Windows 7 based computer.
Novice Python coding.
Able to alpha test any project.
Will donate SPR for bountys.

Faster is tempting, but not a big issue. Once a masternode is elected it is elected. (Unless it gets kicked)  I like the idea of having a variable masternode because it forces people to buy more SPR to stay up with the game. This rewards long term holders who bought it cheap (like right now) and encourages a price growth down the line.  I think the original idea he had was fantastic. Honestly I think we need next to no tweaking to implement the original idea. I know we all want faster elections, but in the grand scheme of things it's not that long.

Does anyone have the capability of slightly modifying the election speed? If only a little. If someone steps up to adjust it then we can put it on testnet immediately. The public needs to see that this project is moving forward. Many of the other developers want to take a few months to perfect it (which I understand) but the coin may be dead before we get that far. Lets get a small victory in the making.

Can we safely call testing round 2 finished? If so let's announce it on bitcointalk and encourage everyone to make preparations for round 3.

Yes, I think test round 2 is definitely finished.

Quote from: Strumpet! on February 23, 2015, 07:17:05 pm

maybe a one step at a time approach is best - another round of testing with more votes per block for faster election/de-election of Masternodes, plus your own/elbandi's UI improvements?

Yes, a detailed road map with dates.

1. Clearly bring round 2 of testing to a public end.
2. Publish a brief summary of the results of round 2.
3. Decide and announce what's to be tested in round 3, with a timeline
4. Detailed planning of round 3
5. etc.

Quote

If the de/election process was about 10x faster it would be a great start. 

Okay, but first we (I) need to understand why Mr Spread didn't make it 10x faster in the first place, i.e. we (I) need to discover and assess the tradeoffs involved.

Tangentially, I think the group could/would benefit a lot if technical discussions were to be held on github in the context of a new (membership-driven) spreadcoin-project github organisation that would offer a bit more structure for us to cling to (making effective open-source group decisions is hard enough as it is). Github offers a usefully practical workspace: issue ticketing, milestones, etc and, as an open source project, there are lots of quite generous closely-associated options open to the Spreadcoin development team w.r.t, to continuous integration / build etc.

Github repos come with a wiki and a web site, it seems suboptimal to have content owned and hosted by an individual when it can be collectively owned, maintained and hosted for free --- or at least until the Spreadcoin “community” (for want of a better word)  develops more formal principles of self-administration and collective curation of commons-generated value.

Shifting tech discussion to github would indeed seem prudent given the predicament we currently find ourselves in. 

As regards the UI and other blockchain-neutral wallet enhancements, it's all up in the air. I agreed with the poster in the darkcointalk thread who found fault with the lack of public vision. It's problematic in that there is no coherent vision for functionality - in contrast with, say, the Clams wallet and the latest SecurityCoin2.1 wallet.

Cheers

Graham

The trouble with public vision is usually that it's pointed in all manner of conflicting directions... I think Spread has already taken some firm and positive steps in the direction of user friendliness, and that should be built on. Is there some specific direction you'd like to head in?

we sould not bury MrSpread. he is off since some days, we can give him some times more

I believe Mr. Spread abandoned SPR project because of Suprnova pool and other pools in the future, if any will exist. "No pool" was his main and original concept, but I don't think ocminer did a bad thing on purpose. It was a challenge for any pool owner. Ocminer just solve a challenge.
On the other hand, Mr. Spread shouldn't be disappointed with pool existing. SPR could raise in other directions despite of pools.
I personally haven't dumped any SPR before, and I'm still mining it, but I don't expect any bright future if Mr. Spread won't return.
I'm ready to help in testing, as I did in previous 2 tests, or any other way to promote SPR, if anyone would be interested in futher development.

I believe Mr. Spread abandoned SPR project because of Suprnova pool and other pools in the future, if any will exist.

nope. the current minersignature is the third pool protection solution. so it's not a news for him if a pool exists.

"No pool" was his main and original concept, but I don't think ocminer did a bad thing on purpose. It was a challenge for any pool owner. Ocminer just solve a challenge.

Yeah, 1% hashrate, cool. that's a big pool!!!! everyone is minig there!!!! omg, omg