GoldCoin Talk
Main Category => Technical Discussion => Topic started by: Majormax on June 10, 2013, 01:30:05 PM
-
I think we need an authoritative summary of where things stand at present.
Many people will be confused as to :
1. Which is the latest client, and where to safely download.
1a Where is the fork coming ? My client shows block 20892 completed, but I don't know if that is correct,and if the fork is at 20900, I do not have that client.
2. Which is the official forum, by majority vote , and especially as far as the dev. is concerned ?
-
1- The latest client is the client we are using now. Which we downloaded from the main GLD thread on bitcointalk forum.
2- At this stage the fork will be activated at block 21000. The dev had put a thread on old GLD forum about moving fork to block 20900 and wanted our opinion. Opnions were divided between let fork at block 21000 and moving it to block 20900. We havent heard anything from dev so it seems he will leave fork at 21000.
3- I think and many others agree with me that this GLD forum should be the official GLD forum. MicroGuy is running this forum and doing a great job. I hope that the dev also agrees with me that this should become official forum with all info about GLD.
-
so once this fork happens, we need to update our client. Or did the most recent update include the fork in the coding already? I don't want to loose my shares, so I need to know how to properly go about doing this. Any help is awesome.
-
1- The latest client is the client we are using now. Which we downloaded from the main GLD thread on bitcointalk forum.
2- At this stage the fork will be activated at block 21000. The dev had put a thread on old GLD forum about moving fork to block 20900 and wanted our opinion. Opnions were divided between let fork at block 21000 and moving it to block 20900. We havent heard anything from dev so it seems he will leave fork at 21000.
3- I think and many others agree with me that this GLD forum should be the official GLD forum. MicroGuy is running this forum and doing a great job. I hope that the dev also agrees with me that this should become official forum with all info about GLD.
I agree on 3).
The first 2 are also correct.
-
1- The latest client is the client we are using now. Which we downloaded from the main GLD thread on bitcointalk forum.
2- At this stage the fork will be activated at block 21000. The dev had put a thread on old GLD forum about moving fork to block 20900 and wanted our opinion. Opnions were divided between let fork at block 21000 and moving it to block 20900. We havent heard anything from dev so it seems he will leave fork at 21000.
3- I think and many others agree with me that this GLD forum should be the official GLD forum. MicroGuy is running this forum and doing a great job. I hope that the dev also agrees with me that this should become official forum with all info about GLD.
I am also in accord with those 3 points. Thanks for confirming.
-
1- The latest client is the client we are using now. Which we downloaded from the main GLD thread on bitcointalk forum.
2- At this stage the fork will be activated at block 21000. The dev had put a thread on old GLD forum about moving fork to block 20900 and wanted our opinion. Opnions were divided between let fork at block 21000 and moving it to block 20900. We havent heard anything from dev so it seems he will leave fork at 21000.
3- I think and many others agree with me that this GLD forum should be the official GLD forum. MicroGuy is running this forum and doing a great job. I hope that the dev also agrees with me that this should become official forum with all info about GLD.
I agree on 3).
The first 2 are also correct.
Thanks:
I believe it is helpful to restate these things, as there will be a lot of people still seeing conflicting info. on btctalk,
and in other locations. I will try to reach any that I can.
-
1- The latest client is the client we are using now. Which we downloaded from the main GLD thread on bitcointalk forum.
2- At this stage the fork will be activated at block 21000. The dev had put a thread on old GLD forum about moving fork to block 20900 and wanted our opinion. Opnions were divided between let fork at block 21000 and moving it to block 20900. We havent heard anything from dev so it seems he will leave fork at 21000.
3- I think and many others agree with me that this GLD forum should be the official GLD forum. MicroGuy is running this forum and doing a great job. I hope that the dev also agrees with me that this should become official forum with all info about GLD.
I agree on 3).
The first 2 are also correct.
Thanks:
I believe it is helpful to restate these things, as there will be a lot of people still seeing conflicting info. on btctalk,
and in other locations. I will try to reach any that I can.
And i hope the dev will react soon and clarify things up.
-
The developer contacted me last week and indicated his willingness to accept new developers into the project.
I think what would be helpful at this point is to get a second opinion from an expert regarding what code improvements (if any) are needed. For example we need to know if the litecoin base keys were used. And the blockchain requires further analysis to determine the split status. This is not my area of expertise but I have consulted with a third party and these are his thoughts.
