I don't like DL too,but
Debt holders in bitusd will get rekkt with his actions.
These were just a part of CN-VOTE debtor in bitusd.
1 1.2.458268 fangli0755 1.94
2 1.2.698 map 1.67
3 1.2.544003 chinaking888 1.5
4 1.2.166673 facem 1.88
5 1.2.1688430 dqt812 1.7
6 1.2.415588 hangjun-btss 1.73
7 1.2.18114 cny123 5.58
8 1.2.878397 zb170352718 2.99
9 1.2.5420 ptschina 2.87
10 1.2.186512 jinlicheng1 1.7
11 1.2.712461 waterkawaye509 1.78
12 1.2.187916 hongcaibao111 1.72
13 1.2.169701 yinghuilong 1.69
14 1.2.900314 guotiger1206 1.71
15 1.2.1037129 suny5392 1.73
16 1.2.1750391 shlzbts2020 1.93
17 1.2.1620696 get-richy 1.69
18 1.2.20197 xiaoshan 1.85
19 1.2.155713 hwbts 2.7
20 1.2.998 spring 1.7
21 1.2.480517 sunshine991019 1.73
22 1.2.403666 gold-star 1.68
23 1.2.129515 jinjue082016 1.84
Want to solve the problem of bitusd, i will give some thoughts later...Devaluation is too big...very hard...
They can't make a patch on BitShares for BitShares
Maybe he said is right,seems he own the trademark of “BitShares” and "BTS", if this is true, anyone can't change it.
About consensus, i want to say when we support a consensus like BSIP 76 in such a long time and didn't want to resovle these problems quickly, we only have a false consensus, when we use a BAIP-threthold not be approved by the community as a voting standards,we didn't have consensus any more.
I was monitoring bitusd debtors before bsip76 and after.
Majority of the current debt positions had no bad debt being in margin call before BSIP76.
They increased their debt some time after the announcement of BSIP76.
So blaming them to create or increase debt in BitUSD after BSIP76 is just wrong and making them responsible or hurting for this even more.
Maybe he said is right,seems he own the trademark of “BitShares” and "BTS", if this is true, anyone can't change it.
He has no authority at all.He would love to control bitshares with legal and trademarks but his EU trademark is worth horseshit.
His threaths to gateways or all social media account users showed that he completly lost reality and looks to centralize bitshares arround him.
Calling gateway owners animals or telling gateways like rudex that he is going to kick them out of bitshares calling chinese in general dumb scammers and many other points are not acceptable .His ethics are also totaly fucked up.You should have read what he supported everything in the past and how
he already planned with george a hostile takeover using witnesses even they may be held liable for their actions in their jurisdiction and fork out chinese.His comment was "its their issue."
He has only trademark for EU so he basicly has nothing as long as he won't get world wide trademark.Also even when getting
world wide he can keep only the name community will take the chain.
Noone is going to invest a dime into his shit
George:
The main thing is we maintain the BTS ticker on exchanges during a fork.
Then China can fork off and their chain will die and if they have some new ticker on some random China exchanges who cares
xeroc: Uff
that's gonna cause a lot of drama if you think about it
George:
Also any fork will cause drama
xeroc:
not if you start 'fresh' .. different name .. learn from the past mistakes ..
George:
Yes but the mountain to climb for liquidity and impact on existing businesses is very large with a fresh chain
Building BTS traction and liquidity with exchanges in 2019 literally requires millions of dollars upfront
Therefore imho a fork of existing chain and maintaining existing liquidity and tickers is preferable as there is no upfront costs for listings and small switching costs for existing users. If stakeholders want to change name at that point too then I’m sure that get support and it may look more ‘fresh’
xeroc:
to do that 'morally' right, you'd need consensus on chain. you wont get that imho
also, whoever would do that 'forking' could be liable for fraud
George:
If people want to follow the fork then they can, if they don’t they won’t. Won’t get everyone agreeing and that’s ok
DL:
and its morally ok
compared to situation blockchain has after being too fair (moral) to some players
George:
It’s up to witnesses to move to a new fork
Xeroc:
liability!
George:
So? It’s up to witnesses who are random accounts on the internet. If you’re talking about someone who lives in some jurisdiction who may have a problem with that then that’s their problem. Not BTS or the new chain
DL:
thumbs up for (So? It’s up to witnesses who are random accounts on the internet. If you’re talking about someone who lives in some jurisdiction who may have a problem with that then that’s their problem. Not BTS or the new chain)
giving a choice is fair enough
picking one is not concern of forkOnly one who kept ethics up during that conversation was xeroc