looking forward …
How would we go about doing this? Does she require payment first, or can we hear a sample? What exactly would she need and how do we implement the new voice in the video? Will we need to contact Overkillcoin to help with this?
She has agreed to do an audition sample for us. I told her we wouldn’t need a new script, just a re-narration. Getting her voice (or any new narrator) on to the existing video will have to involve overkillcoin. Otherwise, we’ll lose all the sound effects, which I assume we don’t want to do. That’s going to add to the cost.
Also note that Overkill would have to change the narrator name in the credits; this is animated text that appears right at the end of the video.
If I were to be very honest I would say a big problem with the video is that it follows in the cheesy footsteps of the bitcoin video. It doesn’t have a grown-up professional feel about it, and it seems to try to copy the style of the bitcoin video too much, and I did not like the style of the bitcoin one. Though this is just my opinion which is probably useless.
The video was build to attract existing Bitcoin owners, so that’s why it is a little cheesy. It is good to see the community care and making an effort to improve it, but I really think we shouldn’t spend a lot of money on it. When cold minting and/or side chains are available for Peercoin, I would say it is a good time to invest in another video with a different broader target group.
In any case, I think @overklillcoin should be contacted when we want to proceed with another narrator regardless whether it can technically be done without him. But let’s see how we go. Looking forward to the sample and an indication of the total cost including the audio remix.
I think its a useful comment. I mean, if you feel like that then others also feel like that.
Maybe there is value in having many different kinds of videos, with different look and feel to them. Depending on the audience, one would show them the video that one thinks is most appropriate to get the message across.
This first video explained proof of work centralization and how Peercoin and proof of stake solve this long-term issue. Bitcoin still works as intended though, so I don’t think this is a big enough motivator to get people to switch to Peercoin. At best, they may remember Peercoin and this video and switch only if Bitcoin starts to have issues. They’ll wait until it starts affecting them personally. This is of no concern to them at the moment.
In a future video, we should focus on how people can use Peercoin. Showing people the benefits in use over Bitcoin may be enough to get them to switch. It needs to be about how Peercoin affects people personally and how it improves their daily lives. Showing off the different ways it can be used, appealing to the emotions and offering peace of mind by enforcing the idea of security and safe long-term wealth storage may be enough to get them to care.
Unfortunately, this may be a problem right now. If I ask what the purpose of Peercoin is, I end up getting varied answers, everything from storage of wealth to the vague backbone currency idea. I think Peercoin has an identity issue. Until we can figure out how to easily explain what it is and how it benefits people, it will be hard to convince others to switch. It also doesn’t help when huge features like sidechains are still secret and unknown.
There is no way that this will make a difference.
This I think is a really super great analysis of the current situation. These are for sure weak-spots right now. I of course don’t have The answers, but I have lots of opinions which elaborate on here: Cryptoblog - notícias sobre bitcoin e criptomoedas!
In the thread I linked to above, I tried to outline and separate different qualities of Peercoin. I try to show how they complement each other and so forth and so on. If we the community could agree on something like that - not exactly what I wrote, but kind of have some sort of consensus that works to the same effect of “fleshing our the concepts” - then I think we could also start communicate them more clearly.
When it comes to side-chains, I have personally no clue what Sunny is working on. I do have my own take on how Peercoin could be used as a backbone currency, and I plan on writing it down here as soon as its appropriate. Hopefully it will also make sense and not be just nonsense.
I agree with Ben. When a product (PPC) is failing to gain traction or momentum there is a tendency to blame the small stuff - a lack of media releases, not enough marketing money being spent on advertising, or in this case updating a narrators voice.
“Going viral” doesn’t happen from changing the small stuff. Until Peercoin figures out what value it actually provides its users, it won’t grow. Peercoin is not structured to be a transactional tool because the price is volatile, and it’s not structured to be a store of value because - as the past 12 months have shown with 60-70% losses - value isn’t stored reliably.
It takes courage to look at the situation objectively. The current value of Peercoin is largely derived from the expectation that it will become superior to Bitcoin one day, but other competitors have already advanced past it with new innovations, growing communities, and active business development. The price is a reflection of this reality.
Peercoin is no longer an automatic choice for a successor to Bitcoin unless it finds a niche to provide value. Counterpeer/Peerparty and Peershares are two products that should be receiving much more attention from this community in my opinion.
Very true words. Sidechains are potentially a great development, but shouldn’t be the only thing we focus on. We should bet on more horses to secure the future of this coin. But I think I’m repeating myself…
Should I ask Stephanie Murphy to do a sample reading for us? Or are we shelving the re-narration idea? I’d like to get back to her one way or another.
[quote=“TomJoad, post:65, topic:2459”][…]
Peercoin is no longer an automatic choice for a successor to Bitcoin unless it finds a niche to provide value. Counterpeer/Peerparty and Peershares are two products that should be receiving much more attention from this community in my opinion.[/quote]
While I agree to the latter of this quote, I disagree partly to the first quoted sentence.
