Guest User

Untitled

a guest
Mar 16th, 2018
390
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
  1. [19:59:39] <katiecharm> alright all its approximately 8pm
  2. [20:00:28] <katiecharm> this meeting is for those who couldn't attend the 2pm session. we had several members of the community present and hammered out how we all feel about recent goings on
  3. [20:00:51] <jwinterm> I rapidly scrolled through 2pm meeting
  4. [20:00:58] <katiecharm> it was proposed and heavily liked that we have our hard fork on April 7th
  5. [20:01:03] <jwinterm> I think floam412 and I are the only ones who missed it and are here now
  6. [20:01:45] <jwinterm> hard fork to new variant1 monero pow?
  7. [20:02:05] <katiecharm> in which we will adopt the rebase code, set minimum ring size to 3,and continue to allow a single tx of ring size 1 per block, but totally disallow ring size 2
  8. [20:02:22] <jwinterm> so no change to pow?
  9. [20:02:27] <katiecharm> and yes
  10. [20:02:32] --> retti (~retti@wsip-70-187-125-251.lv.lv.cox.net) has joined #aeon
  11. [20:02:44] <smooth> jwinterm: the earlier discussion was that we should adopt variant 1
  12. [20:03:03] <smooth> it'll be cn-lite variant 1
  13. [20:03:12] <katiecharm> it was agreed that to prevent an asic butt rush we have to emergency fork to the monero pow, but with our same lighter scratch pad
  14. [20:03:15] <jwinterm> ok, that's pretty quick for hardfork, but not too many people to notify I guess
  15. [20:03:38] <jwinterm> yea, it's not clear that bitmain will work on aeon, but baikal at least seems to
  16. [20:03:48] <katiecharm> I proposed, tho I don't think it met with unanimous approval that we revisit that in 6 months with a possible new hard fork and new algo
  17. [20:04:17] <katiecharm> oh hi smooth, thank you for being at both sessions
  18. [20:04:17] <retti> I'd wouldn't even set a time like "6 months"
  19. [20:04:30] <jwinterm> hyc mentioned argon2d on monero github issue thread
  20. [20:04:38] <retti> Lets get the ffs going and then think about diverging
  21. [20:04:43] <katiecharm> well that was just said aloud, and we can argue it further here
  22. [20:04:58] <jwinterm> that is currently used by unitus and couple other very small coins
  23. [20:05:07] <jwinterm> there is no gpu implementation afaik
  24. [20:05:23] <katiecharm> yes ffs (facial feminization surgery kek) is a top priority
  25. [20:06:33] <katiecharm> once we have a featured forum funding system it will help us be our own blockchain and get out from being Romero's bitch, which we have to be at the moment
  26. [20:06:49] <jwinterm> soon wownero romero's bitch
  27. [20:06:50] <katiecharm> excuse the color
  28. [20:06:59] <jwinterm> needkovri90 disappeared
  29. [20:07:11] <jwinterm> want to come see new monero research labs this saturday
  30. [20:07:26] <katiecharm> west coast? sure
  31. [20:07:50] <jwinterm> yea, I'll ping him on discord if he doesn't get back to me tonight
  32. [20:08:36] <jwinterm> anyway, I guess thanks for accomodating me, the only late meeting attendee
  33. [20:08:44] <jwinterm> o_O
  34. [20:08:49] <katiecharm> so does anyone present object to anything that got wild approval in the first meeting?
  35. [20:09:03] <katiecharm> no don't worry, it's important to me
  36. [20:09:25] <katiecharm> just because you can't make an arbitrary time slot doesn't mean you should get a voice
  37. [20:09:36] <katiecharm> *shouldn't
  38. [20:09:50] <jwinterm> seems good to me, as long as bittrex and big pools are on board to hard fork in 3 weeks
  39. [20:10:09] <smooth> two weeks should be enough once the code is ready, which it is not
  40. [20:10:26] <katiecharm> smooth that sounds like dissent
  41. [20:10:30] <floam412> Dilly Dilly *\o
  42. [20:10:32] <smooth> maybe 2 1/2 a little better
  43. [20:10:38] <katiecharm> do you think April 7th too soon?
