XPY - Paycoin TeamXPY, XPY.IO linked to TeamION and IONOMY


Why so stupid?


Yeah not much in the way of comedy or good satire.
Also its not listed openly, so I’m wondering who asked him to do it.
Another good reason to rebrand.


I just mean the video is so stupid how is it relevant to the discussion. I will laugh about it anyway. Crazy guy.


I made the point if anyone searches for XPY/Paycoin. They will be confused about what revision its at and other things we’ve mentioned. That video will be part of the confusion if it becomes publicly facing.
I found it in the long standing BCT thread of Josh Garza and all the evolution’s that this coin carried. - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=857670.44840


That video is how the world views everyone involved in digital currencies.
Just a bunch of weirdos…nothing to see here :joy:


Sometimes to keep my sanity with looking at all these projects. I have random friends read over some of these threads, sites, and projects.
They think I’m just as weird interacting with everyone just as much as the oddities they read over. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:



“blocks” : 547575,
“moneysupply” : 417185222.03295398,


block: 440861
moneysupply: 16578915

So...Nope... Hyperstake (HYP) hyperstakes way better...

Sorry, had to come out of retirement to correct this asinine statement here…


To further illustrate that XPY can’t even hyperstake properly, HYP was at 312,927,532 coins at block 440861…


We missed you @vancefox


I’ve been lurking here and there… busy making my millions of pesos out here in real life since XPY caused me to loose all those hundreds of pesos I put into it…

But I couldn’t let that go… it was just way too stupid of a statement… :wink:


Have you expressed what type of features you want to see in XPY? :joy_cat:


I think I did back in BCT… something about dying I think it was…

Hold on… I’ll find it…

EDIT: It’s too far into history… I don’t have enough patience anymore for that…


That sounds about right.


:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


GAW and Garza, this way…

XPY has been in “beta” for over a year now and the new platform wont change that. It’s not like there hasn’t been 100 beta platforms over the last year from GAW to TeamXPY and there has been “always” issues with each one of them. Most of them security related aka “hacked” and co. TeamXPY will to have first proof to people that they can actually produce (and sustain) a secure platform before people would even consider looking at XPY again.

This coin and its features, and the platform, it is all still under construction.

Again, coin, features and platforms have been “under construction” for over a year now and XPY is still not even close to what was proposed in the white paper(s).

Not to forget that slacks pretty quickly disappear unless you subscribe to their service. I dislike slack for anything “important” because if someone doesn’t log on for a couple of days and if there has been some activity chances are that the important stuff has been already archived and therefore can’t be retrieved / viewed.

Amen :bow:

Some of “this” would be a start… https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Ox2aEXCxMJaV9oTHlWMllneFk

If we’re honest there has been no major changes to the code to implement any of the 2.0 changes outlined in the original whitepaper.

I am trying to find out what would be considered a “distinguishing unique valuable” feature.

In an dying altcoin landscape. What happened to smart contract capabilities, two-way double deposit escrow, thermal-hybrid-flex-blabla and the implementation of (one of the) smart asset protocols. I remember the last point being discussed in particular about one year ago when GetHashing launched the smart asset platform. I guess the “idea” has vaporized again since it would have required “serious coding” on XPY.

You should check out


Never going to happen on a POS coin. Unless you reimplement colorcore and openassets directly in the wallet which is not very feasable.

POS coins are not very suitable for OA protocol as they tend to use coins to stake and create new transactions in a wallet. Unless you create private keys that are NEVER used in a core wallet. The question is who is going to understand that.


Yeah I know. We discussed this last year. I was just mentioning it again since “back then” there was a big hype about the implementation on the XPY end but like I said, it was based on what we did at that time and it was almost comical.


No it was based on another coin’s developer who had implemented OA into their coin structure, reimplementing OA into XPY, but it didn’t go much further. I was the one discussing implementing a dividend structure with it. As i explained numerous times in our slack.


Wasn’t the dude that was doing the colored coin thing for XPY kind of mocking josh and the whole organization? If I remember correctly it was quite comical the way the dude was handling it.


ya, slack just isn’t my thing. Simple one on one conversation is one thing. The big, open group is just a jumbled mess of words, at least that is they way my brain processes it. I like the forums with pretty pictures that I can look at. You know, like the payout thread pics that @InsaneMiner nsaneminer and @Aethercollector used to post…ha!


Would love that, especially the thermal-hybrid-flex-blabla.

Seriously, this was JG’s fairytale. But if XPY is seriously about development, such a document should be published.

I already did a year ago or so. Very good. That’s why I voted for xpy.io platform buying GHX instead of the other party :wink:

POS coin without minting would be fine with me. Not sure if that could make any sense though.

I’ve actually been looking for that. I failed finding it on Github. I think it was in Python? You have a link?


Well, one could always leave the thermal-hybrid-rubber-duck-duct-tape-chain out of the whitepaper and in exchange start working on all the other features XPY was meant to have and never received. I mean my reply was based on the questions “what features would you like to see” so…