CoinMarketCap.com - Market Cap Rankings of All Cryptocurrencies!

[coins101]

...
 This further leads to the belief that such a poll was rigged or voted on by sockpuppet accounts controlled by the instaminers.

This cuts for Moneor as well.

There was a community vote to continue with the Monero project and not fork, fix, start again.
There was a community vote to not reduce the high initial emissions, that is why Monero now has 7m coins in 12 months, and DASH has 5m in 14months.

Using your inflammatory logic, there could have been just a few people mining all of Moneros first 1m-2m coins and the crippled code and high initial hash rate could be a handful of people and a mass of socketpuppets giving the impression of a regular community, with the odd person joining in to a 'popular' coin.

So if you wish to assert Darkcoin is a scam, you have to also own the scam launch code of Monero.

[smooth]

You can't use the change as your reference point, because if the community had voted for no change, then 84m supply would be the reference point.

I actually think it is best to use the current supply as a reference point. If the parameters are such that the total supply is created over a billion years then it is irrelevant. The only objective base for comparison is the current supply.

The rest of your post is not relevant to coinmarketcap, just your obsession with trying to drag Monero down to dash's level of instamine scam so take it elsewhere or just shut up already.

[Kuriso]

You keep admitting monero had scam code baked in with intent to steal.

I don't know the intent and neither do you so stop making shit up.

As far as I know the intent of the original code appeared to be to fake the bytecoin premine. Whether TFT had any intent to steal or (he or anyone else) did steal via the bitmonero launch I have no idea and, again, neither do you. -snip-

This whole discussion started because the cmc admin asked for evidence of the dash premine, which I provided. -snip-

Previously you have admitted to knowing exactly what the intent was but now you claim to be ignorant of it.  Why?  Let me leave this here to remind you.

Don't forget that Monero was launched with the sole purpose of being a scam.  Original devs only did it for the money.  If the community didn't take it over and find a whale to back it, the coin would be dead right now. 

You are absolutely right. The difference between this coin and that coin is that here, no one took over.
-snip-

Further more, how did you provide evidence of the dash premine?  Dash was never premined.  No coins were mined before the public launch.  How did you prove otherwise?  You are you playing word games.  At the very worst you can argue that it was instamined.  The two are not equal and you know it.  The fact you continue to play these charades further proves you have no honest intent.  You're only goal is to continue to bash dash in a feeble attempt to make mon-troll-ero look better.

[coins101]

linux only miners(Of which he himself was one)

Linux is free, freely available and relatively use to use.

If you claim this to be an issue, then for you its use is only prevented by evolutionary disadvantage.

[coins101]

You can't use the change as your reference point, because if the community had voted for no change, then 84m supply would be the reference point.

I actually think it is best to use the current supply as a reference point. If the parameters are such that the total supply is created over a billion years then it is irrelevant. The only objective base for comparison is the current supply.

The rest of your post is not relevant to coinmarketcap, just your obsession with trying to drag Monero down to dash's level of instamine scam so take it elsewhere or just shut up already.

If those are the words you choose, then I will indeed shut up, smooth.

Best of luck to you.

[Prosperityforall]

...
 This further leads to the belief that such a poll was rigged or voted on by sockpuppet accounts controlled by the instaminers.

This cuts for Moneor as well.

There was a community vote to continue with the Monero project and not fork, fix, start again.
There was a community vote to not reduce the high initial emissions, that is why Monero now has 7m coins in 12 months, and DASH has 5m in 14months.

Using your inflammatory logic, there could have been just a few people mining all of Moneros first 1m-2m coins and the crippled code and high initial hash rate could be a handful of people and a mass of socketpuppets giving the impression of a regular community, with the odd person joining in to a 'popular' coin.

So if you wish to assert Darkcoin is a scam, you have to also own the scam launch code of Monero.

Look, if you don't have a clue about any of this, stop.

The poll done by Monero was not done by voting on an obscure(Which can be easily rigged as shown by Dash), it was done by that MEW membership procedure so that things like sockpuppet voting wouldn't happen. You would actually go and +1 or -1 while giving your reasons as to why, all of which I observed while staying relatively low in the cryposcene.

Your twisted logic is highly irrational. As was said a million times before, Monero did not have any of it's core parameters changed, unlike Dash, so in that respect they cannot be compared.

