1
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.
Pages: [1] 2
2
Openledger / Is Voting on Obits Policy Changes Resumed?
« on: September 30, 2016, 07:58:20 am »Hallo it seem that the Voting on Obits Policy Change is resumed, chek it: http://obits.io/voting/
3
Openledger / Re: OBITS VOTING. Please feel free to leave your comments and suggestions
« on: September 24, 2016, 10:22:16 pm »
Anyway, I give you more reason to vote on Buyback & Burn.
As you probably know, Obits is a great project that give real revenue NOW. But it's market cap is low. The main reason is clearly Bitshares itself, Open Ledger and other bitshares markets right now don't give any real decent liquidity to any token. So one of the best option to boost price and liquidy is apply for other markets, Bittrex and Poloniex at first.
Sharedropping is a messy problem for exchanges.
1) It qualify any token or cryotocurrencies as a Share (regulatory and fiscal problem for dividens)
2) It rappresent a cost and a technical problem to manage sharedropping for every account, just immagine Poloniex that handle shardropping in its cold wallet to any holder. Come on!
So please vote for Buyback & Burn
Ah and I have a question: What are the "good reason" to change the rules? I haven't read any argument here and in the presentation of this voting poll. .
As you probably know, Obits is a great project that give real revenue NOW. But it's market cap is low. The main reason is clearly Bitshares itself, Open Ledger and other bitshares markets right now don't give any real decent liquidity to any token. So one of the best option to boost price and liquidy is apply for other markets, Bittrex and Poloniex at first.
Sharedropping is a messy problem for exchanges.
1) It qualify any token or cryotocurrencies as a Share (regulatory and fiscal problem for dividens)
2) It rappresent a cost and a technical problem to manage sharedropping for every account, just immagine Poloniex that handle shardropping in its cold wallet to any holder. Come on!
So please vote for Buyback & Burn
Ah and I have a question: What are the "good reason" to change the rules? I haven't read any argument here and in the presentation of this voting poll. .
4
Openledger / Re: OBITS VOTING. Please feel free to leave your comments and suggestions
« on: September 24, 2016, 10:13:07 pm »I love buyback & burn! But I suggest place buyback order at a little higher than the highest bid price not just simply buy up!
I agree that this should be added as fourth option
Totaly Agree, buy on ask is not the right strategy, the purpose of every buyback is to burn as much Obits is possible, not to pump the price for some minutes.
5
Openledger / Re: OBITS VOTING. Please feel free to leave your comments and suggestions
« on: September 18, 2016, 05:28:04 pm »
As I am an Obits holder I'm opposed to any form of sharedropping.
The reason is simple: Only a part of obits are currently sold by ccedk. So sharedropping give part of dividends to unsold obits holders, I mean Obits Issuers.
Direct burning affect only the obits on the market, so I strongly belive that sharedropping will destroy obits value.
And there is more , the main problem whit Obits market value is that is listed only oin the bitshares exchanges ( mainly openledger )
Sharedropping will qualify Obits more as a Share than a Cryptocurrency, and there are problems to list shares on poloniex or other exchanges, it seems that they prefer cryptocurrencies.
So I support the option BuyBack & Burn. Plese fell free to discuss this important topic BEFORE the next voting poll.
The reason is simple: Only a part of obits are currently sold by ccedk. So sharedropping give part of dividends to unsold obits holders, I mean Obits Issuers.
Direct burning affect only the obits on the market, so I strongly belive that sharedropping will destroy obits value.
And there is more , the main problem whit Obits market value is that is listed only oin the bitshares exchanges ( mainly openledger )
Sharedropping will qualify Obits more as a Share than a Cryptocurrency, and there are problems to list shares on poloniex or other exchanges, it seems that they prefer cryptocurrencies.
So I support the option BuyBack & Burn. Plese fell free to discuss this important topic BEFORE the next voting poll.
6
Openledger / Re: Obits | You are invited! - Blockchain Powered, People Driven
« on: September 15, 2016, 03:30:46 pm »
I'm against sharedropping. Only a part of obits are currently sold by ccedk. So sharedropping give part of dividends to unsold obits. Direct burning affect only obits on the market so I strongly belive that sharedropping will destroy obits value.
And..., the main problem.whit Obits is that is listed only on the bitshares exchanges ( mainly openledger )
Sharedropping will qualify Obits more as a share than a Cryptocurrency, and there are problems to list shares on poloniex or other exchanges
That's I voted for BuyBack & Burn.
And..., the main problem.whit Obits is that is listed only on the bitshares exchanges ( mainly openledger )
Sharedropping will qualify Obits more as a share than a Cryptocurrency, and there are problems to list shares on poloniex or other exchanges
That's I voted for BuyBack & Burn.
7
General Discussion / Re: [ANN] [OBITS] BUYBACK and BURN in September with 742.358 BTS = 7,4458 BTC
« on: September 03, 2016, 05:41:00 pm »Wow very disappointing results. Even with the blockpay IPO, you were only able to generate 100k bts through fees?
So obviously fees are not going to provide much value to the token. Holders just have to hope one of the other icos takes off or the bts referral program is revamped.
