1
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker Proposal] OpenSource of OpenLedger mobile App
« on: December 18, 2018, 07:40:38 am »
OL has decided to support mobile worker from btspp, it looks very mature and close to delivery.
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.
We saw your accurate and pro work, we voted to your worker proposals openledger_mobile_apps_ph1 and openledger_mobile_apps_ph2.
ioBanker team.
OpenLedger has also recently submitted a bill for developers of mobile app. I think we should have a good communication to find out what is necessary and what is not necessary, so as to avoid repetitive work and pay too much money.
Of course, we also seriously compared the openledger app. I believe that we have certain advantages in terms of time cost and product quality. However, we will continue to communicate with the other side, hoping to achieve a cooperative approach.
Compared to the BTS price we have enough worker at the moment.
What is the difference from the OL solution?
I think a cooperation between OpenLedger and BlockchainProjects makes a lot of sense. There is plenty of business we could mutually benefit from. As for this worker proposal, I believe it makes only little sense put two entities behind it. Mostly because both architectures have been independently developed and thus surely are vastly different from each other.
Either way, looking forward to see more details from OL.
The worker would need to cover the listing fee and then some allowance for people on the Bitshares side assisting technically with the integration - I think DL is much clearer on the quantum of effort involved in that side of things (and who can do it) than me.
Accepted, my understanding of the mechanism was incorrect. Sorry for that.
1. BitUSD holders won't be "being force settled" or "end up with bunch of BTS".
2. Talking about potential "BTS loosing its price dramatically" is not appropriate.What's wrong with that? This may happen with ANY crypto or fiat currency.
3. "price fed by witnesses is voluntary changed w/o having a consensus" is incorrect. Witnesses are acting by consensus. As of writing, BSIP42's status is "approved" according to result of consensus voting.Originally the price was adjusted by some witnesses w/o consensus. This may happen again.
Yes, marketing!
In the past OpenLedger has advertised with incorrect statements, I would like to propose some kind of review system for anything published. This review should not be about layouting or formatting, but merely about the content facts.
Would be good to include DEXBot in any marketing efforts. People will be very interested to learn they can use free decentralised trading software too. It's another good selling point of BitShares and will help to pull in new users.
In what timeframe? I think Bitshares needs first some upgrades of UI, core and website, when this happened some extra money on marketing could be spend.