There have been claims from btc38 that they found security issues and bugs with the new wallet but have not contacted CNX or made any reports on what these issues are.
Yunbi I don't know.
Should CNX not actively reach out to these exchanges then?
No they shouldn't. The liability is on the exchanges.
That makes zero sense. Both exchanges are major sources of liquidity for bitshares as well as bitassets. If BTC38 doesn't have the BTS that they are supposed to have based on their allotment from BTS1 or market participants expect them not to upgrade then there will be a sell of BTS on these exchanges.
Being that bitshares is an exchange and the liquidity of its markets are dependent upon external liquidity providers, it should be our greatest priority to ensure that these exchanges are well integrated with Bitshares.
My statement was perfect sense.. but I think you have conflated the term 'our' with CNX.
What you said above is correct.. but the 'our' belongs to traders of BTS who are using these exchanges, not CNX. Once again, the liability is on the exchanges to serve their customers. It is not CNXs responsibility. CNX responsbility is to a few minor improvements to BitShares... otherwise it's up to 'us' in the sense of not including CNX. Us being users/traders of these exchanges.
If a few people contact them asking whats up, its easy to disregard the responses. If dozens if not 100s of people demanded answers from them, you would see a very different response.
'Our' priority is to stop relying on CNX, and to do things for ourselves, because 'we' are the shareholders of BitShares and 'we' vote on what happens to it next.
Hope this helps clarify what I meant. I understand your concern.. we just need to direct it in the most effective direction. I am just saying it's not CNX we should be directing to.. its the exchanges themselves.
Topic: BTC38 and Yunbi (Read 5620 times)
