BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: cn-members on January 07, 2015, 07:19:10 pm
-
In this video I will show how to post messages on the wall of any BitShares account (TITAN)
http://www.aboutbts.com/2015/01/how-to-post-messages-on-the-wall-of-any-account.html
-
something I didn't know,
Thanks.
-
So burning BTS on someone else's wall is a way to give them rep? Interesting. I had thought people only burn BTS on their own wall.
-
What if someone trying to sabotage by leaving a negative comment/rep? or Spam? How should I manage/fix that? Can we reply that message on our own wall? Can we delete/flag it?
Just asking, never notice that feature before. :)
-
What if someone trying to sabotage by leaving a negative comment/rep? or Spam? How should I manage/fix that? Can we reply that message on our own wall? Can we delete/flag it?
Just asking, never notice that feature before. :)
The developer should answer that :P
Stan's wall already trashed ...
-
Question to Dev,
If I have UIA, can I use that to burn instead of BTS?
-
Question to Dev,
If I have UIA, can I use that to burn instead of BTS?
try that . nope ...
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
fee is not enough to prevent potential damaging texts , like the address of a porn site .....
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
fee is not enough to prevent potential damaging texts , like the address of a porn site .....
Yea I don't think so either, but if it has a high fee then it would benefit the network more and could also be a sign of status.
-
I've added a "trollbox" at the bottom of the bitsharesblocks homepage, it shows the most recent wall burns, it's quite funny imo :)
-
I've added a "trollbox" at the bottom of the bitsharesblocks homepage, it shows the most recent wall burns, it's quite funny imo :)
This one not so funny...
"Last commits was 12 days ago?What are you doing?hoilday?wow,that's a long hoilday.Please remember your are a 100% payrate delegate.If you can not write any codes,community will vote you out."
-
I've added a "trollbox" at the bottom of the bitsharesblocks homepage, it shows the most recent wall burns, it's quite funny imo :)
This one not so funny...
"Last commits was 12 days ago?What are you doing?hoilday?wow,that's a long hoilday.Please remember your are a 100% payrate delegate.If you can not write any codes,community will vote you out."
I dunno it kinda made me chuckle :o I did call it a trollbox for a reason! There was a discussion in monsterer's delegate thread about that particular topic too, guess it's one of the people who posted there who felt the urge to burn that on his wall as well..
-
I like it. It's entertaining and gives yet another reason for people to burn BTS. Like anything else said in public by a stranger I take it with a grain of salt.
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
-
You can already send message TO someone with the transaction memo. Is this Wall function how we are supposed to rate one another? In that case, I think it's way too open for abuse. But if this is just for fun (getting our kicks while burning some BTS) then I'm fine with that.
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account.
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account.
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
Ok, thanks. I only tried to search my own accounts database for that key and couldn't find it, will add the RPC call then if necessary.
-
Sort by cost. It could get very expensive to get your message up in lights.... 8) +5%
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account.
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
I just had a look at the database and what I referred to as the public key is actually a balance id for the deposit operation, and unless that's a truncated key I can't use it. blockchain_get_account returns empty... So it seems to me there's no data indicating who made a particular burn operation in the current transaction output.
Oh and I searched through the database and no burns have negative account ids, so guess no one's done that yet. Not surprising since no one knew about it I suppose.
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account.
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
I just had a look at the database and what I referred to as the public key is actually a balance id for the deposit operation, and unless that's a truncated key I can't use it. blockchain_get_account returns empty... So it seems to me there's no data indicating who made a particular burn operation in the current transaction output.
Oh and I searched through the database and no burns have negative account ids, so guess no one's done that yet. Not surprising since no one knew about it I suppose.
The signature on the burn op can be used to recover the signing account. We will probably update the RPC API to make this info easier to get at.
-
Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...
Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.
BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead
Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig
SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account.
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
I just had a look at the database and what I referred to as the public key is actually a balance id for the deposit operation, and unless that's a truncated key I can't use it. blockchain_get_account returns empty... So it seems to me there's no data indicating who made a particular burn operation in the current transaction output.
Oh and I searched through the database and no burns have negative account ids, so guess no one's done that yet. Not surprising since no one knew about it I suppose.
The signature on the burn op can be used to recover the signing account. We will probably update the RPC API to make this info easier to get at.
Is this also how you identify the delegate name on publish_slate ops?
-
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
None of the answers in this thread address this question. What does a negative burn actually mean? Printing BTS?
-
And how can a burn be positive or negative?
None of the answers in this thread address this question. What does a negative burn actually mean? Printing BTS?
Here's the explanation:
help wallet_burn
Usage:
wallet_burn <amount_to_burn> <asset_symbol> <from_account_name> <for_or_against> <to_account_name> [public_message] [anonymous] Burns given amount to the given account. This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.
Burns given amount to the given account. This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.
Parameters:
amount_to_burn (real_amount, required): the amount of shares to burn
asset_symbol (asset_symbol, required): the asset to burn
from_account_name (sending_account_name, required): the source account to draw the shares from
for_or_against (string, required): the value 'for' or 'against'
to_account_name (receive_account_name, required): the account to which the burn should be credited (for or against) and on which the public message will appear
public_message (string, optional, defaults to ""): a public message to post
anonymous (bool, optional, defaults to "false"): true if anonymous, else signed by from_account_name
It's a reputation system basically, you always burn the BTS but when burning to someone's "wall" you can make that burn count positively or negatively.
-
Shouldn't the burn wall, only have the option of burning BTS?
Burning bitassets, would lead to fractional reserves right?
edit:
Fractional reserves might be the wrong term.
But if we allow bitassets to be burned, it would hurt the black swan resolution, because there would be less bitassets to liquidate.
http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/27/BitAssets-and-Black-Swan-Events/
-
Shouldn't the burn wall, only have the option of burning BTS?
You will always have to burn BTS when writing on the wall .. though you can give a 'like' (+ burn) or a 'dislike' (- burn) .. both time, you will end up with less BTS ... it's just a matter of weighing your burned BTS positively or negatively for the wall!
Burning bitassets, would lead to fractional reserves right?
edit:
Fractional reserves might be the wrong term.
But if we allow bitassets to be burned, it would hurt the black swan resolution, because there would be less bitassets to liquidate.
How so? the amount of BTS hardly has anything to do with a black swan?! .. unless you could burn bitUSD .. which you can't ..
-
Shouldn't the burn wall, only have the option of burning BTS?
You will always have to burn BTS when writing on the wall .. though you can give a 'like' (+ burn) or a 'dislike' (- burn) .. both time, you will end up with less BTS ... it's just a matter of weighing your burned BTS positively or negatively for the wall!
Burning bitassets, would lead to fractional reserves right?
edit:
Fractional reserves might be the wrong term.
But if we allow bitassets to be burned, it would hurt the black swan resolution, because there would be less bitassets to liquidate.
How so? the amount of BTS hardly has anything to do with a black swan?! .. unless you could burn bitUSD .. which you can't ..
Yes, that's what I meant, the gui (windows) shows an option of what to burn, including bitassets.
Luckily if you select a bitasset it gives an Assert Exception.