166
General Discussion / Re: Margin Call Explanation & Beware of Illiquid Markets with Low Margin
« on: October 16, 2015, 02:20:12 pm »
Is there a list that shows who has the lowest swan price? Ranked to the highest swan price.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
167
General Discussion / Re: Anyone concerned about the vol?
« on: October 16, 2015, 01:47:13 pm »
Shouldn't we be adding feeds for other assets now?
APPL
GOOG
TWTR
NASDAQ
VIX
SPY
http://money.usnews.com/funds/etfs
APPL
GOOG
TWTR
NASDAQ
VIX
SPY
http://money.usnews.com/funds/etfs
168
General Discussion / Re: Am I the only one that thinks referral system is Bitshares largest mistake ever?
« on: October 16, 2015, 01:40:00 pm »
Your concerns have merit. It goes both ways. Either you cut costs or you bring something new to the table. WIth Bitshares we can charge more right now because you offer greater financial services (dex exchange, hedging, hopefully bond markets). The differences in fees have to be competitive. A consumer is willing to pay more in fees because they gather more services from bitshares. I don't think they will go to lesser transaction altcoins unless they offer the same quality in services. This is the hypothesis at least.
So the referral is not the flagship feature, but a additive one that brings more value when bitshares already has value to offer to begin with. Simply put, referral system cannot work alone as a stand alone feature, but needs the other value additive features of bitshares to bring out the best of the two.
So the referral is not the flagship feature, but a additive one that brings more value when bitshares already has value to offer to begin with. Simply put, referral system cannot work alone as a stand alone feature, but needs the other value additive features of bitshares to bring out the best of the two.
169
General Discussion / Re: Margin Call Explanation & Beware of Illiquid Markets with Low Margin
« on: October 16, 2015, 11:28:45 am »It looks like you were margin called at 1.50 SQP. I do not understand it though why this is happening.
Aren't all margin calls at 1.50 collateral leverage?
170
General Discussion / Re: HOw do I short BITUSD?
« on: October 16, 2015, 01:05:09 am »
I mean lack of market depth. I would think there would be more volume by now.
171
General Discussion / Re: HOw do I short BITUSD?
« on: October 16, 2015, 12:44:12 am »
I will try. Why is nobody bootstrapping the network?
172
General Discussion / HOw do I short BITUSD?
« on: October 16, 2015, 12:07:53 am »
Can someone explain? DO I just sell USD? I want to short USD that people are trying to buy.
173
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Commitee Proposal - Increase account creation fee to 95BTS
« on: October 15, 2015, 05:51:16 pm »
This is proposal change knock out openledger?
174
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Commitee Proposal - Increase account creation fee to 95BTS
« on: October 15, 2015, 02:23:11 pm »I don't like these decisions on the spot at all. These things should have been thought and discussed previously. You can't through a plan for over a month and day one because some people register a lot of names you realize that maybe it wasn't a good plan after all and changing the fees like that on the spot.
So until everyone can Vote with their stake for such decisions I don't think you should change things and keep them as is..
I don't even know how much each name costs, what is premium name and which one no premium anymore since we keep changing our definition of things..
consider that it will burn more BTS. There is a net benefit.
175
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Commitee Proposal - Increase account creation fee to 95BTS
« on: October 15, 2015, 02:02:52 pm »I oppose to increase the fees at this point.
You call these people spammers but they might have other business objectives that may bring value to bts.
Have you thought that some people may want to register many names and then offer them in the future for free to new members attracting them to in the ecosystem by offering them their desired name?
Don't just make a decision because someone says so. Bring Vote or something and vote based on stake and don't change anything just yet when most people haven't even started to use the new bts2.
non-premium names have to include numbers or dots for example. so no, I don't think your argument has much value. unless your friends use all numbers in their nicks, and I guess than won't be a problem in the future
dots and dashes should be part of premium names
176
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Commitee Proposal - Increase account creation fee to 95BTS
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:16:45 pm »
wanted to spur further discussion as well. I think we should think about increasing cost for names that don't have any numbers. even if it is split with a dash or a period " . " it should still cost as much as a normal username
177
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Commitee Proposal - Increase account creation fee to 95BTS
« on: October 15, 2015, 11:09:04 am »
I think another change should be used sign ups shouldn't get 80% fee back. Also how can we consider squatting fee?
178
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: October 15, 2015, 10:59:22 am »
It's dropping like a rock!
Username spam is breaking bitshares.
Username spam is breaking bitshares.
179
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: October 14, 2015, 09:43:03 pm »
is bts really worth less than dash? truth is nobody has been using the new market functionality.
180
General Discussion / Re: Fill the void of BitReserve
« on: October 14, 2015, 07:20:39 pm »
Is the peg working?