In my estimation, these client syncing / network issues need to be placed at the top of our list of priorities. It would be most helpful to have direct communication with the developer on an ongoing basis. Building a small team of developers is my recommendation. I am willing to pay for their initial involvement within reason. I will post a little later tonight with more updates.
Thank you all for your participation in this critical discussion.
-
Further thoughts.....
The thing that attracted me to this coin was the name Gold Coin.
I also very much like the GLD designation. It has nothing to do with the type of hash or the block reward, it's simply the name I like. This is how consumers look at things, not from the underlying technology. If that was the case, no one would use Windows. But they like that name and they will like this name.
And there is nothing that can stop this coin from succeeding if we can all work together and build a team. This is going to take focus, cooperation, compromise, and leadership. When I talk about the stars aligning, this is what I mean.
This coin is like a mighty ship dead in the water and drifting towards a giant iceberg. There is no power and the rudder is useless. We need to take emergency measures to regain directional control of this ship and either steer to the right or to the left of the iceberg. As long as we miss the iceberg, we are still afloat and alive.
1. The Right Turn
Try to salvage the current code and fix the blockchain through coordinated hashing power. Update the client as needed and continue with this version. This will require someone at the helm of the code that can/will communicate and respond to emails and private messages. We also need to know more about the code so we don't become blindsided down the road. If we take the right turn, we still need a second developer.
2. The Left Turn
This is a HARD left. Write a new client from scratch that is leaner and meaner than the existing client. One that has been well thought out and cleanly written. Then what we can do is pre-mine coins for the purposes of exchange. We will create an exchange program where miners and investors holding coins from the current version 1.0 can swap them for shares/coins from version 2.0. This will keep market prices in check and will most probably increase the market prices as the market then would see we have a new and clear direction.
These are my thoughts. I welcome yours.
-
I think their is still a possibility to salvage Goldcoin. We are almost at block 21000. The only thing we should do is to increase our hashpower. Furtermore as MicroGuy stated its important that the dev of GLD should involve more developers to help him and us a hand. Its also important of the dev to keep us updated to prevent things like now that some questions stay unanswered.
And when things really turn out we cant salvage GLDCoin than we have always the option to still turn very hard left. ;)
-
I have just placed the following "Help Wanted" advertisement on Bitcointalk.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=231487
-
I also very much like the GLD designation. It has nothing to do with the type of hash or the block reward, it's simply the name I like. This is how consumers look at things, not from the underlying technology. If that was the case, no one would use Windows. But they like that name and they will like this name.
The only problem with the name is that it matches the symbol of the SPDR Gold Trust ETF which is GLD. Which may get a bad rep when people find out that they hold less gold than they sell shares for. In case of a gold run lots of investors will be holding the bag. And that might sour many people on the name GLD. :-\
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com
-
I also very much like the GLD designation. It has nothing to do with the type of hash or the block reward, it's simply the name I like. This is how consumers look at things, not from the underlying technology. If that was the case, no one would use Windows. But they like that name and they will like this name.
The only problem with the name is that it matches the symbol of the SPDR Gold Trust ETF which is GLD. Which may get a bad rep when people find out that they hold less gold than they sell shares for. In case of a gold run lots of investors will be holding the bag. And that might sour many people on the name GLD. :-\
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com
I don't foresee see that as being an issue. This is called GLDcoin. What I'm concerned about is the fact that people have stopped mining this coin. We have to get people mining this coin again.
-
Further thoughts.....
The thing that attracted me to this coin was the name Gold Coin.
I also very much like the GLD designation. It has nothing to do with the type of hash or the block reward, it's simply the name I like. This is how consumers look at things, not from the underlying technology. If that was the case, no one would use Windows. But they like that name and they will like this name.
And there is nothing that can stop this coin from succeeding if we can all work together and build a team. This is going to take focus, cooperation, compromise, and leadership. When I talk about the stars aligning, this is what I mean.
This coin is like a mighty ship dead in the water and drifting towards a giant iceberg. There is no power and the rudder is useless. We need to take emergency measures to regain directional control of this ship and either steer to the right or to the left of the iceberg. As long as we miss the iceberg, we are still afloat and alive.
