i quit

[MinerFTW]

Just release it.

There is not much choice at this point.

As is no coins are good.

Thats the hardest part though. if we release a fix we doing it first need all wallets to be down. and exchanges need to get updated version also etc etc.

[SockPuppetAccount]

Unless there is a wallet that will prevent this massive forking from happening again I guess choosing a fork (and the winners of the fork lotto) is kind of secondary.

With block rewards under 10k, only about 13.5 million LDOGE are created a day.  There are nearly 2.75 Billion LDOGE out there right now so while shitty, it really is a minor detail.  Also, its not like there is active scamming going on here.  It would have to be the least lucrative and most pointless scam in crypto history.  Some people are just going to be lucky and have their blocks accepted as valid.  Some are going to lose a whole day of staking.  Finally there is the issue that the LDOGE market was open to trading, deposits, and withdrawals for a time before the forking was being widely acknowledged.  This will turn into an epic clusterfuck if bittrex is asked to roll back the market.  Best thing for LDOGE is just get this issue fixed as soon as possible and move on.

Give me your LDOGE address and I will send you 1 million once the network is chugging along again.

[SockPuppetAccount]

Lol Peter you are ok? Im not speak with you now lol,better say why when you here that you start nervious?. Its now show all connection like local network with different internal IP. But with the same local adress.

lol

Check these: litedoge / src / chainparams.cpp

vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("198.105.125.233", "198.105.125.233"));
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("198.105.125.234", "198.105.125.234"));
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("198.105.122.174", "198.105.122.174"));

they are dead, i just made a fork with new seednodes and checkpoints so if community is in i will post it in my github

You are made it or can make?

did

seednode1
***:~# litedoged getinfo
{
    "version" : "v1.0.0.1-g32a928e",
    "protocolversion" : 60016,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 0.00000000,
    "newmint" : 0.00000000,
    "stake" : 0.00000000,
    "blocks" : 41744,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "moneysupply" : 2795795175.26000023,
    "connections" : 3,
    "proxy" : "",
    "ip" : "104.236.102.172",
    "difficulty" : {
        "proof-of-work" : 153.05769441,
        "proof-of-stake" : 17550.91418040
    },
    "testnet" : false,
    "keypoololdest" : 1429101372,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.99000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00000000,
    "errors" : ""
}


seednode2
****:~# litedoged getinfo
{
    "version" : "v1.0.0.1-g32a928e",
    "protocolversion" : 60016,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 0.00000000,
    "newmint" : 0.00000000,
    "stake" : 0.00000000,
    "blocks" : 41744,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "moneysupply" : 2795795175.26000023,
    "connections" : 3,
    "proxy" : "",
    "ip" : "104.236.4.12",
    "difficulty" : {
        "proof-of-work" : 153.05769441,
        "proof-of-stake" : 17550.91418040
    },
    "testnet" : false,
    "keypoololdest" : 1429108212,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.99000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00000000,
    "errors" : ""
}

synced my pc wallet and staked 4 blocks
now both seednodes and my wallet are on same fork
So does the community want to continue from this fork?

I think the best is to go with the block explorer chain.. Minerftw and I and got it working and it also syncs nice with the block explorer.  I feel goin with this chain is the best solution if there is one in this case.. If we roll back to 40001 then all the transaction that occurred on exchanges are a mess.. Not sure what everyone thinks  but I for one support goin with the chain the block explorer has been on all along..  

If you all agree we can get new wallet made up shortly

Best Regards
d57heinz

Yes.  Stick with block explorer.  Do not roll back.  Roll back will be huge clusterfuck.

[MinerFTW]

also would be great if spooky share his findings so we are not messing up each other code

[xPooky]

If same hardcoded nodes are kept it will continue to fork as they are no good, I think the best is my solution with new nodes and random chain

[xPooky]

also would be great if spooky share his findings so we are not messing up each other code

I downloaded chain from surnova node, switched seednodes in code with 2 mine and changed protocol version so only new version will be accepted and added few checkpoints

[MinerFTW]

i recompiled daemon with block chain version.

changed vseeds in chainparams.cpp to my own node.
also changed version to 60016 and think best to give new release version also.

i didn't add checkpoints and set listen=0 to conf to stay on explorer chain.
tests running now rest of code i didn't touch.


also thinking its smart to change time with protocol change.

