1666
General Discussion / Re: TCNY has been accepted by BTC38.
« on: January 13, 2016, 12:29:58 pm »
Thanks everyone.
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.
1667
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 12, 2016, 10:04:29 am »I don't think this is the end of the world by any means.
I don't think I'll use yunbi anymore, but I was not a regular customer so they won't be missing much.
Trying to get three entities to control the majority of voting in the name of decentralisation is rather silly.
This is seeming more and more like an attempted coup. Please inform me if I've misread this.
How did you get so disenfranchised? what do you hope to accomplish?
I'm glad that clayop is back in the committee. It's too bad that we lost two witnesses in the process.
sorry for having not totally understood the voting rule, have communicated with yunbi and now the witnesses number has grown to 27.
what I accomplished now is to get clayop and bhuz back, even only this still worth me to spend so much time to communicate with yunbi. it's not a normal status for 5 inits accounts to stay in the committee, if no one can change that, let me push the move.
1668
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 12, 2016, 09:51:31 am »There was still 5 hours to spare to get your votes in while you were busy posting in forums here. If you can post in forums, you telegram any questions you have or vote. You choose not to support the protection measure. Proof is in the blockchain. There is still more that needs to be done.
actually when I try to approve I have some trouble in my cli_wallet, and I saw there are more than 51% support, then I switch to do some other things, if you explain this as I do not support the protection measure, up to you.
1669
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 12, 2016, 07:49:11 am »
all the scenarios are imagined by you, I can also imagine that BM and you conspire to exploit all the shareholders, but I wouldn't.
at least half of the committee members support me to do so, don't think you can represent the interest of BTS community, even BM said he will just give help.
yes, BM and exchange are different, BM are so good at the design of the system infrastructure, but he may be not so good at understanding some business, and his own interest can also conflict with the interest of the whole shareholders. Giving any entity too much power will be bad, including BM.
as a committee member, my idea is to make a balance on the committee, so need to introduce more voting powers, maybe also need to refine the rule. all these is to avoid the committee be under any single entity's control.
I haven't began asking big dogs, I just invited a little dog to come out to let everyone know him, otherwise no changes are possible, I'll help the system to grow for the coming of big dogs.
don't worry.
The committee members (primarily puppies) have been working on measures through the weekend to protect Bitshares against scenarios of bad proposals being passed. We finally did a test today that at the time did not have clayop voted in (congrates btw!)... it got support from every committee member except one.
but without the one, would you think about to prepare this measure?
without the one, would clayop be voted in?
I am at Shanghai blockchain hackthon the last weekend, no time to discuss in telegram, on the other side, I am not so good at technical things, should these be blamed?
1670
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 11, 2016, 04:35:00 pm »
@BunkerChain Labs
exchanges(here I only talk about yunbi and btc38) do not think they can control Bitshares, and they understand that they need a stable Bitshares, not a Bitshares in trouble, and they do not think DEX is their competitors, and, please believe, BTS trading is not so important for them now, they even do not want to pay more resource on BTS.
all the scenarios are imagined by you, I can also imagine that BM and you conspire to exploit all the shareholders, but I wouldn't.
at least half of the committee members support me to do so, don't think you can represent the interest of BTS community, even BM said he will just give help.
yes, BM and exchange are different, BM are so good at the design of the system infrastructure, but he may be not so good at understanding some business, and his own interest can also conflict with the interest of the whole shareholders. Giving any entity too much power will be bad, including BM.
as a committee member, my idea is to make a balance on the committee, so need to introduce more voting powers, maybe also need to refine the rule. all these is to avoid the committee be under any single entity's control.
I haven't began asking big dogs, I just invited a little dog to come out to let everyone know him, otherwise no changes are possible, I'll help the system to grow for the coming of big dogs.
don't worry.
exchanges(here I only talk about yunbi and btc38) do not think they can control Bitshares, and they understand that they need a stable Bitshares, not a Bitshares in trouble, and they do not think DEX is their competitors, and, please believe, BTS trading is not so important for them now, they even do not want to pay more resource on BTS.
all the scenarios are imagined by you, I can also imagine that BM and you conspire to exploit all the shareholders, but I wouldn't.
at least half of the committee members support me to do so, don't think you can represent the interest of BTS community, even BM said he will just give help.
yes, BM and exchange are different, BM are so good at the design of the system infrastructure, but he may be not so good at understanding some business, and his own interest can also conflict with the interest of the whole shareholders. Giving any entity too much power will be bad, including BM.
as a committee member, my idea is to make a balance on the committee, so need to introduce more voting powers, maybe also need to refine the rule. all these is to avoid the committee be under any single entity's control.
I haven't began asking big dogs, I just invited a little dog to come out to let everyone know him, otherwise no changes are possible, I'll help the system to grow for the coming of big dogs.
don't worry.
1671
General Discussion / Re: Who would support a limited offer of drastically reduced fees?
« on: January 11, 2016, 03:52:09 pm »
I prefer to lower fees step by step.
BTS is not consumer goods, it like assets for investment, people normally do a long term thinking when then decide whether to step into the BTS market. so a 3-6 fees discount is not so attractive as expected.
anyway, this campaign is much better than staying unchanged.
