Paying for the servers is not a problem - I believe in this coin and want to do anything I can to help it succeed.
You know my thoughts on the block reward - resync it to a 1%/month devaluation.
Bitladen has threatened to destroy the coin - he can't be involved in the development of the coin.
Yea, paying for servers isn't a problem for you, for now. It wasn't a problem for me for most of the time either. However, regardless, does it make sense to keep paying for servers for something that isn't being developed, and doesn't even have people willing to come up with a plan to counter bitladen's/mine?
Okay, I do know your thoughts on block reward, and it isn't a bad plan, and could possibly help the situation, but who is going to do this? How will it take place? What are the plans after? These are the things that must be discussed.
Threatening in public as a way to broaden people's thoughts on what is possible, and point out that there ARE some security issues that could be fixed fairly easily by getting a larger network, and simply being the frontman badguy, I still don't see this as a problem. If he is pointing out something that could legitimately happen, and saying he will only do it if it gets to the point that it is possible... but yet also saying... I'm willing to help, I'm willing to give use for the coin, I'm willing to provide core development for FREE, this doesn't sound like a person who is hostile to me. It sounds like someone who has a very direct way of pointing certain things out, yes. But it doesn't sound like someone who is out to destroy the coin. It sounds like someone who knows that there are possibly other people in positions near his own, and maybe these people aren't as up front about the possibilities of the said attack.
let us pretend for a moment, that bitladen isn't the only one with the possibility to do this. Let us also pretend that this person has already plotted multiple accounts. Let us also pretend that this person is totally hostile, and does this kind of stuff simply because they think it is fun, and has no reason behind it other than that. Will this person not attack the network if it is possible for them?
Allowing the network to continue to decrease in size is BAD. The problem, is coming up with a way to reverse the process. You and I both agree that a change in the block reward could do this, we just have different ideas on how much, and how so, and WHO will do it.
I don't immediately say that I'll never support someone who has pointed out an issue with a network, in public, and at the same time suggests a way to fix it, that makes sense.
I have yet to hear anyone say that the plan doesn't make sense. Only that they either think it would be a breach of contract, or that it would be bad (without any real reason.)
If you're totally wanting the coin to survive at all costs, wouldn't those costs include possibly working with someone that you may not necessarily be entirely 100% for in all ways? Does it really matter THAT much that the way he chose to point out that there is a possible security risk, is by being able and willing to exploit it and prove it? You can think of him as a 'pentester' for normal style networks. Right?
I just refuse to take this so called threat as a real threat, not only because it is out in the open, but also because he has suggested a way to fix it, and not only that, volunteered to help implement it.
If he were solely out for his own gain, would he do this? Would he not only want to change the reward structure, but ALSO, implement an extremely good reason for many people to USE the coin? Is this not what many people have said (including you) would bring the 'value' to the coin?
I don't know, I guess I just don't look at him as a negative thing. To me, if he were truly a negative only, he would have plotted anonymously, and continued to increase his power as much as possible, and bide his time, just waiting while the network decreases in size, not coming in to warn people that there is the possibility of this attack, and just attack when he can.
He most certainly wouldn't have offered to help by developing for the coin, and not solely by changing the reward.
If he had come in and suggested he develop for the coin, and given nothing more than "I'll change the reward", I wouldn't have supported that. But he didn't. He came in with many ideas, which I combined with my own, and came up with a structured plan, a future structure suggested, containing almost everything that every community request for change has included. A roadmap with details, a suggestion for changes, and reasoning as to why those changes would do what we think they'll do, structure for the team, and ideas to make things more functional, a way to fund the dev team and give ability for promotion, hiring of other devs, and more...
but all we can do is sit here and say "he's the enemy"? Sorry but I really can't see it that way.
I have had many conversations with him, directly. I can say for sure that he isn't against the coin. He would prefer to implement the changes in BURST as opposed to a clone, because he would like to see the coin succeed. The same reason as me.
The change in block reward is hardly a breach in contract. There was never a contract. Many coins have changed their reward structure, and even you are for a change in that.
So what we're mostly not agreeing on, is the person. To this I still say the same... Who else? Do we even have any way to be able to show a way to FIND someone else? Do you really think that not only are we going to find someone, but they're going to work for free, and not only that, but BUY coins, so that they can work for free, and hope that their work is enough to give enough future value to the coin to make it worthwhile... This seems an almost impossible task.
I am all for the coin having a healthy future, but the amount of other coins out there that are currently much more popular than BURST, do you really think that without some changes, maybe some fundamental ones, that it is going to magically become what we all want it to be?
Hope alone isn't going to accomplish this.
Fighting his attack by delisting the coin from exchanges is suicide. As you said yourself. So are we going to really do this?
I want to know how else we are going to get the network to stop declining.