[smooth]

there could have been just a few people mining all of Moneros first 1m-2m coins and the crippled code

For the last time, that is not the case. There was a lot of trading going on and posts about mining by many known people in the community. There is zero chance that "just a few people" were mining all of the coins ever, even the first 50k coins, much less 1m-2m, and by day 29 when the second part of the fix for the crippled miner went in, only about 700k coins had been mined total. A vanishingly small fraction of those were mined by the original scammer, if any (by that time dga's group was active, for example)

So if you wish to assert Darkcoin is a scam, you have to also own the scam launch code of Monero.

No, if you want to assert that dash is a scam, then you provide evidence for dash being a scam (e.g. instamine), which has been done time and time again. When it comes to the question of the dash instamine scam, talking about Monero is irrelevant misdirection and obfuscation (and lashing out).

Please stop spamming your off-topic whining about the Monero mining code on the coinmarketcap thread unless you realistically think coinmarketcap is going to start identifying coins with alleged crippled miners. I think there is zero chance of that personally.

[Prosperityforall]

linux only miners(Of which he himself was one)

Linux is free, freely available and relatively use to use.

If you claim this to be an issue, then for you its use is only prevented by evolutionary disadvantage.

Over 90% of all people that own a computer use Windows, not the still relatively unpopular Linux. Please go and learn logic, then come back to me.

[coins101]

Mew?

Mew wasn't around in April 2014

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=585480.0

Now who doesn't know what they are talking about.

[Prosperityforall]

Mew?

Mew wasn't around in April 2014

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=585480.0

Now who doesn't know what they are talking about.

You're so clueless it's starting to get irritating now. There was a final lasting vote done on Monero's emission change on their previous forum forum.monero.cc of which I myself voiced by opinions and around 200 votes if I recall correctly, most in favor of not changing the emission rate.

Unlike Dash where one Developer, Evan Duffield changed the core features on a whim, Monero did several votes(Witht the last one including Mew and being the final one) on whether to change core features or not.

edit

[smooth]

Mew?

Mew wasn't around in April 2014

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=585480.0

Now who doesn't know what they are talking about.

Look if the poll had voted to change it, you might have an argument about shady emissions practices. The poll voted to not change it, so that is irrelevant. That was in fact one of the reasons it was voted down, twice. The second time the core team said flat out that we wouldn't support it (the first time, if I recall correctly, the core team didn't exist). We wanted no part of a retroactive instamine. Even the first time, the proposal was to essentially burn half of the already mined coins, or donate them to bounties or something. Another alternative considered was to first slow down the emissions below the new target to offset the original faster mining, so for someone arriving later, there would be no "extra" coins in existence. Nevertheless, it didn't pass, so no change was made.

Monero is fully on its original mining schedule with no premine, no instamine, nothing relevant to coinmarketcap here at all. Please stop spamming off-topic about it.

[nachoig]

I can't believe there are people here that don't understand what is an instamine or a premine. So, let's clarify the concepts:

Premine: The generation of coins in the genesis block. We call "significantly premined" when a large portion of these coins is generated in the first/genesis block.

Instamine: Generation in the very first blocks of a disproportional number of coins when compared with the following blocks.

People are using the idea of time in the wrong way. Instamine is not about time at all. It's about how many blocks with high rewards are offered, in case if you are on a decreasing or a finite emission scheme.

[smooth]

I can't believe there are people here that don't understand what is an instamine or a premine. So, let's clarify the concepts:

Premine: The generation of coins in the genesis block. We call "significantly premined" when a large portion of these coins is generated in the first block.

Instamine: Generation in the very first blocks of a disproportional number of coins when compared with the following blocks.

People are using the idea of time in the wrong way. Instamine is not about time at all. It's about how many blocks with high rewards are offered, in case if you are on a decreasing or a finite emission scheme.

I don't agree -- I think a badly flawed retargeting that spews out an enormous number of blocks ahead of schedule is also an instamine. But in any case Dash created a large number of extra coins because the per-block reward was 500 when it should have been lower. Then they cut it, but never did anything about the extra coins (other than keep them).

[smooth]

Further more, how did you provide evidence of the dash premine?  Dash was never premined.  No coins were mined before the public launch.  How did you prove otherwise?  You are you playing word games.  At the very worst you can argue that it was instamined.  The two are not equal and you know it.  The fact you continue to play these charades further proves you have no honest intent.  You're only goal is to continue to bash dash in a feeble attempt to make mon-troll-ero look better.