  44. [20:10:50] <smooth> not dissenting anything
  45. [20:10:50] <katiecharm> that's 3 weeks
  46. [20:10:57] <smooth> it depends when the code is done
  47. [20:11:05] <katiecharm> hmmm
  48. [20:11:22] <retti> April 25th?
  49. [20:11:43] <smooth> lets finish the code and then set a date, or at least get closer to finishing it
  50. [20:12:11] <katiecharm> are you worried about getting hit with ASICS in the mean time?
  51. [20:12:12] <thinkpol2> finish rebase code? or pow?
  52. [20:12:18] <retti> Concern that asics are going to ruin the network. Oh well to the miners right? *cries in the corner*
  53. [20:12:54] <-- viceroy (uid275197@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zsioiprokehhkaka) has quit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
  54. [20:12:54] <smooth> the rebase code is mostly done but we cant really fork without finishing up one last item which is removing monero's forks
  55. [20:13:08] <smooth> otherwise our fork will activate other stuff like mandatory ringct
  56. [20:13:17] <thinkpol2> aha, ok
  57. [20:13:35] <smooth> the pow change is very easy, can probably be merged in a few minutes
  58. [20:13:40] <katiecharm> ugh, stoffu would be a nice voice here. hope he sounds off in the Reddit comments. and wow, okay smooth, yah we don't want that wow
  59. [20:13:49] <retti> When can we get that to testnet at least?
  60. [20:14:16] <smooth> i dont know, stoffu said he was working it and it seemed more than trivial
  61. [20:14:34] <stoffu> I'm planning to do that this weekend.
  62. [20:14:43] <katiecharm> yurrrrrssse
  63. [20:14:44] <stoffu> Right now I'm busy fixing small bugs in Monero :)
  64. [20:14:54] <katiecharm> hi and welcome
  65. [20:15:00] <smooth> https://github.com/aeonix/aeon-rebase/pull/4#issuecomment-373269085
  66. [20:15:01] <aeonbux-test> [ Even more minimal version by stoffu · Pull Request #4 · aeonix/aeon-rebase · GitHub ] - github.com
  67. [20:15:10] <katiecharm> Retti my hopes we are logging this meeting too?
  68. [20:15:14] <smooth> sounds great stoffu
  69. [20:15:21] <retti> Yes
  70. [20:15:31] <retti> kekekekek
  71. [20:15:43] <stoffu> Also a good learning opportunity for me as a Monero developer.
  72. [20:15:51] <katiecharm> okay, hmmm, so do you think it isn't a good idea to set a date at all for a fork?
  73. [20:16:02] <katiecharm> asking since we have both of you here
  74. [20:16:12] <smooth> we'll set a date when the code is done, maybe after the weekend
  75. [20:16:15] <smooth> you never know until it is done
  76. [20:16:39] <smooth> i want at least 2-2.5 weeks once we have a tagged release
  77. [20:17:01] --> shigutso (~vitor@177.102.162.17) has joined #aeon
  78. [20:17:12] <katiecharm> okay, so we will agree to revisit this in one week? no irc chat necessary, we will just freeze it for a week
  79. [20:17:24] <thinkpol2> 2 weeks of testing does seem important
  80. [20:18:00] <katiecharm> obvi we'll defer to yours and stoffu's wishes here. so let's freeze this for a week.
  81. [20:18:04] <jwinterm> 2 weeks after code is available seems like good minimum
  82. [20:18:23] <katiecharm> as far as the hard fork date
  83. [20:18:28] <retti> Seems good, so an estimated time would be by the end of April
  84. [20:18:34] <retti> We gotta have something for the memes
  85. [20:18:38] <katiecharm> it would seem so
  86. [20:18:57] <katiecharm> yeah the meme press will just run wild with their own nonsense if we don't leak something
  87. [20:19:43] <stoffu> I'd be uncomfortable to have my code in without moneromooo's review. But I'm not sure if he can spend enough time for us before Monero's release.