BTS is not consumer goods, it like assets for investment, people normally do a long term thinking when then decide whether to step into the BTS market. so a 3-6 fees discount is not so attractive as expected.
anyway, this campaign is much better than staying unchanged.
1672
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 11, 2016, 03:36:20 pm »not same, it's easy for exchange to understand what they are doing, and to judge whether voting conflict with their interest.
Yes, and they could easily decide that it's in their best interests to vote out all the delegates and vote in their own unique set. Giving one entity so much power is a very bad idea.
yes, that's why I propose to restrict the maximum committee members one account can vote.
and the another question is, BM has so much power now, don't you think this is also bad?
1673
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 11, 2016, 02:39:23 pm »
Sending a new born puppy out to fight dogs.. or throwing a new born bird out of the nest before it has feathers.. that's not in the interest of the new born. In both instances they have not had time to grow and develop. In this instance it's the same.
not same, it's easy for exchange to understand what they are doing, and to judge whether voting conflict with their interest.
You may have just caused more businesses to run from using Bitshares.. for what exactly?
no new business, however I may propose to lower the transfer fee in recent future.
1674
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 11, 2016, 01:58:26 pm »there's no social contract/consensus that exchange should not vote, the problem is only how exchange should communicate with their users on this issue.
from committee perspective, the problem is how to define the rule to prevent one big account from controlling the whole network, maybe one option is to restrict the committee number one account can at most vote.
no proff to tell that exchanges are more likely to abuse power, they do not spend capital for the stake, but they are responsible for their users.
Once you let the genie out of the box, you won't be able to put it back in.
either I let or not, they will finally come out, the point is to be ready to defend the system, not to expect them to stay in the box for ever.
and, I'd rather to let them out earlier, then the system can be ready earlier also.
1675
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 今天从Telegram群看到的一些消息
« on: January 11, 2016, 12:21:53 pm »降低手续费其实也没用，免费也照样
0.5*0.5*0.5*0.5*0.5=0.03125
那你还在这儿晃悠干嘛？还不哪儿凉快哪儿呆着去。
1676
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 今天从Telegram群看到的一些消息
« on: January 11, 2016, 12:05:44 pm »
过几天再尝试一把降手续费，不能就这么被这帮家伙拖死。
1677
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 11, 2016, 11:32:35 am »
there's no social contract/consensus that exchange should not vote, the problem is only how exchange should communicate with their users on this issue.
from committee perspective, the problem is how to define the rule to prevent one big account from controlling the whole network, maybe one option is to restrict the committee number one account can at most vote.
no proff to tell that exchanges are more likely to abuse power, they do not spend capital for the stake, but they are responsible for their users.
from committee perspective, the problem is how to define the rule to prevent one big account from controlling the whole network, maybe one option is to restrict the committee number one account can at most vote.
no proff to tell that exchanges are more likely to abuse power, they do not spend capital for the stake, but they are responsible for their users.
1678
General Discussion / Re: Lessons Learned from Alt Coins
« on: January 10, 2016, 12:01:49 pm »
share 2 stories first:
1.several days ago, I visited ***pay.com to seek cooperation chance, after 2 hours told me "we do not want to introduce BTS things, it is a little complex, there is a big learning cost for our programmers, more important, we do not feel safe for BTS, there's always unexpected terrible issues happen".
2.after you posted the POW blog, many discussion in China QQ group, rumor spread that dilution will come, and some BTC guys mocked that POS failed. - the blog is just a simple discussion on some ideas, but it cause these only reflect that the market are not confident on BTS.
I think we should:
1. build a real decentralized infrastructure, which will convince user that BTS platform are stable and security, not under any single people's control,then they will feel safe.
2. reduce transfer fees, the high fee make no sense with such a low transfer volume.
these are the basis for marketing, and is the best marketing.
1.several days ago, I visited ***pay.com to seek cooperation chance, after 2 hours told me "we do not want to introduce BTS things, it is a little complex, there is a big learning cost for our programmers, more important, we do not feel safe for BTS, there's always unexpected terrible issues happen".
2.after you posted the POW blog, many discussion in China QQ group, rumor spread that dilution will come, and some BTC guys mocked that POS failed. - the blog is just a simple discussion on some ideas, but it cause these only reflect that the market are not confident on BTS.
I think we should:
1. build a real decentralized infrastructure, which will convince user that BTS platform are stable and security, not under any single people's control,then they will feel safe.
2. reduce transfer fees, the high fee make no sense with such a low transfer volume.
these are the basis for marketing, and is the best marketing.
1679
General Discussion / Re: [poll] Should we use a worker proposal to reduce the premium for bitassets?
« on: January 10, 2016, 11:40:21 am »
I don't think worker proposal should be used to do the things such as market making for a specific BitAsset, system should only define rules.
1680
General Discussion / Re: exchange preparing for voting
« on: January 09, 2016, 09:43:44 am »So technically bitcrab's proposal in another thread makes sense. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20858.0.html
I think community need to reevaluate the necessity of the proposal. @Stan @xeroc
yes, there's really some challenge while exchange voting comes, thanks for the reminding from @abit