No not really so disappointing, The next month will be the first were profit from ICOO come into Obits.
In my opinion actually BTSR is really disappointing, it simply doesn't work as expected and it doesn't produce revenue to burn and more subscription from the ICO.
8
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD needs liquidity for those that want to buy it.
« on: August 05, 2016, 03:33:11 pm »Hallo, I'm a crypto trader and I was a Forex trader (I worked for an evil non commercial bank
)I endorse this liquidity-by-workers proposal because I know the importance of the Market Maker to give some initial trust to every market (mainly dervative markets and every smartcoin IIS a DERVATE by Design. Market Makers, HAVE TO give to every asset a minimum liquidity trought a decent bid-ask spread.
In this case we are not talking about milions of dollars so I think we can try this proposal.
Just My 2 cents.
9
General Discussion / Re: transwiser's marketing making plan
« on: July 12, 2016, 10:35:30 am »
congrats, and thanks for your support, I hope that bitUSD and bitEUR will be following the same bitCNY path.
10
General Discussion / Re: bitCNY optimization committee proposal voting begins
« on: July 12, 2016, 10:33:14 am »Hallo, again could you give us some feedback?
Does this new settlement fee improve liquidity and interest in CNY?
@bitcrab
before this change the supply of bitCNY is less than 800K, now it is 1100K and keep on increasing...
going ahead, bitCNY will be used as trade base in many markets.
Can you describe how the change has contributed to this?
We need more details to know this isn't just regular market movement.
in my view the logic is simple, because the change changed the expectation of the players, especially the shorters.
actually bitCNY can be used in many cases - to buy other assets in DEX, to deposit to btc38 just as fiat CNY, to just withdraw from transwiser - so there is always demand for BTS holders to short out bitCNY , but they always worry about being force settled, this worry prevent them from shorting.
now the 1% offset reduced the worry greatly and shorters have more incentive to short.
is it just regular market movement? I don't think so, in the weeks before and after the change, there's no other big change in BTS ecosystem that can make bitCNY supply increase at close to 50%, and we can see that bitUSD supply has no obvious change in the same period.
So there are few things here.
You are saying that because of market support there is a reason for shorters to be creating bitCNY.
Following that you then said that the 1% offset reduced the worry of shorters.
So can you explain what the worry was that shorters had if there was already the market support as you described for bitCNY?
That's really not what he said. What he said was that people wanted to short bitCNY but were concerned about being forced settled. He also said the increase in bitCNY supply since adjusting the offset was not due to market movement considering bitUSD did not experience the same increase in supply during the same period. I think he makes a compelling case, and perhaps we should consider the same adjustment for bitUSD (or even all BitAssets).
Yes absolutely, I agree
11
General Discussion / Re: bitCNY optimization committee proposal voting begins
« on: July 10, 2016, 08:48:08 am »Hallo, again could you give us some feedback?
Does this new settlement fee improve liquidity and interest in CNY?
@bitcrab
before this change the supply of bitCNY is less than 800K, now it is 1100K and keep on increasing...
going ahead, bitCNY will be used as trade base in many markets.
Can you describe how the change has contributed to this?
We need more details to know this isn't just regular market movement.
in my view the logic is simple, because the change changed the expectation of the players, especially the shorters.
actually bitCNY can be used in many cases - to buy other assets in DEX, to deposit to btc38 just as fiat CNY, to just withdraw from transwiser - so there is always demand for BTS holders to short out bitCNY , but they always worry about being force settled, this worry prevent them from shorting.
now the 1% offset reduced the worry greatly and shorters have more incentive to short.
is it just regular market movement? I don't think so, in the weeks before and after the change, there's no other big change in BTS ecosystem that can make bitCNY supply increase at close to 50%, and we can see that bitUSD supply has no obvious change in the same period.
12
General Discussion / Re: bitCNY optimization committee proposal voting begins
« on: July 05, 2016, 03:01:51 pm »
Hallo, again could you give us some feedback?
Does this new settlement fee improve liquidity and interest in CNY?
Does this new settlement fee improve liquidity and interest in CNY?
13
General Discussion / Re: bitCNY optimization committee proposal voting begins
« on: June 29, 2016, 05:57:53 pm »
Hallo do you experienced more liquidity and Interest in the CNY smart contract with this new feature?
14
General Discussion / Re: Cryptofresh Block Explorer + MUSE now available
« on: June 14, 2016, 10:18:14 pm »
Any Reply?
15
General Discussion / Re: Cryptofresh Block Explorer + MUSE now available
« on: June 12, 2016, 07:13:55 am »Hallo Roadscape, I am using Cryptofresh every day to analyze bitshares adoption. I realy need a couple of tool:
1) The total bts fee paid to the network on a daily basis (whit a graph)
2) A better graph were is possible to where you can vary the time frame and set a some mobile mean (at least just a weekly mobile mean)
Total fee paid to the network expressed in bts (and if it is possible in bitcoin) is crucial to better understand the real network adoption.
Thanks in Advance
Paolo Rebuffo
Pages: [1] 2