  88. [20:20:39] <-> You are now known as moneromooooooooo
  89. [20:20:44] <moneromooooooooo> it's ok stoffu
  90. [20:20:49] <thinkpol2> lol
  91. [20:20:49] <moneromooooooooo> I trust in your code
  92. [20:21:00] <moneromooooooooo> :P
  93. [20:21:00] <katiecharm> hmm, well if monero releases end of March we could ask him to take a peek early April
  94. [20:21:05] <-> You are now known as jwinterm
  95. [20:21:12] <katiecharm> lol
  96. [20:21:14] <retti> hahaha
  97. [20:21:21] <katiecharm> use the force stoffu
  98. [20:21:34] <stoffu> :)
  99. [20:21:37] <katiecharm> just write it all out at once and push to master without running it
  100. [20:22:19] <thinkpol2> whoa whoa whoa, this isn't electroneum
  101. [20:22:36] <katiecharm> okay since we have some heavyweights here and most tech business seems to be nearly agreed upon, I have an issue I wanna bring up
  102. [20:24:18] <katiecharm> it's me and a fellow aeon'ers intention to establish a non profit organization known as the Aeon Foundation. I know there has been a lot of bad vibes regarding these types of organizations, but exchanges and other agencies are increasingly demanding a central organization of accountability for a given blockchain
  103. [20:24:42] <katiecharm> cons: a lot, I know
  104. [20:25:04] -*- jwinterm nods in agreement
  105. [20:25:13] <katiecharm> anything centralized gives a central point of attack. pros: a lot
  106. [20:25:24] <jwinterm> I was just looking at bitcoin foundation wiki the other day tho
  107. [20:25:45] <jwinterm> According to its founding documents, the Bitcoin Foundation's original members included Gavin Andresen, Charlie Shrem, Mark Karpeles, Peter Vessenes, Roger Ver, Patrick Murck and Mehul Puri.
  108. [20:25:54] <thinkpol2> what is the aeon foundations job?
  109. [20:26:02] <jwinterm> shrem, andresen, karpeles, and ver
  110. [20:26:04] <jwinterm> wcgw?
  111. [20:26:34] <katiecharm> lol true jwinterm. lots of slime there and a little luster
  112. [20:26:39] <smooth> how about now? brock pierce?
  113. [20:26:47] <smooth> everyone else with a brain quit after that
  114. [20:27:24] <katiecharm> fact is, exchanges such as bittrex are demanding a central public point of contact for all listed coins
  115. [20:27:38] <smooth> seems kind of easy for these orgs to go off the rails badly
  116. [20:27:57] <katiecharm> I think the Aeon Foundation isn't a great idea, but neither is having this entire coin under the legal hand of me
  117. [20:28:02] <jwinterm> not much better atm: https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board-of-directors/
  118. [20:28:04] <aeonbux-test> [ Board of Directors - Bitcoin Foundation ] - bitcoinfoundation.org
  119. [20:28:39] <smooth> haha, i didn't even realize vinny was on there
  120. [20:28:41] <smooth> that fits
  121. [20:28:43] <katiecharm> consider if I died, or got arrested, or etc etc
  122. [20:29:19] <katiecharm> as well, having an organization let's us do legal and official fund raising
  123. [20:29:25] <jwinterm> I don't think it's a bad idea, but if you are the only one controlling the foundation, does it make a difference?
