Electroneum Fundamental Crypto Asset Score

The score is probably low because of the private code repository that ETN is using vs the public. That’s probably giving the “Developer Behavior” a low score…


They were talking about increasing the number of commits to the public repo because of these issues, personally I don’t think many care about these ratings. Any real investor is going to do some actual research.

1 Like

I was just editing my post to reflect that.:+1:
I wonder how much our network activity contributed? I would have thought the large number of wallets /users would have had more of an impact.


Welcome back @cuddlesquid


My man! Glad to see you! Miss you too Bro!


Nice to see a familiar face …

Hope things are all good

Welcome home @cuddlesquid


@Plankton Better for now haha, was :rage: somewhere else for a while :sweat_smile: Thanks Boss, you are awesome.


@Anthony I think its a little harsh for you to interpret something and inject a line of your own as if it was written by the website you’re quoting…

“quantity over quality” is a very poor understanding of what they said and whats being done as one of the many metrics they use for that…

one of the metrics used is the trickling of updates into the public eyes on github rather than this dump that seems to be popular with electroneum, this is critical because when they dump and push an update it means there has been little feedback and community review/engagement, which as you read is one of the key factors, especially in blockchain… there are old “issues” as well, not closed, or addressed in any meaningful way… in addition to commits to the developer branch that have been in limbo and not updated to the master branch, aka, why update things that sit in limbo for so long and are not implemented making the development stale and prone to future errors as people contribute items that now conflict with those silent commits… and while I’m on the topic of silent, the number of contributors and their commits to not just this github but others gets included in the ranking and we simply lack a variety meaning little community involvement…

you see how a LOT of things go into factoring things, rather than just “quantity over quality” because we are lacking a LOT of quality, so please don’t inject your interpretation to mean one thing when if you pause and put your emotions aside you might see the big picture and that there is plenty of room for improvement in electroneum bringing the community into the development for not just a better ranking but a stronger community in general…

for instance… how many even know there was an update the other day? notice the recent issues, yeah, because a lot of folks with nodes have “set and forget” them because there is no communication or involvement and their message got drowned out in the twitter spam they released something, well kinda released something, they never updated the “release” page on github which is how many have scripts and notifications there was a new “release” and they should go look, they just dumped something in master but few know and the network is forking and fighting with itself as most nodes have not updated and I don’t know how thats going to change where there is little communication with folks running them, because they’ve all been alienated or don’t have clear communication to be informed in some means other than checking themselves daily, and lets be honest, few do that… some pools were caught off guard, that should never happen…

I could go on and on and on, but I think I’ve touched on enough things to show your injected summary of “quantity over quality” is very far from reality…


Thanks for sharing your opinion on this @Darkbane. You made some good points.
Just for the record I wasn’t trying to pass off any part of their text as my own but I see that this could be unclear and I may edit the post. It also wasn’t my intention to be harsh.

From my perspective, I appreciate the Electroneum devs are constantly working hard and I personally don’t think they need to be seen to be continually updating github, which would be the ‘quantity’ part of my comment. If the blockchain works, let it do its thing until an update is either required or scheduled to coincide with a new product or announcement. Let’s not forget, the devs have the App, Website and Gig.Guru to work on as well as whatever is up their sleeves that we don’t know about yet. They are laying the foundations for a massive ecosystem and likely to be juggling many things - keeping the balls in the air and the plates spinning.

I appreciate community devs would like to get involved in giving feedback on github updates and I think it’s great that you’re of them and feel strongly about this. Have you considered posting a compelling argument or idea to try and facilitate this in the ideas section? From the perspective of a user in SA, if they can send and receive ETN, that is all that really matters to them and the success of the project and price of ETN will ultimately be determined by user acquisition, which is the case for any business providing a service.

The way I see it, Electroneum are doing their own thing and not conforming to the norms or expectations of what a crypto should do and I think that’s great. However, if the current price and low ratings is a reflection of these practices, then maybe there should be an open debate about it. It would be interesting to hear the perspective of the team. I’m sure their view isn’t to cut off their nose to spite their face.

