One of our favorite twitter cryptocelebs/commentators is @manelecrypto, who often posts some of the funniest, frequent, timely, on-target crypto commentary on the web - it's quite witty. We address some recent comments directed to us:
In the days to come, we plan to publicise Nectar wherever crypto is widely followed, including CoinBlab (I think we've already started posting our profile there). But we have our small suspicions that Coinblab is run by whale-manipulators/pump-and-dump groups. And we really want to keep Nectar as clean as possible - one of our biggest selling points is that we're new to the system (Mr Smith Goes to Washington) and are not tangled up in all that baggage. We do plan to post more on Coinblab, but we'd like to know more about who's behind it and what their intentions are.
As for FUD, we consider it the "cost of doing business." Any time you do business, especially if you're successful, you have to put up with some noise/criticism. As an IT services group (in the "real world"), we have to put up with our fair share of difficult clients. Our perspective is that, as long as there's mutual respect, clients who entrust us their hard-earned money, have every right to have their concerns expressed and addressed. We don't always have all the answers - all the right answers. Constructive criticism and input makes us question our wrong assumptions and do a better job of serving our clients going forward.
As long as that criticism is constructive and not vulgar, we welcome it. If it's vulgar and clearly motivated by deliberate plans to undermine the coin and hurt this community, we'll respond. You can see our FUD policy in the [ANN] #1 post.
We're reluctant to censor - one option we've considered is opening two threads, one moderated and one unmoderated, so that if FUD becomes a problem (doesnt seem to be so far), people will be free to pick whether they want to read the clean, filtered thread to get to informative content/updates faster and more easily or go through the unfiltered messy message thread.
As always, we're open to suggestions that address the tradeoff between freedom and order and, more specifically, what we can do to ensure valid criticism gets through and deliberate attempts to hurt the coin/community do not.
We plan to be very responsive to community input about all aspects (including marketing and wallet/messenger design and functionality) and will consider lowering the coin price (since several people have commented on this) as well as the number of coins, but keep in mind that we've priced the coin to be able to provide a budget that covers a full-time commitment over an 18-month+ period from a professional staff of serious designers, programmers and marketers. The kind of quality dev team and the kind of 24/7 commitment that people clearly want. We have to make sure the budget supports that.
Regarding the quamtity of coins (putting aside the price), we thought it might actually be too low. Our goal is to make Nectar widely used, especially across college campuses, media institutions and other groups who value secure chat communications. We want a widely circulated coin to be widely available without a lot of people having to make decimal .000000x calculations or conversions to Nectar-satoshi ("nectarines"/"natoshis"?) in their heads. We think this is one thing Dogecoin got right and one of the reasons it's been effecting as a tipping/social coin. Again, we want everything about Nectar to be user friendly.
One possibility we're considering is to increase the coin supply and proportionately reduce the price per coin to keep everything even.
We keen on p2p chat anon but are ambivalent about currency anon-transactions tech. We think there are a lot of big technical questions that haven't been fully addressed (though Shadowcoin and the Cryptonote coins seem promising and seem to be making progress). We dont want to give false promises. What we've promised so far is only what we're certain we can deliver. That said, we are building Nectar to be a very flexible, modular system (including a plugin platform) that will be future-proofed for upgrades.
We just think there are more immediate issues about usability and adoption that really need to be addressed fast, first, and we want to focus on those - things we're sure we can deliver - before we address bigger, more exotic things.
If Cryptonote, Shadowcoin and Darkcoin fail to achieve solid, verified anon-transaction tech and we decide to make a big push on this front, we likely wont say anything about it or announce anything until we achieve it 100% in a way that is 100% verified by well-respected third party experts (on the level of Andreas Antonopoulos). In other words, we'd Ninja announce it. We will not run the risk of dragging people through weeks and months of anticipation for nothing, as so many "anon" coins have.
We love nature pics too! Bees are adorable... from a distance.
Wow, we thought we might be a bit picture-heavy. Glad you appreciate nature photography like we do. Regarding roadmap ETAs, please see our previous comments. We will be providing a roadmap and %-completed updates on a regular basis, but we want to avoid overpromising and underdelivering, so we will avoid giving hard dates. The nature of programming is that you can always run up against unanticipated unknowns that have to be worked through and worked around on unpredictable schedules. But where we're more certain, we'll give more guidance. And again, we'll always be provided "% complete" updates.
Direct 2-way/fiat conversion - we completely agree. And will have more to say on this. The user-friendliness of the system will rely heavily on making use of crypto as easy and the tech as "invisible" to mainstream users as possible. Everything that supports that we can enable we will enable.
Thank you so much for the feedback - we welcome other helpful comments.