  124. [20:29:38] <retti> She wouldn't be the only one
  125. [20:29:55] <retti> There would be a succession plan at the very least
  126. [20:29:59] <katiecharm> no, it would be my intention to split this among 3 to 5 public names in the community
  127. [20:30:14] <katiecharm> maybe not even colocated entirely
  128. [20:31:08] <shigutso> I agree with the Aeon Foundation idea, it just has to be done very carefully to not be viewed as something centralized by the community
  129. [20:31:30] <thinkpol2> it will be viewed as something centralized
  130. [20:31:36] <katiecharm> I think we all agree that a central foundation is not great, but a single public person being the sole point of failure is much worse
  131. [20:31:40] <thinkpol2> because it is
  132. [20:31:41] <retti> That might be unavoidable to some people's perspectives.
  133. [20:32:29] <katiecharm> I can confidently say I haven't been officially approached by any three letters and my warrant canary is intact, but how long will that last if Aeon gets huge and I have the sole keys to the kingdom?
  134. [20:32:38] <retti> Aeon needs to be dekatiefied. Too much is tied to her and centralized to her right now.
  135. [20:33:02] <retti> Does anyone have other ideas to achieve this?
  136. [20:33:08] <katiecharm> I agree. even if I am. trustworthy, we must guard against being too powerful in a given system
  137. [20:33:43] <shigutso> hmm we should use... multisig for that :)
  138. [20:33:45] <thinkpol2> i wish i did.. how do you decentralize a foundation?
  139. [20:33:56] <katiecharm> lol a blockchain
  140. [20:34:01] <thinkpol2> hah
  141. [20:34:05] <katiecharm> snakes mouth, taste tail
  142. [20:34:43] <jwinterm> eos? eth? some other bullshit token?
  143. [20:34:53] <katiecharm> an Aeon Foundation won't be an ideal solution, but it will be less wrong
  144. [20:35:47] <katiecharm> as is, I have far too much power in what may become a global standard of economy, especially considering I am a narcissistic histrionic undergoing a female puberty ;)
  145. [20:36:23] <shigutso> maybe a multisig wallet with the main devs + main community managers with the keys? or maybe not
  146. [20:36:25] <retti> Ugh...this sounds bad on paper...its not palatable
  147. [20:36:50] <katiecharm> would be better if the keys to that kingdom were in the hands of a legal non profit, which then gave it additional rights above a single human
  148. [20:36:57] <retti> shigutso that is not good enough for bittrex
  149. [20:37:20] <katiecharm> bittrex (and other exchanges) want to cover their ass
  150. [20:37:31] <katiecharm> to do that they need a source to point to
  151. [20:37:37] <smooth> you can mostly tell them to get lost if you are a big coin but not a small one
  152. [20:37:55] <smooth> easy for them to just delist, no real loss for them
  153. [20:37:58] <retti> Until there is a amazing decentralized exchage, we are threatened with delisting.
  154. [20:38:09] <katiecharm> not vague shadowy kids on the interwebz, and not some obscure multi sig min/max solution
  155. [20:38:12] <jwinterm> tradeogre.com
  156. [20:38:20] <katiecharm> they need a name of a person or organization
  157. [20:38:33] <katiecharm> yah, we should not lose bittrex
  158. [20:38:41] <jwinterm> smooth or katiecharm did you get request to avoid price discussion on official forums like /r/aeon from bittrex?
  159. [20:38:45] <jwinterm> just out of curiousity
  160. [20:39:01] <smooth> i dont recall getting one
  161. [20:39:03] <katiecharm> I can confirm I have signed an nda with bittrex
  162. [20:39:06] <smooth> maybe i forgot?
  163. [20:39:21] <retti> Is tradeogre reputable?