1. The Right Turn
Try to salvage the current code and fix the blockchain through coordinated hashing power. Update the client as needed and continue with this version. This will require someone at the helm of the code that can/will communicate and respond to emails and private messages. We also need to know more about the code so we don't become blindsided down the road. If we take the right turn, we still need a second developer.
2. The Left Turn
This is a HARD left. Write a new client from scratch that is leaner and meaner than the existing client. One that has been well thought out and cleanly written. Then what we can do is pre-mine coins for the purposes of exchange. We will create an exchange program where miners and investors holding coins from the current version 1.0 can swap them for shares/coins from version 2.0. This will keep market prices in check and will most probably increase the market prices as the market then would see we have a new and clear direction.
These are my thoughts. I welcome yours.
I had considered these points a few weeks ago, before our trojan horses wreaked havoc. I bought a large % of the coins available as soon as anyone was offering them on btctalk, primarily because I felt the name was the biggest asset, but also because the block generation was fast (didn't take into account sticky downwards diff adjustment though). Then I tried to encourage and moderate the community, but turned out there were too many loose cannons.
I am working with several other alts. as that is the only way to be open minded to the opportunities and pitfalls which can blindside a very focussed coder/trader.
The hard left is an intriguing one...needs some serious technical knowhow, but would IMO have the biggest potential.
I have studied, traded, and own 10 different alts., and have taken great pains in the last couple of months to understand their individual strengths and weaknesses. The consequences of these pros and cons can still be seen unfolding in real-time. I will be happy to give my own views FWIW.
-
I also very much like the GLD designation. It has nothing to do with the type of hash or the block reward, it's simply the name I like. This is how consumers look at things, not from the underlying technology. If that was the case, no one would use Windows. But they like that name and they will like this name.
The only problem with the name is that it matches the symbol of the SPDR Gold Trust ETF which is GLD. Which may get a bad rep when people find out that they hold less gold than they sell shares for. In case of a gold run lots of investors will be holding the bag. And that might sour many people on the name GLD. :-\
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com
Don't worry about that...You are thinking too far ahead, and its far from certain any way.
GLDCoin stands for GLOBAL LITE DIGITAL COIN in any case ;) (that steals thunder from our closest 2 competitors , so must be good !)
-
As a further point to understand:
Each strength/weakness and variable of a coin takes on changing significance at different stages in its life.
Robustness, flexibility and technical resistance to attack are uppermost in the formative stages (first 6 months)
-
The power is also in the hands of the community.
It we have to do the rewrite and make v2.0, we're going to need the vast majority of the community's support. And we're going to need an exchange program to allow a fair reissue of the new coin to current 1.0 coin holders. This is going to take a lot of trust and planning.
-
I also very much like the GLD designation. It has nothing to do with the type of hash or the block reward, it's simply the name I like. This is how consumers look at things, not from the underlying technology. If that was the case, no one would use Windows. But they like that name and they will like this name.
The only problem with the name is that it matches the symbol of the SPDR Gold Trust ETF which is GLD. Which may get a bad rep when people find out that they hold less gold than they sell shares for. In case of a gold run lots of investors will be holding the bag. And that might sour many people on the name GLD. :-\
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, but I am pretty sure, this should be ok.
-
Dreamwatcher posted this on the 'other' forum [LINK REMOVED]
"Although this will help in the short run, I believe you must look into a more permanent solution down the road.
I would recommend you take the time these changes give you and look closely at implementing a PPC style difficulty algo.
The PPC style algo is pretty resilient to these types of difficulty swings and attacks.
If you need help, Sunny has helped others in the past. I have worked with him on issues surrounding PPC since it came online and he has always been helpful.
Just my 2cents that I would recommend to any coin developer who has long term plans for there coin. (Yes I know, I should be taking my own advice and implement into JKC also..I just do not know where the time goes ;D )"
Might be worth a thought.
-
Dreamwatcher posted this on the 'other' forum [LINK REMOVED]
"Although this will help in the short run, I believe you must look into a more permanent solution down the road.
I would recommend you take the time these changes give you and look closely at implementing a PPC style difficulty algo.
The PPC style algo is pretty resilient to these types of difficulty swings and attacks.
If you need help, Sunny has helped others in the past. I have worked with him on issues surrounding PPC since it came online and he has always been helpful.
