[EBM] Btc38

[Tuck Fheman]

... especially as proxy voting is used more and the control of the network is more decentralized.

Please explain how masses of people giving up their votes to a few proxies makes a network more decentralized.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what it is you're trying to say or it was worded incorrectly.

I have to be honest, BM is too important to BTS, and he is out of control, if he want to change mind, we have no way to stop.

We kind of have a way of not allowing unwanted changes to happen, as long as we can amass enough BTS voting power. 

That is unless you give up your voting power to others and those few proxies vote differently than you wanted.

If you do give up your vote to a proxy, you have no one to blame but yourself if they vote against your wishes.

Don't give up your voting power and you keep your ability to have your say.

It may not change anything because a few whales may be able to outvote the masses of smaller holders, but at least you can feel good knowing you didn't subjugate yourself, sort of.

You can then cash out and move on to the next Dev who says he's going to change the world.

[cube]

As I know, most people are tired for the quickly rule change.

DACX keep silent.
why they don't dare to use Bitshares as their exchange?
I think they are worry about when will BM change the rules again.

if we don't have a strict rule to control the change,  no serious business dare to dive into BTS.
it's very important to make people belive the system is stable.

personally, I think BTC2.0 is very good now, just keep it stable,
people will keep watching, then join the blockchain. we need more patient than rapid develop now.

Yes I agree. There's not much that needs to be changed with Bitshares 2.0. I don't think that they should worry about BM changing the rules, especially as proxy voting is used more and the control of the network is more decentralized.

I have to be honest, BM is too important to BTS, and he is out of control, if he want to change mind, we have no way to stop.
this is really a possible risk for the business based BTS.
for example, in BTS1.0 we can't register the sub account name without root account, we can't register sub asset name without root asset.
we can't sell account name. they are changed in BTS2.0 without any warnning.
these rules maybe is not so important for everyone, but it can kill some business.

I think these are valid genuine concerns from our long-time Chinese partners and users.   It pays us great dividends when we listen and address their concerns. 

[lil_jay890]

As I know, most people are tired for the quickly rule change.

DACX keep silent.
why they don't dare to use Bitshares as their exchange?
I think they are worry about when will BM change the rules again.

if we don't have a strict rule to control the change,  no serious business dare to dive into BTS.
it's very important to make people belive the system is stable.

personally, I think BTC2.0 is very good now, just keep it stable,
people will keep watching, then join the blockchain. we need more patient than rapid develop now.

Yes I agree. There's not much that needs to be changed with Bitshares 2.0. I don't think that they should worry about BM changing the rules, especially as proxy voting is used more and the control of the network is more decentralized.

I have to be honest, BM is too important to BTS, and he is out of control, if he want to change mind, we have no way to stop.
this is really a possible risk for the business based BTS.
for example, in BTS1.0 we can't register the sub account name without root account, we can't register sub asset name without root asset.
we can't sell account name. they are changed in BTS2.0 without any warnning.
these rules maybe is not so important for everyone, but it can kill some business.

Did you hear the mumble today?? Bm and cryptonomex only hold a few percent of bts... It's the most decentralized relevant crypto their is.  Doesn't matter if bm is in or out of control

[clout]

As I know, most people are tired for the quickly rule change.

DACX keep silent.
why they don't dare to use Bitshares as their exchange?
I think they are worry about when will BM change the rules again.

if we don't have a strict rule to control the change,  no serious business dare to dive into BTS.
it's very important to make people belive the system is stable.

personally, I think BTC2.0 is very good now, just keep it stable,
people will keep watching, then join the blockchain. we need more patient than rapid develop now.

Yes I agree. There's not much that needs to be changed with Bitshares 2.0. I don't think that they should worry about BM changing the rules, especially as proxy voting is used more and the control of the network is more decentralized.

I have to be honest, BM is too important to BTS, and he is out of control, if he want to change mind, we have no way to stop.
this is really a possible risk for the business based BTS.
for example, in BTS1.0 we can't register the sub account name without root account, we can't register sub asset name without root asset.
we can't sell account name. they are changed in BTS2.0 without any warnning.
these rules maybe is not so important for everyone, but it can kill some business.

BTS1.0 to BTS2.0 was a major change. Going forward however we will not see as many drastic changes.

[alt]

As I know, most people are tired for the quickly rule change.