  164. [20:39:24] <smooth> i may have ignored it since i mostly dont do price discussion anyway
  165. [20:39:28] <jwinterm> retti: no
  166. [20:39:29] <katiecharm> I need to review it and see if I'm allowed to discuss what is or isn't inside it
  167. [20:39:37] <shigutso> tradeogre is still very small
  168. [20:39:41] <jwinterm> just saw this thread on myriadcoin the other day: https://www.reddit.com/r/myriadcoin/comments/83syi1/price_investing_discussions_not_allowed/
  169. [20:39:41] <aeonbux-test> This setting can be provided in a praw.ini file, as a keyword argument to the `Reddit` class constructor, or as an environment variable. (file "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/praw/reddit.py", line 150, in __init__)
  170. [20:39:48] <jwinterm> gd it aeonbux-test
  171. [20:40:03] <jwinterm> see top comment
  172. [20:40:05] <katiecharm> we don't want to lose bittrex. from an economic standpoint, that would be very bad for Aeon
  173. [20:40:07] <thinkpol2> a temporary foundation? to be disolved once aeon gets big enough or decentralized exchanges work?
  174. [20:40:26] <katiecharm> busses into Aeon are necessary
  175. [20:40:35] <smooth> foundations can be dissolved as long as you dont get asshats on the board who want to perpetuate it for no good reason like BTCF
  176. [20:40:37] <katiecharm> we can't go full idealism here
  177. [20:41:02] <shigutso> and one of the reasons the rebase is so important is that aeond won't eat 10GB of RAM anymore, so more Exchanges can consider listing Aeon... so maybe even if we lose Bittrex, we can get listed in many other Exchanges, like Poloniex
  178. [20:41:23] <katiecharm> then we should be very careful who gets on the foundation
  179. [20:41:33] <katiecharm> and sure shig, but that's hypotheticala
  180. [20:41:36] <thinkpol2> that's my worry - foundation has a board, so they make the decisions on what the foundation does
  181. [20:41:46] <thinkpol2> (i say this as a nobody here) :D
  182. [20:41:52] <smooth> im not against a foundation with a properly defined purpose but ill be cautious about turning over the repo or donation fund. That doens't mean i wont, but i'll want to see the foundation well functioning first
  183. [20:42:12] <smooth> However, a foundation can still do its own fundraising, run FFS, etc.
  184. [20:42:20] <katiecharm> we have bittrex now, one of the biggest exchanges in the world - we lose that and Aeon takes a pretty nasty hit. like it or not, XMR success had something to do with polo success
  185. [20:42:32] <smooth> i agree with that katiecharm
  186. [20:42:37] <shigutso> does Monero have a foundation?
  187. [20:42:41] <smooth> no
  188. [20:42:48] <jwinterm> well
  189. [20:43:01] <jwinterm> "core team" is like unofficial foundation
  190. [20:43:03] <smooth> monero is big enough to mostly tell exchanges to pound sand or comply minimally and they still list it
  191. [20:43:07] <jwinterm> not a legal entity I guess
  192. [20:43:19] <katiecharm> yes I would be trepid af about smooth turning over the repo too
  193. [20:43:28] <smooth> its not a legal entity. there have been discussions at various times about having one, but has not gone anywhere so far
  194. [20:43:32] <shigutso> yeah Monero is top 10 in coinmarketcap... Aeon is... 200ish :(
  195. [20:43:40] <jwinterm> is trepid even a word?
  196. [20:43:45] <jwinterm> .dict trepid
  197. [20:43:46] <aeonbux-test> trepid — adjective: 1. timid, timorous, fearful
  198. [20:43:50] <smooth> small coins pay $10 million to list on binance. xmr paid nothing
  199. [20:43:57] <smooth> just to give an idea
  200. [20:44:14] <smooth> arguably listing on bittrex might be worth something like that, so worth not squandering it
  201. [20:44:33] <shigutso> indeed
  202. [20:44:39] <smooth> i cooperate with them as much as possible
  203. [20:45:05] <shigutso> so bittrex is telling it's mandatory to have a focal point for all coins?
