1blockologist



Offline



Activity: 501

Merit: 250



Activist Investor







Sr. MemberActivity: 501Merit: 250Activist Investor

Re: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed[Bittrex/Poloniex]GPU Released October 06, 2016, 02:44:29 AM #7186 Quote from: b4h4mu7 on October 05, 2016, 09:15:45 PM Quote from: 1blockologist on October 04, 2016, 03:58:31 PM Quote from: shojayxt on October 04, 2016, 03:29:57 PM Quote from: 1blockologist on October 03, 2016, 11:19:46 PM Other contributors of the project are working with me already. I went through the github commits and contacted several of the other contributors a month ago, and this has helped revive interest in the project and accelerated our code reviews. This really isn't the battle of ego that one influential person may be making it out to be. In our world, the age of egotistic blockchain savants are over. Boolberry is broken and we are repairing it with a level of professionalism more in line with the broader software industry. You'll have to wait for more code updates if thats what you want to see for your comfort level.



What's broken? The blockchain was working fine before you showed up. Many of us have been mining Boolberry from the beginning and off and on over the last couple of years without any "Repairs" from you. Please explain what was broken.



All that seems to have happened since you showed up was a coordinated pump. You've added some checkpoints and made the developer bounty disabled by default. All of those are very simple changes and does not prove that you have the ability tio make the changes to the code that you lead people to believe. You have also made a comment about changing the trading ticker as if that would have anything to do with the technology, price, or adoption of this coin. You were promptly followed by the typical shills asking "when yobit" "translation bounty" etc... This is all suspect and leads one to think that this is nothing more than an elaborate attempt to pump the price so some can dump their coins. My last post regarding BBR was to say that I'll hold off judgment before deciding on whether this is a pump or a legitimate effort to develop the coin. I do not think that this is a legitimate effort to develop the coin and because of that I will support CZ 100% and will not take part in any hostile takeover attempt that you are currently pursuing.



That's where I stand. You are free do do whatever you please and myself and others are free to call CZ's repository the official Boolberry version.

What's broken? The blockchain was working fine before you showed up. Many of us have been mining Boolberry from the beginning and off and on over the last couple of years without any "Repairs" from you. Please explain what was broken.All that seems to have happened since you showed up was a coordinated pump. You've added some checkpoints and made the developer bounty disabled by default. All of those are very simple changes and does not prove that you have the ability tio make the changes to the code that you lead people to believe. You have also made a comment about changing the trading ticker as if that would have anything to do with the technology, price, or adoption of this coin. You were promptly followed by the typical shills asking "when yobit" "translation bounty" etc... This is all suspect and leads one to think that this is nothing more than an elaborate attempt to pump the price so some can dump their coins. My last post regarding BBR was to say that I'll hold off judgment before deciding on whether this is a pump or a legitimate effort to develop the coin. I do not think that this is a legitimate effort to develop the coin and because of that I will support CZ 100% and will not take part in any hostile takeover attempt that you are currently pursuing.That's where I stand. You are free do do whatever you please and myself and others are free to call CZ's repository the official Boolberry version.

The blockchain works fine although less and less nodes are able to use it as the blockchain is stored in memory. all cryptonote coins have this flaw and Monero and Bytecoin are the only ones that have fixed it. The last two years would be fine, as you pointed out. The next would not.



You are associating a lot of unrelated things with presuppositions you already made about it being a pump with shills, which I also consider flawed presuppositions just like the one about the continued viability of boolberry's blockchain. This is the opposite of reserving judgement, it is entertaining to chat with you but my organizations only way to disprove most of the noise is to continue doing exactly what we are doing.



The only people that need to decide to run my code or not are the mining pool operators, until the network becomes more distributed. They dont seem to share the same views as you



We are having casual conversations while you are looking to our words as gospel to prove or disprove your faith based interest in the project. The trading symbol discussion isn't masquerading as a technological improvement. It is something we are going to do or not do, after letting the community know about it and gather input. Did you consider simply not conflating it with your other presuppositions?





The blockchain works fine although less and less nodes are able to use it as the blockchain is stored in memory. all cryptonote coins have this flaw and Monero and Bytecoin are the only ones that have fixed it. The last two years would be fine, as you pointed out. The next would not.You are associating a lot of unrelated things with presuppositions you already made about it being a pump with shills, which I also consider flawed presuppositions just like the one about the continued viability of boolberry's blockchain. This is the opposite of reserving judgement, it is entertaining to chat with you but my organizations only way to disprove most of the noise is to continue doing exactly what we are doing.The only people that need to decide to run my code or not are the mining pool operators, until the network becomes more distributed. They dont seem to share the same views as youWe are having casual conversations while you are looking to our words as gospel to prove or disprove your faith based interest in the project. The trading symbol discussion isn't masquerading as a technological improvement. It is something we are going to do or not do, after letting the community know about it and gather input. Did you consider simply not conflating it with your other presuppositions?

As a long term investor, I've gained a higher amount of confidence in the project based on CZ's last few posts. He said he's working on an update and if we gauge his prior contributions to his recent statements, we can expect top quality work in a short period of time. A substantial update from CZ could bring this project back to 200k-400k+ range or a 10x-20x from it's current position with relative ease. If your primary goal is to increase the value of this crypto asset, it would be in the best interest of all parties to work with CZ and conform to his request for a code review. At least that way there is unity in the project and you can earn his and the communities trust.



If your team is actively working to improve the codebase, then working alongside the best Cryptonote developer in the field will only add more value to this project. CZ seems motivated to contribute here and why mess a good thing up? IMO, you've already accomplished a lot by motivating CZ to work on the project again. Anything else is an added bonus

As a long term investor, I've gained a higher amount of confidence in the project based on CZ's last few posts. He said he's working on an update and if we gauge his prior contributions to his recent statements, we can expect top quality work in a short period of time. A substantial update from CZ could bring this project back to 200k-400k+ range or a 10x-20x from it's current position with relative ease. If your primary goal is to increase the value of this crypto asset, it would be in the best interest of all parties to work with CZ and conform to his request for a code review. At least that way there is unity in the project and you can earn his and the communities trust.If your team is actively working to improve the codebase, then working alongside the best Cryptonote developer in the field will only add more value to this project. CZ seems motivated to contribute here and why mess a good thing up? IMO, you've already accomplished a lot by motivating CZ to work on the project again. Anything else is an added bonus

That's right



There are already community members sending pull requests to my organization's repository. Zoidberg could just as easily be one of the community members reviewing code over there, we would even add him to the github organization! At the same time, we can also just send a big pull request later to his repository if we deem it necessary. Furthermore if he makes solo updates to his repository we can just rebase ours again with the latest updates. It is all a net benefit and thats how open source is supposed to work That's rightThere are already community members sending pull requests to my organization's repository. Zoidberg could just as easily be one of the community members reviewing code over there, we would even add him to the github organization! At the same time, we can also just send a big pull request later to his repository if we deem it necessary. Furthermore if he makes solo updates to his repository we can just rebase ours again with the latest updates. It is all a net benefit and thats how open source is supposed to work