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.


Messages - Thul3

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 37
1
I didn't choosed i follow protocol/rules even i disagree that BEOS/DL is the smaller evil.


I can't demand from others to act according to protocol and consensus and support at the same time a clear cheat caused by one of the main cheater on bitshares just because it may fit me.

Let's do it the right way.


2
vote decay          YES
collateral            Not really
DPOS1               YES
Stacking            Never in this form

Way of implementation    Never

3
Quote
There are more good old longterm witnesses who provided first class infra who have been replaced by bitcrab/abit and beos to add witnesses who provide a simple VPS only and don't even participate in bitshares at all.

I don't think so,this is not the fault of bitcrab/abit and beos, after CN-VOTE created, the big Proxy is not bitcrab/abit anymore,the big Proxy is CN-VOTE, even beos still support the most number witness, face the date and the true.

https://bts.ai/voting_report


BEOS did clearly inside deals nobody can deny.Or do you belive 2 witnesses from BEOS receive at the same time support when
two chinese reiceives from beos ?

4 new committee members in single hour.
BEOS supporting cn-vote members and cn-vote supporting BEOS members.

I did some digging about that voting and you can basicly say majority of cn-vote members don't know why they support liondani and evangelist who haven't been active a single time in 1 1/2 years.

Who did the inside deals i can only guess from past experience of proposals i received which i always rejected.
What is very clear is that BEOS has a very good relationship with Jademont and DL

DL is now the new director of BEOS.


If you blame CN-Vote for supporting the shitty workers or blocking then i need to tell you without the help of BEOS they would not be able to do so.
Restoring bitcny price feed was rejected from BEOS with the argumentation people can get hurt (bitcrab didn't wanted it at that time)
Today they attack cn-vote for blocking to restore pegg and claim to instantly restore pegg.
Now they have no more issue of people getting hurt when average CR got very lower ?


I know CN-Vote and i know BEOS.

BEOS is far worse than CN-Vote and together with Abit and DL it is a total mess.
Centralization and dictorship pure.


Most people agree on that.

It's easier to find consent with cn-vote than being under BEOS.


Also the attack of Abit and DL fudding that CN-Vote is forking and should leave bitshares is something i can't accept at all.
Today its cn-vote because you don't like their voting and tomorrow its me because they don't like my voice.

Abit already muted all critical foreigners using his bot which he refuses to disable even when asked from all other admins.

Another question is who is causing the big corruption on bitshares?
Is it cn-vote ?IMO and many others its not cn-vote but Abit/Bitcrab/Jademont and BEOS.
Each other supporting themself makes such a corruption we have in committee first possible.
I'm 4 years now in bitshares and never saw such a big corruption we got today.And its mainly caused by these people and that won't change just because you switch vp from cn-vote to beos which is already supporting that corruption.

Abit and Bitcrab are trying to switch vp because they lost their influence in cn-vote who got tired of their permanent ignorance.

I talked a lot with CN-Vote and they expresses me their bad feelings that Abit is not listeing to their opinions but basicly acts based on his own personal opinion (or bitcrab) .
Tell me who opened a BAIP instead of normal worker ?
Who refuses to execute community will?
Who changes rules for its own favour like gdex ?


So claiming that the new voting system is needed to change when the most corrupt people stay is just a simple lie.
Changing power from bad voters to corruption supporters is no solution at all.

4
Some existing foreigner witnesses are going to support CN-Vote patch.

They will talk with CN-Vote directly

Quote
The patch is not a straight reversal of the voting system, it is something else and it looks less stringent to me than what abit did.

Quote
Full diff here
https://github.com/bitshares-cnvote/bitshares-core/compare/349e0061300d3e65a3e3040276c321b76069e44f...master


Diffrences are that staking will be reduced to x1 only.So each BTS will only hold 1 BTS VP.
Collateral voting will be disabled not after 60 days but 600 days.

When asked for the reason CN Vote explained that due to the short time and lack of funding to create a patch they reverse the added voting system by simply mainly changing parameters and not much code in fear to not destroy the compatibility of the patch as a full reverse would take more coding and time.

Giving that they had only 3 days without preparation and funding it is for me personly acceptable like for other foreign witnesses i'm in contact with.

There are no some existing foreigner witnesses:

only four:

zapata42-witness
roelandp
bhuz
sahkan-bitshares

There are more good old longterm witnesses who provided first class infra who have been replaced by bitcrab/abit and beos to add witnesses who provide a simple VPS only and don't even participate in bitshares at all.


P.S the claim from Abit and DL on telegram that CN-Vote is going to create a fork with its own new coin and leave bitshares is FUD.


5
Some existing foreigner witnesses are going to support CN-Vote patch.

They will talk with CN-Vote directly

Quote
The patch is not a straight reversal of the voting system, it is something else and it looks less stringent to me than what abit did.