[samspaces]

seednode1 and 2 didn't work for me, but 104.236.102.172 did.
Only have 1 connection now and on block 41752

[MinerFTW]

we on 41900 already

[xPooky]

seednode1 and 2 didn't work for me, but 104.236.102.172 did.
Only have 1 connection now and on block 41752

They are coded in my fork, you will need my source for them to work like expected

[samspaces]

seednode1 and 2 didn't work for me, but 104.236.102.172 did.
Only have 1 connection now and on block 41752

They are coded in my fork, you will need my source for them to work like expected

Ok I'll recompile

[xPooky]

we on 41900 already

Who mined the past 1k blocks on your fork?

[xPooky]

seednode1 and 2 didn't work for me, but 104.236.102.172 did.
Only have 1 connection now and on block 41752

They are coded in my fork, you will need my source for them to work like expected

Ok I'll recompile

Code is not published

[MinerFTW]

seednode1 and 2 didn't work for me, but 104.236.102.172 did.
Only have 1 connection now and on block 41752

They are coded in my fork, you will need my source for them to work like expected

Ok I'll recompile

Code is not published

not me but look at explorer. thats the 1 i am holding on to.

thats why i said also that it would be best if ppl hold of from staking or trying to stake etc etc. it mess up a lot.

[not.you]

Unless there is a wallet that will prevent this massive forking from happening again I guess choosing a fork (and the winners of the fork lotto) is kind of secondary.

With block rewards under 10k, only about 13.5 million LDOGE are created a day.  There are nearly 2.75 Billion LDOGE out there right now so while shitty, it really is a minor detail.  Also, its not like there is active scamming going on here.  It would have to be the least lucrative and most pointless scam in crypto history.  Some people are just going to be lucky and have their blocks accepted as valid.  Some are going to lose a whole day of staking.  Finally there is the issue that the LDOGE market was open to trading, deposits, and withdrawals for a time before the forking was being widely acknowledged.  This will turn into an epic clusterfuck if bittrex is asked to roll back the market.  Best thing for LDOGE is just get this issue fixed as soon as possible and move on.

Give me your LDOGE address and I will send you 1 million once the network is chugging along again.

There is no getting around it, exchanges were not on same chain as explorer and no reason to believe exchanges were on the same chain as each other.  No matter what chain is selected as winner, exchanges and others will have to deal with lost transactions.  How they deal with rolling back transactions on their exchange is their issue but there is no way to select a fork and not have this happen.

[CryptoHobo]

...
snip
...

I think the best is to go with the block explorer chain.. Minerftw and I and got it working and it also syncs nice with the block explorer.  I feel goin with this chain is the best solution if there is one in this case.. If we roll back to 40001 then all the transaction that occurred on exchanges are a mess.. Not sure what everyone thinks  but I for one support goin with the chain the block explorer has been on all along..  

If you all agree we can get new wallet made up shortly

Best Regards
d57heinz

Yes.  Stick with block explorer.  Do not roll back.  Roll back will be huge clusterfuck.

+1 block explorer has the fork everyones been trying to get on

[not.you]

...
snip
...

I think the best is to go with the block explorer chain.. Minerftw and I and got it working and it also syncs nice with the block explorer.  I feel goin with this chain is the best solution if there is one in this case.. If we roll back to 40001 then all the transaction that occurred on exchanges are a mess.. Not sure what everyone thinks  but I for one support goin with the chain the block explorer has been on all along..  

If you all agree we can get new wallet made up shortly

Best Regards
d57heinz

Yes.  Stick with block explorer.  Do not roll back.  Roll back will be huge clusterfuck.

+1 block explorer has the fork everyones been trying to get on

Who is running the block explorer?  That person should be in on this so that the explorer is on the corrected wallet version right out of the gate.

[samspaces]

...
snip
...

I think the best is to go with the block explorer chain.. Minerftw and I and got it working and it also syncs nice with the block explorer.  I feel goin with this chain is the best solution if there is one in this case.. If we roll back to 40001 then all the transaction that occurred on exchanges are a mess.. Not sure what everyone thinks  but I for one support goin with the chain the block explorer has been on all along..  

If you all agree we can get new wallet made up shortly

Best Regards
d57heinz

Yes.  Stick with block explorer.  Do not roll back.  Roll back will be huge clusterfuck.

+1 block explorer has the fork everyones been trying to get on

This makes the most sense, unless there's is something were overlooking

[MinerFTW]

don't know where spooky is in blocks now but my wallet/fix is equal with explorer still

[xPooky]

don't know where spooky is in blocks now but my wallet/fix is equal with explorer still

i am on 41752 but will remove my fork as there is no point in having 2, so post source as soon as you are ready