Just my 2cents that I would recommend to any coin developer who has long term plans for there coin. (Yes I know, I should be taking my own advice and implement into JKC also..I just do not know where the time goes ;D )"
Might be worth a thought.
I'm beginning to lean toward a complete rewrite also. But before we work out the details of this new Goldcoin 2.0, I think we need to devise a plan to fully protect those holding the current coin. Otherwise, the PR fallout might prove difficult to overcome.
-
Dreamwatcher posted this on the 'other' forum [LINK REMOVED]
"Although this will help in the short run, I believe you must look into a more permanent solution down the road.
I would recommend you take the time these changes give you and look closely at implementing a PPC style difficulty algo.
The PPC style algo is pretty resilient to these types of difficulty swings and attacks.
If you need help, Sunny has helped others in the past. I have worked with him on issues surrounding PPC since it came online and he has always been helpful.
Just my 2cents that I would recommend to any coin developer who has long term plans for there coin. (Yes I know, I should be taking my own advice and implement into JKC also..I just do not know where the time goes ;D )"
Might be worth a thought.
I'm beginning to lean toward a complete rewrite also. But before we work out the details of this new Goldcoin 2.0, I think we need to devise a plan to fully protect those holding the current coin. Otherwise, the PR fallout might prove difficult to overcome.
There is very little you cannot do with a hard fork. You can change just about anything in the chain, client/daemon, while continuing the current block chain. Nobody loses anything, because the chain before the fork is still a part of the valid chain.
The main issue with a hard fork is mining as any coin-base transaction after the fork without the updated client/daemon would be on an orphan chain or unofficial chain. Any transactions on this chain would not be reflected in the main fork, so existing coins would not be lost.
What kind of changes do you think would be a problem in a hard fork?
-
Dreamwatcher posted this on the 'other' forum [LINK REMOVED]
"Although this will help in the short run, I believe you must look into a more permanent solution down the road.
I would recommend you take the time these changes give you and look closely at implementing a PPC style difficulty algo.
The PPC style algo is pretty resilient to these types of difficulty swings and attacks.
If you need help, Sunny has helped others in the past. I have worked with him on issues surrounding PPC since it came online and he has always been helpful.
Just my 2cents that I would recommend to any coin developer who has long term plans for there coin. (Yes I know, I should be taking my own advice and implement into JKC also..I just do not know where the time goes ;D )"
Might be worth a thought.
I'm beginning to lean toward a complete rewrite also. But before we work out the details of this new Goldcoin 2.0, I think we need to devise a plan to fully protect those holding the current coin. Otherwise, the PR fallout might prove difficult to overcome.
There is very little you cannot do with a hard fork. You can change just about anything in the chain, client/daemon, while continuing the current block chain. Nobody loses anything, because the chain before the fork is still a part of the valid chain.
The main issue with a hard fork is mining as any coin-base transaction after the fork without the updated client/daemon would be on an orphan chain or unofficial chain. Any transactions on this chain would not be reflected in the main fork, so existing coins would not be lost.
What kind of changes do you think would be a problem in a hard fork?
My concerns are with the lack of communication from the developer.
He does not appear to be mining the coin any longer or effectively communicating. Also, I was informed that we need to know if the litecoin base keys were used in his code. If they were, my understanding is that that could cause problems down the road even if we get past these forks.
Transparency and communication will be essential if we are to solve these critical issues.
-
I have been in touch with a developer who will posting his ideas in this forum a little later tonight. He has indicated to me that he is in direct contact with the current developer "gldcoin" and has access to the source code. My thinking was we should make this the official forum and use some type of voting system or elected committee to decide how to proceed when major decisions need to be made.
-
All, I am the dev of "Nibble" - my coin has been near the top of coinchoose.com on and off for the last few weeks. I can do whatever you want really with this coin. Some ideas I have are to change the fork to 20,950 - its currently set to fork at 21k. you guys will have to spread the word of the update, get cryptsy to install it and all that.
I would change the block time to 1 minute, make the difficulty retarget something like 250 blocks, make the max difficulty adjustment around 110% (makes attacks or spikes less effective or impacting), and change the coin maturity to 50 confirms - the current 100 for a coin with so few miners is insane. I would keep the block reward at 500 but have it 1/2 every x amount of blocks (way out in the future)
These are not things the dev did wrong - its just that no coin is ever intended to be mined with under 10 mH/s total.