Quote
Full diff here
https://github.com/bitshares-cnvote/bitshares-core/compare/349e0061300d3e65a3e3040276c321b76069e44f...master


Diffrences are that staking will be reduced to x1 only.So each BTS will only hold 1 BTS VP.
Collateral voting will be disabled not after 60 days but 600 days.

When asked for the reason CN Vote explained that due to the short time and lack of funding to create a patch they reverse the added voting system by simply mainly changing parameters and not much code in fear to not destroy the compatibility of the patch as a full reverse would take more coding and time.

Giving that they had only 3 days without preparation and funding it is for me personly acceptable like for other foreign witnesses i'm in contact with.

6
Technical Support / Re: Hero coin settle problem
« on: August 12, 2020, 09:33:12 pm »
seems price feeds are not updating

7
The new voting system is poorly done.

Jumping from one shit into another.

Remembers me of dumb voters who always jump from one party to another in hope it gets better.


The stacking mechanism in current form is wrong

The biggest paradox is BTS is core token of our ecosystem.

This voting system is in decline with that function.

A member who has 1000 BTS and participates in the ecosystem to make Bitshares great has less voting power than somebody who has 1000 BTS and does nothing in ecosystem other than stacking and receiving up to 8 times the voting power of the guy who actually brings the ecosystem forward and income.

These stupid stacking ideas are all based on theory and academic bs.

You know why chinese won economic battle against US ?
Because US is and was leaaded by academic idiots who only know theory unable to forcast the result of their actions.
China had/has old currency traders living in reality knowing what will be the result when doing a or b and able to forcast years in forward based on their planned actions.

You guys clearly represent the US academics who have completly no clue what you get in the end result.




But you are free to explain to me where the additional value comes from
the one guy with 1000 BTS stacking when he is not going to participate in ecosystem.Where will the income come from ?

And the guy who is trading 1000 BTS and knows the ecosystem well and pays fee's to the network will be dictated/controlled by the other guy who knows it only theoraticly.


But the inactive guy is worth more as he is "willing to sacrifice their personal interests for the benefit of the community"
What exectly did he sacrifice ?Did he worked more for bitshares than the active trader ?


What an idiotic logic based on an one time price pump and not growth

 
You guys have now the opportunity to chose between horseshit1 and horseshit2 as voting system.




Somebody going to explain to me what BTS exectly represents  ?A blockchain with high acitivity including a populated dex or just a blockchain with no activity and no populated dex but pure speculation token for a pump ?

8
Its funny you support the people as solution who caused majority of points you are pointing out.

Did Abit revoked his abuse ?
Did he apolagize ?
Did he gave away sole control over github ?
Did he claimed he is going to fix bitassets which he refused before ?
Did bitcrab any change ?



You supporting people you called scammers for months ?

9
Feed the real bitcny price. There is no alternative solution.

Where was Abit or BEOS or co ?

Can't see them.They didn't needed cn-vote to get it fixed

10
Quote
支持解锁喂价

they had the opportunity to unlock bitcny.

Where were their votes ?
Didn't saw abit,bitcrab,beos and majority of others voting for it ?

So what is changing ?

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32387.msg343385;topicseen#msg343385

CN-Vote has only 250 million votes so where were the rest supporting to get pegg back for bitcny without hurting someone ?


1.14.264 is still there and just needs 160 million votes more to get approved.It would be less but the votes from openledger have been decayed

11
General Discussion / Re: @Abit
« on: August 11, 2020, 09:41:21 am »
Since some people claim Abit changed bitshares to the right direction .......


Did Abit delete his absuing bot on telegram and unban all DEV's and other people ?

Did Abit execute community will as committee ?

Did Abit listen to CN-Vote or other committee members other than bitcrab about the MM contest rules ?

Did Abit apolagize for his abuse ?

Did Abit gave up sole control over github ?

Did Abit distance from previous corruption he supported openly ?

Did Abit's point of view changed that abuse/cheats are ok as long it fits bitshares (in his private point of view)


Serious questions ?
Cause i can't see any changes at all

12
Quote
what happened has also proven, the voting power from collateral is always biased on bitAssets relevant voting, they always focus on maximizing the benefits of the debt positions owners, it's always impossible to let them to do a little compromise for the optimization of the whole system, it's not bad to cancel these voting power.

You are a hyprocate.

The threshold for price feed was Abit's idea which was supported by you and Jademont.
CN-Votes disagrees with many of your ideas which does the majority/nearly all of foreigners too.


It's basicly you trying everytime to enforce your point of view with the help of Abit where voters opinion are not being considerated at all.
Great example the MM contests

hehe, interesting, now I don't care whether cn-vote agree or disagree with my ideas, I just care whether this patch will lead BTS to a better future.

Bitcrab you are always smart enough trying to switch VP to entities which favorise your actions.

Who managed to get the inside deals with BEOS on committee and witness ?Was it you?
Which chinese is in big favour of BEOS ?Jademont and you ?

Who coworked with you trying to centralize bitshares like kicking out other gateways or registering bitshares in thailand?Digital Lucifer ?

What a coincidence.......


Who has the biggest track on corruption and lack of ethics ?