  204. [20:45:12] <katiecharm> okay well we don't have to come to agreement on this now btw
  205. [20:45:29] <smooth> shigutso: mandatory for all small coins for sure
  206. [20:45:39] <katiecharm> I just wanted to get this out there that I think it's an idea worth arguing about in the near future
  207. [20:45:53] <katiecharm> I think it's an inevitable evil for Aeon
  208. [20:46:23] <shigutso> do we have a deadline for that? or is bittrex fine if we deliver a "foundation" next year? :P
  209. [20:46:46] <smooth> bittrex is okay for now, this is more of a longer term path
  210. [20:47:23] <retti> What is the current focal point now for bittrex?
  211. [20:47:32] <katiecharm> yes we are gtg on bittrex in a suboptimal but perfectly fine way at the present time
  212. [20:47:38] <smooth> katiecharm is the lead represensative or some such title
  213. [20:47:51] <katiecharm> lead histrionic
  214. [20:47:51] <smooth> something we made up, they dont care as long as someone signs it
  215. [20:47:56] <shigutso> nice
  216. [20:48:05] <retti> And we are worse off with an Aeon Foundationm
  217. [20:48:08] <shigutso> I trust katiecharm :P
  218. [20:48:10] <retti> ?*
  219. [20:48:35] <smooth> retti: i guess katiecharm is uncomfortable being personally responsible and that's not even bad
  220. [20:48:42] <smooth> as she said, what happens if she dies, goes rogue, etc.
  221. [20:48:43] <thinkpol2> i think most people don't know that
  222. [20:49:19] <smooth> a foundation with a board can possible be a more responsible way to handle the business relationships and public affairs
  223. [20:49:23] <smooth> assuming it doesn't go off the rails
  224. [20:49:27] <katiecharm> shig I'm conveniently too basic to be much of a threat to any given blockchain XD XD "sometimes there's a dude... and that dude is the right dude for that time..."
  225. [20:49:30] <shigutso> yeah that's a risk, we could have one or two more community managers
  226. [20:49:53] <shigutso> katiecharm lol xD
  227. [20:50:06] <katiecharm> I'm not uncomfortable. it would just make me a bad node not to question my placement there
  228. [20:50:08] <thinkpol2> hmm so, smooth, would you be a member of this foundation's board?
  229. [20:50:26] <katiecharm> Smooth has so far maintained staunch anonymity
  230. [20:50:39] <thinkpol2> i know, hence the question
  231. [20:50:45] <katiecharm> I intend to respect it, as should the community
  232. [20:50:47] <smooth> i can probably nominate someone to act on my behalf
  233. [20:51:03] <katiecharm> can we get the cash me outside girl?
  234. [20:51:05] <jwinterm> is stoffu anon?
  235. [20:51:06] <retti> Proxy smooth
  236. [20:51:15] <katiecharm> I always wanted to werk with her
  237. [20:51:24] <thinkpol2> that's... weird
  238. [20:51:26] <retti> twerk with her
  239. [20:51:35] <shigutso> wut
  240. [20:51:53] <katiecharm> please keep rando conspiracy speculation to another place thx
  241. [20:51:57] <jwinterm> 'Cash me outside' girl is off probation | Page Six
  242. [20:51:57] <jwinterm> https://pagesix.com/2018/03/15/cash-me-outside-girl-is-off-probation/
  243. [20:51:58] <aeonbux-test> [ ‘Cash me outside’ girl is off probation | Page Six ] - pagesix.com
  244. [20:52:05] <jwinterm> apparently she's available since today
  245. [20:52:11] <retti> kek
  246. [20:52:24] <katiecharm> there are no coincidences in this game gentlemen
  247. [20:52:31] <katiecharm> XD
  248. [20:52:52] <thinkpol2> are you referring to me, rando conspiracy speculation?
  249. [20:53:00] <smooth> i guess we can hire her for security?