I never did. I provided evidence specifically for the instamine (see below #1). That's how it was described at the time. In fact a few posts later, I commented that I didn't think a premine and instamine are exactly the same thing (see below #2). There is an overlap though, the whole point of both is to front-load the distribution of coins. And Dash's "public launch" was a mess, with no clearly defined launch time, as previously discussed.

Here's the context. You can click through for the rest of the actual evidence of the instamine, I trimmed it here in the quote for brevity

#1 (bold emphasis added in the quote):

Why isn't Dash listed as an instamine, Gliss? I know you need 'evidence' so I'll do your research for you.

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=560138.0

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=999886.0

http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

'That means in less than 8 hours, almost 5% of the Darkcoins that ever will be created spawned in that 1/3 of a day.'

Also

Was Darkcoin Instamined?
~2mn coins were issued in the first 48 hours due to problems with the difficulty readjustment. That represents approximately 10-15% of the total money supply that will ever be issued.

#2:

I agree that an instamine isn't exactly the same as a premine but when 35% of the outstanding coins were created in one day that is highly significant. I'm not sure that one day gap really makes that big a difference compared to just issuing 35% of the coins in the genesis block. It's certainly worth noting somehow anyway.

[Lebubar]

Nobody give a shit about your opinion.
There is conflict of interest here, so all what you are saying means nothing. You are loosing your time.
Nobody give a shit of someone opinion where there is conflict of interest.
Go work please, or just quit you so-called-pseudo-'dev' job, and make politic.

[smooth]

Nobody give a shit about your opinion.
There is conflict of interest here, so all what you are saying means nothing. You are loosing your time.
Nobody give a shit of someone opinion where there is conflict of interest.

So wait, when the Dash developers asked coinmarketcap to take the "significantly premined" tag off, was that a conflict of interest and something that should be disregarded?

Accurate evidence is accurate evidence, regardless of the source. Unless you can show the evidence to be inaccurate, conflict of evidence is a bullshit objection to evidence you don't like.

[nachoig]

I don't agree -- I think a badly flawed retargeting that spews out an enormous number of blocks ahead of schedule is also an instamine. But in any case Dash created a large number of extra coins because the per-block reward was 500 when it should have been lower. Then they cut it, but never did anything about the extra coins (other than keep them).

The issue is how you define what is a good retargeting. People accuses some altcoins which used the same retargeting scheme of Bitcoin (each 2016 blocks) of being instamined just because the blocks were generated more faster because of the big and fast increases in the hash rate. But what developers can do about this?

[Lebubar]

Nobody give a shit about your opinion.
There is conflict of interest here, so all what you are saying means nothing. You are loosing your time.
Nobody give a shit of someone opinion where there is conflict of interest.

So wait, when the Dash developers asked coinmarketcap to take the "significantly premined" tag off, was that a conflict of interest and something that should be disregarded?

Accurate evidence is accurate evidence, regardless of the source. Unless you can show the evidence to be inaccurate, conflict of evidence is a bullshit objection to evidence you don't like.

You are not objective :

There was nothing wrong with the history of Monero. It's one of if not the cleanest coins and launches in history.

[Jeff8247]

LOL edited because its not even worth it.

[Prosperityforall]

I don't agree -- I think a badly flawed retargeting that spews out an enormous number of blocks ahead of schedule is also an instamine. But in any case Dash created a large number of extra coins because the per-block reward was 500 when it should have been lower. Then they cut it, but never did anything about the extra coins (other than keep them).

The issue is how you define what is a good retargeting. People accuses some altcoins which used the same retargeting scheme of Bitcoin (each 2016 blocks) of being instamined just because the blocks were generated more faster because of the big and fast increases in the hash rate. But what developers can do about this?

As someone who've looked through currencies starting from Pandacoin to Blackcoin to Auroracoin, and beyond, I myself have never seen someone accuse an altcoin of having an instamine just because the blocks were generated fast, not once.

The only time I've seen altcoins accused of being an instamine, and rightly so, was Dash/Darkcoin because it had it's core paramters changed after the instamine occured, and coins like Asiacoin where it had a hidden instamine. That is why we need a new filter to filter out coins that had illegtimate instamines where the actual core parameters were changed after launch to benefit early miners.

Of course the most infamous example of a instamine is Dash.