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.
If you want something be done, just do it.
{
"client_version": "unknown",
"steem_revision": "3bb37ad275d35f1cb9181beb0d8773fb137e023a",
"steem_revision_age": "3 hours ago",
"fc_revision": "b34e8584ae8f2667dcdfa5b53b1a372fe2c41a89",
you can try to learn what you did wrong and improve.
Fact is, the Bitshares wallet is good and getting better. Which is probably at least partly why it's getting more and more use by a growing number of people. @viz10nari's users will do just fine.
NothingBitshares is ready for the prime timeyet. Products arestill very much inpretty complete
After being taken the ability to actively vote against ideas like this... I find myself pretty much agreeing with the approach...
Let distribute all available fund to stake holders and then finance any development we find appropriate on a case by case bases.
what?
This will be "voting 'for' only" brought to its purest form...
haha , I'm pretty sure this proposal is for morking the "vote against function being taken out"
So this is more a protest vote against the change which makes it easier to vote in bad workers?
I hate to say it, but CF probably has a better reputation in this ecosystem than DL.
BitShares should be worried. Not about these other projects, but about it's own reputation outside of this forum.
It seems like it doesn't really matter how good BitShares is, what features it rolls out, how far ahead of XYZ it is ... the crypto-masses are simply avoiding it and have a predetermined bad impression of the platform.
So much so that it appears most are unwilling to even give it a try by downloading the wallet.
Following that same line of thought, gambling should be illegal. That argument doesn't make sense to me.
It is illegal in many parts of the world.
Which is absolutely insane to me, trying to tell consenting adults how they can spend their money. I-N-S-A-N-E! But that topic is for another day.
1 million bts to create an asset ?
and so it begins.
Did it happen?
This week I focused on improving the asset pages. It's not finished but this is all useful market data so I figure I'd release the work in progress sooner than later:
https://cryptofresh.com/a/USD
https://cryptofresh.com/a/MKR_OPEN.BTC
Feedback is appreciated, especially from a trader's perspective.. Any units to flip? Any obvious missing data?
Really nice!
I think the current feed price should be in a more prominent position. Is there a plan for transaction history? What does the top 250 accounts mean?
Thanks @cube, feed price is the same thing as "settlement price" price, correct? I've added it above "Details" pane on the right side for now.
Transaction history - you mean to show latest transfers? Or market orders history? Market order history is definitely something I'd like to add there, it's just part of the new API I haven't accessed yet.
Top 250 accounts means "250 accounts with the highest balances and/or debts in this asset" (i.e. the most interesting)
Yes, the fed price is the 'settlement price' in the GUI. Settlement price in CF is showing '--'.
Transaction history = 'transacted order history'. Does market order history means that?
The top 250-account list is lumping the highest balances and debts together and this can be confusing. Can it be separately ranked (ie top in balance OR top in debt)?
Ah, there's actually 2 'settlement prices' -- the 2nd one is part of the "Global settle" feature, and currently only applies to RUB/SEK. But I did add "Price feed" at the top of the right-hand pane. I'll try to clear this up to make it look better though.
And yep, that's what I meant by market order history.
As for the top 250 list, I see what you mean. Maybe it is best to split it into two tables? One for debt positions, the other for balance+orders+collateral balance. Should I combine "Orders" and "Collateral" fields? Or keep them separate?
I see that 'fee price' now. If this information is right above the price chart, it would be easier for the user to compare it with the chart. I think the feed price should be in the same base term as the price chart.
IMHO, balance+orders should be acharttable by itself and making collateral anothercharttable.
On OL they have Settlement Price line right on the chart, would that be preferable?
Shouldn't collateral be counted as a type of "order"? Because we already have a table that lists full collateral+debt positions, ordered by collateral ratio. If someone has 1M BTS locked up to create USD, would you expect to see this 1M BTS reflected on the "richlist"?