I think a lot of people knew about the update last week because it was posted on Electroneum’s Facebook and Twitter account but perhaps you’ve raised a good point that there needs to be a better line of communication between node owners that ‘set and forget’ and the team. Do you have a suggestion? Maybe the app will be able to determine which users run a node and will send them push notifications of any necessary updates.

1 Like

about the update 2 days ago: I don’t understand why there is no binaries pushed to github. I tried to compile it myself on win10 and failed (opened an issue about it on github).
Now I don’t dare to check my CLI wallet on win10 with the old binaries. Next pissibility would be to compile it on my linux virtual box or on my Mac but I suppose the binaries should be there soon so I prefer to wait a bit. Anyway it is strange that the source is different when you download the zip or you clone it via git. Don’t devs check their stuff to be consistent?

edit: the version number is also forgotten to be changed in electroneumd still says when you run it. It should have been changed here:

@Anthony my comments aren’t suggesting they are doing a “bad job” but that there is a lot of room for improvement in the method in which they are doing the job that would impact the particular rating and many others, so its more they need to consider that and weigh its impact overall which lets be honest I don’t think this rating has a tremendous impact at the end of the day but when its a metric you CAN positively influence just by adjusting the way things are done without costing yourself a lot of work or problems, then its definitely worth pursuing in the end as every little bit helps right…

but lets explore one example in this very forum about this… @lkelemen has pointed out his trouble in not being able to quickly download binaries and when he tried to compile them there was an unexpected error with the boost portion, which as I pointed out to him in another thread is likely due to the newer version being incompatible but an older 1.69.0-2 should work as its a similar issue we have on other monero clones… which is great I can suggest a solution for him but the binaries should have been posted when the update was made, and they should have realized there would be this boost issue for anyone following the directions to compile their own, rather than it now be another issue that seems unresolved on github and who knows when someone will post a solution there and means test it and resolve the issue…

meaning the scoring on not just this one rating going down, but others that look at very similar issues that not only could have been prevented, but the clock is ticking to see when they will get addressed is part of that rating… so its one of those "oh they can go to this other forum and find an answer, or they could figure it out from a discord channel, or they could now download binaries since enough folks made a stink, but the issue is still open and every day adds another negative point lets say, when it could have been entirely avoided if there was means testing or updates were given a community review etc etc… granted this was a “hotfix” so I’m only using this as a loose example not a grand standing they failed at the task, but showing how little things add up…

and thats the whole point, little things add up to an overall rating, you can do one thing REALLY well but let all those other little things go and it will drag you down into the red and we end up with the “F” we have today, because quite frankly its deserved for “not giving a damn” about the ratings, its reflected in the score, but more importantly, a lot of folks have been back channel discussing with each other on how to fix the problem and what to do about it, but discord channels don’t get recorded and ranked, it just becomes endless scrollback bots certainly aren’t going to track, because its just discord, its not the PRIMARY GITHUB DEVELOPERS USE FOR THE NETWORK… can you see the emphasis I put on that for a reason heh… it should be looked after and taken care of and groomed, because its important stuff…

if we’re troubleshooting CLI wallets for pools and users running nodes on discord channels, it means there is a gap between the “decentralized” network and the electroneum team communicating with all of them directly and making sure they all have good lines of communication, you don’t want poor communication when it comes to node operators, especially when it involves the pools and exchanges, that could be a disaster for some of them and they will punish the coin with long confirms or locking it out if they take a personal hit because communication was poor… the github should be a priority, not an after thought once people complain…


this should also have been updated:

Looking good!:rocket:


Any idea what is causing the sudden uptick?

Probably their Github update last week.

Moving, slowly but surly.


Moon Soon Coming :stuck_out_tongue:


Moving up!


Growing stronger each and every day :grin::+1:

Community Terms | Main Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy | Support Tickets | Main Website