I can make these changes immediately and have a build for you tonight - I have dealt with gldcoin (we swapped nodes to improve both networks) and he told me that he will let me take over his dev duties. He said that he just has no time at the moment, he's swamped at work, swamped at home or something.
-
All, I am the dev of "Nibble" - my coin has been near the top of coinchoose.com on and off for the last few weeks. I can do whatever you want really with this coin. Some ideas I have are to change the fork to 20,950 - its currently set to fork at 21k. you guys will have to spread the word of the update, get cryptsy to install it and all that.
I would change the block time to 1 minute, make the difficulty retarget something like 250 blocks, make the max difficulty adjustment around 110% (makes attacks or spikes less effective or impacting), and change the coin maturity to 50 confirms - the current 100 for a coin with so few miners is insane. I would keep the block reward at 500 but have it 1/2 every x amount of blocks (way out in the future)
These are not things the dev did wrong - its just that no coin is ever intended to be mined with under 10 mH/s total.
I can make these changes immediately and have a build for you tonight - I have dealt with gldcoin (we swapped nodes to improve both networks) and he told me that he will let me take over his dev duties. He said that he just has no time at the moment, he's swamped at work, swamped at home or something.
Thank you Hyoshi!
I was just thinking about you (and Nibble) today and how perhaps you might be willing to help us.
It sounds like you have some great ideas and hopefully we can now begin making some headway with Goldcoin. My understanding is that we need to know if the litecoin base keys were used in the code and discuss what impact that might have moving forward. I guess you could examine the source code and let us all know.
Also, I am consulting with another miner/developer who might like to provide his input into code changes. Maybe I can get him to chime in tomorrow here in this thread. If we have two people that understand the code, and one becomes missing in action, then community won't be put in another awkward situation like we're in now.
I suggest we all discuss this over the next day or two and get ample input from the community. Then a little later in the week, if everyone agrees we can begin the updates.
-
The keys could be an issue, but it depends what "keys": we are talking about.
IF we are talking about the Block Header "Magic numbers" or the P2P "Magic numbers" (In reality they should be the same, but I have seen some variance with the coins lately) , those can be changed in a hard fork relatively pain free. In the programming of the explorers, I use those numbers, and on most of the new coins I can tell exactly which of the older coins the source was forked off. It seems most of the new developers today are unaware they need to change those. ::)
If we are talking about colbees' key for the broadcast message system , that could changed in a hard or soft fork. I cannot recall anybody ever using the system to date (I could be wrong), but it is such a little know about/used system that I do not think changing the key would require a hard fork.
Anyway, all this is just my ramblings, and I could be wrong ;)
-
I'm excited! We're finally making some progress.
Right now I need to get some sleep. I've been working non-stop for a while and just need a little rest. See you guys tomorrow and I just know we're going to make this work.
You guys are the best! :)
-
All, I am the dev of "Nibble" - my coin has been near the top of coinchoose.com on and off for the last few weeks. I can do whatever you want really with this coin. Some ideas I have are to change the fork to 20,950 - its currently set to fork at 21k. you guys will have to spread the word of the update, get cryptsy to install it and all that.
I would change the block time to 1 minute, make the difficulty retarget something like 250 blocks, make the max difficulty adjustment around 110% (makes attacks or spikes less effective or impacting), and change the coin maturity to 50 confirms - the current 100 for a coin with so few miners is insane. I would keep the block reward at 500 but have it 1/2 every x amount of blocks (way out in the future)
These are not things the dev did wrong - its just that no coin is ever intended to be mined with under 10 mH/s total.
I can make these changes immediately and have a build for you tonight - I have dealt with gldcoin (we swapped nodes to improve both networks) and he told me that he will let me take over his dev duties. He said that he just has no time at the moment, he's swamped at work, swamped at home or something.
Thank you Hyoshi!
I was just thinking about you (and Nibble) today and how perhaps you might be willing to help us.
It sounds like you have some great ideas and hopefully we can now begin making some headway with Goldcoin. My understanding is that we need to know if the litecoin base keys were used in the code and discuss what impact that might have moving forward. I guess you could examine the source code and let us all know.
Also, I am consulting with another miner/developer who might like to provide his input into code changes. Maybe I can get him to chime in tomorrow here in this thread. If we have two people that understand the code, and one becomes missing in action, then community won't be put in another awkward situation like we're in now.