You are right that Peercoin needs to find a niche to provide value. But I still consider Peercoin the automatic successor of Bitcoin!
You might ask why.
Because it’s secure and sustainable (couldn’t resist), because of Peershares, because of NuShares (a working implementation of the Peershares template!), because of the sound development, because of Peerunity, because of the community!
I’m not even talking about side chains for Peercoin, although that (once here) might be a kind of game-changer.
But you are right that we need more value brought by Peercoin. Peercoin needs to be used in proper ways to make it what it is designed to be:
a background currency!
That seems to include a “background currency” aspect; Peercoin will be necessary in the background for ideas that are yet to be thought of or implemented.
Peercoin might never be as much wow as Dogecoin, never be as heavy as Litecoin (in terms of block chain size), never be as black as Blackcoin (seriously, I don’t know what that shall mean, but I wanted to continue the list 
), never be…
…but it will be here!
All you need to keep Peercoin up is a bunch of RaspberryPis that do some minting.
I’d be happy to have a Counterparty implementation for Peercoin to welcome one more useful and valuable concept in the world of Peercoin.
We need more!
[quote=“masterOfDisaster, post:68, topic:2459”][quote=“TomJoad, post:65, topic:2459”][…]
Peercoin is no longer an automatic choice for a successor to Bitcoin unless it finds a niche to provide value. Counterpeer/Peerparty and Peershares are two products that should be receiving much more attention from this community in my opinion.[/quote]
While I agree to the latter of this quote, I disagree partly to the first quoted sentence.
You are right that Peercoin needs to find a niche to provide value. But I still consider Peercoin the automatic successor of Bitcoin![/quote]
I don’t think that there is a clear niche. Apart from minting, there isn’t much difference between Peercoin and Bitcoin on a practical level. Even if Counterpeer/Peerparty is created, there isn’t a big incentive to use it over the Bitcoin Counterparty. Peershares does fill a sort of niche, but even that is more related to Proof of Stake rather than Peercoin itself, as it wouldn’t be secure to start a small blockchain using Proof of Work. Pretty much anything that can be done with Peercoin can be done with Bitcoin too.
But that doesn’t mean Peercoin has no value. When Sunny started Peercoin he said something along the lines of how it was to prove that energy consumption wasn’t necessary to run a blockchain. This solves the issues of centralization, tragedy of the commons, and energy wastage associated with Bitcoin’s security model, while still providing all of the functions and flexibility that Bitcoin allows.
So Peercoin’s benefits are on a fundamental level, not on a practical level. Really, Peercoin could be positioned in the way Litecoin has often promoted itself: if anything bad was ever to happen to Bitcoin, then at least we would have a mature and widely used blockchain to fall back on. Peercoin fulfils this role much better than Litecoin, as it is a completely different security model and so is a better hedge against Proof of Work than Litecoin, which only makes insignificant changes that mean it is still susceptible to any issues that Bitcoin is susceptible to.
So the plan is what it has always been: continue to develop the infrastructure around the coin and port any beneficial Bitcoin projects to Peercoin. It might not generate as much hype as all the new “features” that other coins are always shouting about, but fundamental issues are still a concern to many, as seen by Jordan Lee’s statement on why he decided to distribute dividends with Peercoin instead of Bitcoin.
The best thing for Peercoin would be convincing Bitcoin users that a strong Peercoin is beneficial for everyone, as it ensures the success of cryptocurrency even if Bitcoin fails. Though this is admittedly hard as most altcoins are usually dismissed as scams (rightfully so) and it is difficult to see any broad acceptance of Peercoin while checkpoints are still an issue. Peercoin receiving the same level of respect that Namecoin receives from Bitcoiners would be a dream.
Anyway, this is getting off-topic so here is the important thing in this thread:
My opinion is that it would be a lot of work to change the narration, and there wouldn’t be much gain from it. If people want to focus energy on a video, there might be more benefit from a new video as some have suggested. One that focuses on a different aspect of Peercoin, with a different tone that is aimed at a different audience.
I don’t really care whether it’s Stephanie Murphy or the lady ppcman is in contact with.
As I have no samples I can’t tell which one I’d prefer.
But I’d really like to have a version of this video with a female voice because I think it might please some people to hear a female voice!
I’ve got a temporary technical glitch. The recording was done, but it was on a high end camera/mic setup that uses a P2 card from Panasonic. The camera to computer connection isn’t working, so we’re stuck with the files on the P2 card at the moment.
It’s not your typical setup. I’ll let you know when this gets fixed. Silly situation indeed.
Hi sportscliche, I’ve finally got this P2 card reader issue sorted.
Before I go further, your “fixed price of 240 PPC” is going to be the best deal in town!
At current market rates, Stephanie Murphy is willing to re-do the video narration for $132 USD.
I can’t beat that price with the talent I found.
Please move ahead with an audio sample from Stephanie, and we’ll go ahead with a fundraiser.
I just emailed Stephanie Murphy. ppcman or anyone else should feel free to contact her independent of me using:
stephaniermurphy–at–gmail.com