DACX keep silent.
why they don't dare to use Bitshares as their exchange?
I think they are worry about when will BM change the rules again.

if we don't have a strict rule to control the change,  no serious business dare to dive into BTS.
it's very important to make people belive the system is stable.

personally, I think BTC2.0 is very good now, just keep it stable,
people will keep watching, then join the blockchain. we need more patient than rapid develop now.

Yes I agree. There's not much that needs to be changed with Bitshares 2.0. I don't think that they should worry about BM changing the rules, especially as proxy voting is used more and the control of the network is more decentralized.

I have to be honest, BM is too important to BTS, and he is out of control, if he want to change mind, we have no way to stop.
this is really a possible risk for the business based BTS.
for example, in BTS1.0 we can't register the sub account name without root account, we can't register sub asset name without root asset.
we can't sell account name. they are changed in BTS2.0 without any warnning.
these rules maybe is not so important for everyone, but it can kill some business.

[clout]

BTC38 will not issue IOU cny at the chain,
even yunbi.com will not do this, maybe another reason is legal risk.

BOTSCNY is an IOU asset for CNY now, and can deposit/withdraw from transwiser.com
because it's not issue by a company, I don't think too much about legal risk. and so people don't want to use it.

Yunbi and Btc38 would not face any legal risks by providing a CNY IOU on the Bitshares blockchain. The asset could be managed with the same thoroughness as they manage the CNY IOU on their site currently.

Are you familiar with Transwiser's operation? How much transaction volume can Transwiser process?

Also alt, I have PMed you already, but do you think you can be a an EBM representative for Yunbi, Btc38 and Transwiser?

[clout]

As I know, most people are tired for the quickly rule change.

DACX keep silent.
why they don't dare to use Bitshares as their exchange?
I think they are worry about when will BM change the rules again.

if we don't have a strict rule to control the change,  no serious business dare to dive into BTS.
it's very important to make people belive the system is stable.

personally, I think BTC2.0 is very good now, just keep it stable,
people will keep watching, then join the blockchain. we need more patient than rapid develop now.

Yes I agree. There's not much that needs to be changed with Bitshares 2.0. I don't think that they should worry about BM changing the rules, especially as proxy voting is used more and the control of the network is more decentralized.

[alt]

BTC38 will not issue IOU cny at the chain,
even yunbi.com will not do this, maybe another reason is legal risk.

BOTSCNY is an IOU asset for CNY now, and can deposit/withdraw from transwiser.com
because it's not issue by a company, I don't think too much about legal risk. and so people don't want to use it.

[alt]

As I know, most people are tired for the quickly rule change.

DACX keep silent.
why they don't dare to use Bitshares as their exchange?
I think they are worry about when will BM change the rules again.

if we don't have a strict rule to control the change,  no serious business dare to dive into BTS.
it's very important to make people belive the system is stable.

personally, I think BTC2.0 is very good now, just keep it stable,
people will keep watching, then join the blockchain. we need more patient than rapid develop now.

[Akado]

@cn-members could you do this? Would also like to know what's up in China too you seem quiet since 2.0 launch.
@alt ?

[clout]

BTC38

Btc38 is a chinese based exchange that does more than $1m worth of BTC / CNY volume a day. It is the largest source of BTS / CNY liquidity. Btc38 also allows for CNY deposits with BitCNY, which is facilitated by Transwiser. Prior to the upgrade to Bitshares 2.0, Btc38 allowed for a single deposit limit of 5000 BitCNY and a total deposit limit of 300,000 BitCNY. The user experience of non Chinese traders could be improved if CNY withdrawals were possible.

Btc38 allows for multiple types of CNY deposits, from Ripple gateways and the Transwiser bridge. While these alternative CNY deposits are managed by third parties, it would not be impractical for Btc38 to create a UIA, BTC38.CNY and manage deposits and withdrawals of this promissory note as well. In the event that the Btc38 does not want to directly manage BTC38.CNY deposits and withdrawals, the EBM team could manage this process on their behalf.  Getting Btc38 to issue an UIA on the internal exchange would allow Bitshares to more easily capture a share of the Btc38 user base. The introduction of BTC38.CNY should in turn increase the efficiency of all CNY markets on the internal exchange.

Goal: Get Btc38 to issue a UIA, BTC38.CNY, that is accepted means of deposit and withdrawal. Get Btc38 to allow for withdrawals of BitCNY.

How can we incentivize Btc38 to become a CNY and gateway and issue their own UIA? How else would you like to see Btc38 integrated with Bitshares?