Quote from: donkeypong on October 28, 2015, 05:51:09 pm

Quote from: svk on October 27, 2015, 10:45:39 pm

Quote from: donkeypong on October 27, 2015, 07:05:00 pm

It's worked great for me. Are these the full balances, though? Seems like a lot less than I thought I had.

It showed me about 1/10 of my actual balance after importing my keys, I'll have to look into it again tomorrow.

That's what I think, too. It's about 1/10th of what I would expect should be in there. I assume the balances haven't been scaled yet?

I figured out my issue, I used a filtered wallet json that had been made using the BTS genesis, once I redid it with the correct genesis file my balances were correct.

My json file went from 94633 keys to 18 after filtering

I don't have that many keys, but could you please explain how you filtered? If it isn't rocket science, I might try that to see if I can get my full balance. Thanks!

I heard the CryptoPromises UIA really surged in its IPO.

It's worked great for me. Are these the full balances, though? Seems like a lot less than I thought I had.

What about CCEDK and the smaller exchanges? Does VOTE still count as something separate from BTS? It seems to me that Mark Lyford's business maybe should not be mentioned, given the recent PR issues, even though I wish him and his business success.

The blub under Identibit is an oxymoron. Complying with "regulations" means you give them whatever info they demand and then you hope they don't give it away or use it against you (which they will).

But that's the calling card for Identabit; it's exactly the punch line they need to promote it with. It allows potential partners to comply, while most of them would be too scared to use something where you can't verify identities. You don't have to agree with what they are doing, but far from being an oxymoron, it's what separates Identabit from BitShares.

This is Post # 68 in the current thread. R0ach, based on the responses, let me take a stab at answering the original question.

Q: Am I the only one that thinks referral system is Bitshares largest mistake ever?

A: Pretty much. There are a few people who don't want fees of any sort involved in BitShares, but it seems that a super-majority of this community are pretty excited about the referral system.

Take Away: Few of us agree 100% with every decision made on BitShares, but I know we're all very high on its potential. The jury's still out on this referral system, but it's something no one else has in this field. Some of us have tried marketing an insular product (0.x)  that was more like a savings account, that no one knew about, using basically no marketing budget, and that's not an experience I wish to repeat. Give the referral system a chance to help us spread the word and grow the ecosystem. If it sucks, then we'll change it or stop using it, but I really feel that it could be the secret sauce. Longer term, maybe we won't need such a thing. Your feedback will be important.

When I got into BitShares the timeframes I was envisaging were in excess of five years. Looking at price changes day to day, week to week and even month to month is all well and good for the active trader. I'm looking at the big picture though and am interested in the long term ground breaking potential which I see in BitShares.

To answer the OP, I'm pretty curious to hear what bytemaster has planned in relation to 'web of trust' stuff. I remember him saying in a mumble session that we'd love his ideas in this field. As far as I know he hasn't revealed this yet. Has he? I'm not sure whether or not his plan is to be implemented on the BitShares platform though...

Excellent post. I fully agree.

Great. I'd love to have 20 of them, all borrowing one another's features, engaging in a friendly synergistic competition, and creating an awesome experience for users.