  250. [20:53:13] <katiecharm> okay let's shelf this Aeon Foundation talk for now and revisit soon
  251. [20:53:32] <katiecharm> I just wanted to put it in the zeitgeist
  252. [20:53:42] <katiecharm> if I'm using that phrase right
  253. [20:54:03] <jwinterm> Born: March 26, 2003
  254. [20:54:07] <jwinterm> jfc
  255. [20:54:09] <jwinterm> am old af
  256. [20:54:29] <katiecharm> nah, the internet has bound us all
  257. [20:54:51] <shigutso> mfw 15 years old is old af... I must be ancient then
  258. [20:54:56] <katiecharm> I have more in common with 21 year olds than 49 year olds (usually, am 35)
  259. [20:55:10] <katiecharm> okay the hour is ending
  260. [20:55:17] <jwinterm> also 1982er
  261. [20:55:18] <katiecharm> any last official business
  262. [20:55:20] <jwinterm> ok
  263. [20:55:22] <jwinterm> none here
  264. [20:55:31] <katiecharm> Oregon trail generation
  265. [20:55:38] <shigutso> I have only one more thing to add
  266. [20:56:13] <shigutso> after the rebase, are we going to organize a crusade to make aeon available in more exchanges? xD
  267. [20:56:25] <katiecharm> yes absolutely
  268. [20:56:34] <katiecharm> there will be little excuse then
  269. [20:56:49] <shigutso> "let's fill all those forms!!!"
  270. [20:56:51] <retti> We won't have to crusade
  271. [20:57:04] <katiecharm> I think the tux people will be interested
  272. [20:57:08] <retti> Thats on Katie now
  273. [20:57:12] <katiecharm> it's a small exchange, but solid and promising
  274. [20:57:31] <retti> Aeon to Pepecash trading pait ftw
  275. [20:57:48] <_Slack> <needkovri90> jwinterm
  276. [20:57:50] <_Slack> <needkovri90> saturday is on
  277. [20:57:59] <katiecharm> the more exchanges we get listed on (without paying for obvi) the more. decentralized and powerful we become
  278. [20:58:00] <_Slack> <needkovri90> its nothing fancy yet, still moving stuff in
  279. [20:58:00] <shigutso> I'll make sure the miners of my pool will ask the hell out my country's exchange for aeon
  280. [20:58:19] <katiecharm> open invitation nk90?
  281. [20:58:32] <retti> Not fair lol
  282. [20:58:46] <jwinterm> ok, can you post meetup link or pm address
  283. [20:58:54] <jwinterm> not sure I'll get there but would like to
  284. [20:59:46] <smooth> paying a little isn't bad. obviously we aren't paying $10 million but paying a (much) smaller amount could be worth it
  285. [21:00:11] <smooth> ideally no, but its back to being realistic about being a small coin
  286. [21:00:22] <smooth> and not paying is better ofc
  287. [21:00:50] <smooth> right now only being on one real exchange is quite bad
  288. [21:01:24] <katiecharm> yes I would even say dire. we need to construct additional exchanges immediately
  289. [21:01:25] <jwinterm> honestly it's probably better shitopia delisted
  290. [21:01:29] <jwinterm> those guys are scammy af
  291. [21:02:01] <katiecharm> these two chats have been a great step in solidifying our community tho
  292. [21:02:17] <katiecharm> and I wanna thank all the crypto legends who made time to be here and weigh in
  293. [21:02:22] <jwinterm> thanks for having second one
  294. [21:02:36] <katiecharm> and even those luerkers who just watched from the sides
  295. [21:02:55] <jwinterm> gotta go play guitar for kids and get them to sleep
  296. [21:03:03] <jwinterm> hopefully see you on saturday or soon
  297. [21:03:08] <katiecharm> and those who asked innocuous and innoculous questions, and even those who took the time to review this log afterwards
  298. [21:03:16] <katiecharm> thanks all <3
  299. [21:03:22] <-- retti (~retti@wsip-70-187-125-251.lv.lv.cox.net) has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
  300. [21:03:39] <shigutso> thanks everyone, have a good night!
  301. [21:04:42] <smooth> gn
  302. [21:05:01] <-- shigutso (~vitor@177.102.162.17) has quit (Quit: Leaving)
RAW Paste Data