I suggest we all discuss this over the next day or two and get ample input from the community. Then a little later in the week, if everyone agrees we can begin the updates.
Here is your dilemma. There is a hard fork in place at 21K which is 89 more blocks - you likely don't have a week.
You don't need to change the public key for any reason other than the broadcast system at this point, and the magic number prefix codes don't really need to be changed either. Those things are not critical - but likely should be changed down the road.
There is nothing to say that after this fork takes place though you can't fork again in a few weeks with a faster block time, etc.
-
All, I am the dev of "Nibble" - my coin has been near the top of coinchoose.com on and off for the last few weeks. I can do whatever you want really with this coin. Some ideas I have are to change the fork to 20,950 - its currently set to fork at 21k. you guys will have to spread the word of the update, get cryptsy to install it and all that.
I would change the block time to 1 minute, make the difficulty retarget something like 250 blocks, make the max difficulty adjustment around 110% (makes attacks or spikes less effective or impacting), and change the coin maturity to 50 confirms - the current 100 for a coin with so few miners is insane. I would keep the block reward at 500 but have it 1/2 every x amount of blocks (way out in the future)
These are not things the dev did wrong - its just that no coin is ever intended to be mined with under 10 mH/s total.
I can make these changes immediately and have a build for you tonight - I have dealt with gldcoin (we swapped nodes to improve both networks) and he told me that he will let me take over his dev duties. He said that he just has no time at the moment, he's swamped at work, swamped at home or something.
Thank you Hyoshi!
I was just thinking about you (and Nibble) today and how perhaps you might be willing to help us.
It sounds like you have some great ideas and hopefully we can now begin making some headway with Goldcoin. My understanding is that we need to know if the litecoin base keys were used in the code and discuss what impact that might have moving forward. I guess you could examine the source code and let us all know.
Also, I am consulting with another miner/developer who might like to provide his input into code changes. Maybe I can get him to chime in tomorrow here in this thread. If we have two people that understand the code, and one becomes missing in action, then community won't be put in another awkward situation like we're in now.
I suggest we all discuss this over the next day or two and get ample input from the community. Then a little later in the week, if everyone agrees we can begin the updates.
Here is your dilemma. There is a hard fork in place at 21K which is 89 more blocks - you likely don't have a week.
You don't need to change the public key for any reason other than the broadcast system at this point, and the magic number prefix codes don't really need to be changed either. Those things are not critical - but likely should be changed down the road.
There is nothing to say that after this fork takes place though you can't fork again in a few weeks with a faster block time, etc.
Okay.
I think I understand. So then let's try to make a decision tomorrow. As an added security measure I have just changed the new registration option to "admin approval" to keep the forum from being spammed during the night.
...talk to you tomorrow. And thank you so very much.
-
I've moved these posts to your own thread. Let's try to stay on topic. Thank you.
-
I have moved Goldmine's two posts to his own thread.
Let's please keep this topic focused on the source code changes proposed by Hyoshi. This seems like something we need to decide in the next 24 hours. We can debate other things like "how to guides" and wiki's later. Thank you.
-
I have moved Goldmine's two posts to his own thread.
Let's please keep this topic focused on the source code changes proposed by Hyoshi. This seems like something we need to decide in the next 24 hours. We can debate other things like "how to guides" and wiki's later. Thank you.
My opinion:
We are getting some development talent together now, and people are finding this forum: atm the community is a bit fragmented to cope with a change in the upcoming fork
A fork is in place for block 21000. Let this go ahead: We will learn from its implementation and the problems thrown up. (Listen for the wails afterwards, and use them to plan properly next time)
That will give time for a new code with effective parameters to be voted on and written. An effective publicity campaign can then be mounted before the next fork.
There are mercenaries mining, and that is a novel approach which can continue. A deal needs to be worked out with the developers having an important stake - how about something using the paid-for mined coin ? I can see some interesting possibilities using some variations of paid mining to give stability, and reward to those paying and coding.
-
Just getting started this morning. Will be back in 30 minutes ready to work.
-
Looking forward to how this pans out, extremely excited to have Hyoshi with us on this too.
Can't wait for a community group to be established that will guide the direction of this coin.
-
Finally we are seeing some progress.
-
I have moved this discussion here: https://www.goldcointalk.org/index.php?topic=27