The people who claim to be the solution ?

13
中文(Chinese) / Re: 4.0 投票机制变化
« on: August 11, 2020, 08:36:27 am »
CN-Vote has only 250 million votes so blaming everything on them is wrong.BEOS is at least to be blamed the same making the deep corruption in committee even possible and blocking workers you claim to be important.
I will explain more in detail why i disagree tonight.

But one question.
Are Dev's going to fork everytime a new voting system when someone gets to powerfull they disagree with ?

You just see cn-vote have 250M VP now, but you didn't see the future, about BEOS, this is the choice of real bts holder not the debtor.

Quote
making the deep corruption in committee even possible and blocking workers

About this, any big proxy can't avoid the responsibility.

Quote
But one question.
Are Dev's going to fork everytime a new voting system when someone gets to powerfull they disagree with ?

About this question, i think i have give the answer, but you don't want to see, the Dev can't fork anything, only the witness can.

Quote
when someone gets to powerfull

This is a very interesting question, this is about the powerful come from where, come from the leveraged collateral or real bts? if this powerful come from the real bts, no one can fork it, even the witness.

If this powerful come from the leveraged collateral,then i have a question for you:

When the cn-vote have 650M leveraged collateral VP in the future(certainty event), and use this VP locking the feed price again, so what do you want to do with this? you want to make a same leveraged collateral VP to fight with them and what you did you want the other bts holder to do?

No the problem is i know BEOS.
BEOS is corrupt.Way more corrupt than CN-Vote.
Their community asked so many times to vote for something which they didn't.They preach A but do B.
Majority of foreigners hates BEOS.
BEOS comes to power you can trust me they will leave.
The 170 million votes left on BEOS are people who are mainly there to get some sort of benefit via rainfall not caring about bitshares voting at all.
BEOS did inside deals on bitshares destroying witnesses.They made the committee corrupt with inside deals.They never participated in any voting from themself.You always had to ask them to do something.CN-Vote was created because BEOS approved all workers making the dilution very high.They created workers which instantly failed already during funding.
If i had to chose between BEOS and CN-Vote i would ALWAYS chose CN-Vote.
People who know them for a longer time always write they leave a long tail of tears.

Also people are talking debotos bad.
A debtor is nothing bad.
He is long on BTS and more important in real world debtors get also voting rights.
The only thing which would need to be changed is bitassets getting protected from debtor votings in bad times.
However did you see BEOS supporting something like that other than just claiming ?
Did you see community willing to do something about it ?

Because i can tell you i tried a lot and to say the truth the majority gives a fuck even unwilling to take 2 minutes for a vote.



Committee is conntrolled by 2 entities.DPOS1 is the solution to it i proposed for a long time but not the way it was implemted.


Same rules apply to all about collateral.In real world collateral is also giving voting rights.

The current voting system change basicly punishes now being long on BTS via collateral and favorise paid votings rights via rainfall like at BEOS.

DL being a longterm partner of BEOS is the reason why he suppports these changes.
But this would end in a total centralization of bitshares.
Who is going to follow that ?

14
Quote
what happened has also proven, the voting power from collateral is always biased on bitAssets relevant voting, they always focus on maximizing the benefits of the debt positions owners, it's always impossible to let them to do a little compromise for the optimization of the whole system, it's not bad to cancel these voting power.

You are a hyprocate.

The threshold for price feed was Abit's idea which was supported by you and Jademont.
CN-Votes disagrees with many of your ideas which does the majority/nearly all of foreigners too.


It's basicly you trying everytime to enforce your point of view with the help of Abit where voters opinion are not being considerated at all.
Great example the MM contests

Who was not willing to execute community will as committee ?
CN-Vote or you and Abit ?

Who banned foreigners with diffrent opinion from chats like wechat.
CN-Vote or you and Abit ?

Who broke the OMO fund consensus to catch his own margin ?

Who implemented BSIP42 on bitusd with the given promise to not touch it ?


You prefer a power switch from CN-Vote who doesn't support you much to BEOS which you do good inside deals ?

15
中文(Chinese) / Re: 4.0 投票机制变化
« on: August 11, 2020, 07:51:20 am »
CN-Vote has only 250 million votes so blaming everything on them is wrong.BEOS is at least to be blamed the same making the deep corruption in committee even possible and blocking workers you claim to be important.
I will explain more in detail why i disagree tonight.

But one question.
Are Dev's going to fork everytime a new voting system when someone gets to powerfull they disagree with ?

Did Abit disagree with CN-Vote ?Am asking because he was always supportive to them and their actions,banning dev's who questioned some actions.
Was DL disagreeing with CN-Vote ?Cause i saw him claiming cn-vote to be wise and smart when getting his worker approved.
It seems he always blames chinese when his worker doesn't seem to get approved.


Has Abit and DL support of foreigners?

A clear no and majority of foreigners having anykind of influence on bitshares sees it as a hostile takeover but are silent as they belive both sides are not bringing bitshares forward

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 37