anybody"   and  this worked to a degree.


So lets contrast that with say Bitcoin:

- in the fist "half" up to halving of most long distribution Crypto 50% of all the currency is released, (fact for Bitcoin) so from Genisis block to first halving (obviously)
- Bitcoin started in obscurity in 2009  ( not its fault but still a fact)

- by the time the fist halving passed 50% of all the currency was distributed but the numbers of people that where aware of it were tiny.

+

then Bitcoin deviated from the economic principals of  "one CPU one Vote" and this meant that mining monopoly took hold.

now the "back half" after the first halving can not be mined by "personal computer users"

so now back to Quark:

- Quark can always be mined by a Personal computer user
- The EQ reward guarantees that new people can always gain it
- The price in terms of paper currency is very low.

all these things spell better distribution in the future.

every thing Bitcoin has spells;  > centralization -> "Crisis" then > "Collapse." > evolution > Recovery.

its just a different model.