Quote from: cube on August 18, 2016, 10:15:42 pm

I have no objection in letting the committee takes over this baby. I do like to know your longer-term goal for this smartcoin and the web portal you have created for this smartcoin.

Great thanks @cube!  Yes this will be used for:
1) Bitcash: www.bitcash.org - CASH.USD will be the main asset for the simple Bitcash wallet.
2) MegaX: www.megaexchange.org  - CASH.USD will trade with Bitcoin, Bitshares and other digital assets as part of this dentralized Smartcoin exchange

We have functional products, but we're still pre-launch alpha and are testing out markets for traction.  We are trying to make sure it solves a problem for our target demographics so we can build a growth strategy around that.   Long term we still plan for this to take a significant share of the cryptodollar market in the future alongside Steem dollars.

Thanks for sharing with us your longer-term goal for cash.usd.  One question - who are your "target demographics "?

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COMMITTEE MAKES A LOSS
If bitshare go up the committee-trade account will make a profit.
If bitshares goes down the committee-trade account will make a loss.
It doesn't matter. However my guess would be it makes a profit.
Making a profit and avoiding a loss would be a bonus but the purpose is to get more BitUSD out in the wild not to make money.

Thanks for bringing up this liquidity bootstrap idea and getting a lively discussion going.  I am all for increasing liquidity but I like to have a detailed carefully draft out plan before going ahead. 

Making a loss does matter, especailly if the espected liquidity did not happen but some users gained from 'wrongly' executed orders by the committee-trade members.  A loss means a loss for the bts shareholders.  At what price (loss) when it becomes too much for the shareholders to bear?  We should mitigate this risk as much as possible.  My concerns are:

1) Committee members are not traders and do not have the necessary experiences nor know-how to trade without making (significant) losses or gamed by experienced traders

2) How to make this into a self-sustainable process and when would it become profitable for users/shorters to step in and take over from this committee-run liquidity-subsidy effort?

Now its the same point to keep it alive than when you and cube say that take care about Bitshares PTS proyect and change it from pow to dpos.

Sincerily im focking angre and upset, just seeing how you and @cube  kill a good coin and at same time you asking for witness for other proyects in same place, your reputation should take same way that PTS.

You or @cube never ask for help or nothing to maintain pts, just left it his way, and this is a big shit for investors like me that trust you before.

Some one just buy like 100 btc in poloniex days ago .... try to imagine ... and now is 13 btc buy support i think moar than ever.

Thanks waclou for almost try to recover the chain, moar help will be welcome.

Poloniex never stop trading of PTS, its another thing i cant understand reading you in here. must say thanks to polo.

Hey, calm down. 

Most of the witnesses are still running PTS chain with near-zero pay.  I am happy to know that you as an investor are willing to invest more monies into the development and maintenance of it.

ptstalk.org is sponsored by fuzzy and nothing to do with pc or cube.  I will check with fuzzy if he is willing to renew it.  If not, would you like to take over the sponsorship?
While ptstalk.org is down. You can still reach the forum via pts.cubeconnex.com.

While @pc may project a perception to some that he no longer care about PTS.  That is certainly not true.  He cares deeply about PTS.  He is pretty tied up with work now, and frankly it is discouraging to see complaints of things not working from users, instead of offering help via effort, time or money.

As for poloniex's stopping withdrawal and deposit, I asked them and they said they were working on it.  No news yet.  Why not you help to contact them and chase them to release PTS's suspension?

Donation: Yes, we do need generous donation to maintain PTS.  If you want to see development on PTS, then a goal and budget need to be defined.  In any case, I accept generous donations at pts account 'bitcube'.

Sharebits is now  sharebits.co

The mysterious 'object-id bug' should be fixed now.  You give it a try.  Remember to test with ONE transaction and a small amount first.

sharebit.cubeconnex.com not working for me.

We are in the middle of changing it to sharebits.co.  It is temporary unavailble until the transition is completed.

I solved two birds with one stone by focusing on Troopeers. It's a single pitch. "Whoever you are, if you have or want an engaged fanbase, sign the hell up!"
The onramping is easy with a centralized DB as a back end. We will then snapshot all token balances to MUSE once the blockchain is to a point we are happy with.

This means that Troopeers can do its thing, irrespectively of MUSE. MUSE can be upgraded to something much more viable. Only then will the music branch launch (PeerTracks.com)

We simply can't afford a giant team though, so progress is slow. Troopeers' success should allow us a much much bigger budget.

ATM ressources are focused on Troopeers. Shortly switching gears to MUSE. Then we hook up Troopeers to MUSE, followed by PeerTracks.

I do not quite get it. What is the part that MUSE broadchain needs to be upgraded to 'something more viable'?  MUSE broadchain is a decentralised database which you can use store the token balances.  Why do we need a big team for that?

Hello forum members and future Moonstone users.
We would like to invite any one of you that is interested in using Moonstone to become part of the alpha phase.
Just write to us on Skype ID: moonstone.bitsapphire or send us an e-mail at info@moonstone.io, and we'll immediately reply with an invitation link.
Just don't forget to report on any bugs or any inconsistencies that you may stumble upon.

Finally, an alpha moonstone.

Sent skype pm.

There are a few reasons to not un-approve those committee members that support bitcrab's proposal:

* Lack of alternatives: There simply are not many people around that want to be a committee member just now and I don't want to have people in the committee that don't even participate in the forums or slack
* Dictatorship: With the 150M voting power my proxy currently has, I need to be more careful about what I do. This is still a decentralized decision finding process and I have cast my voted already to not support the proposal. That does not imply that I do not support the committee members.

Your post makes me think about whether it makes sense to step down as a committee member as it leaves me at a conflict of interest (as you can see)

Anyway, thanks for being so direct!

You are one of the most active committee members and have a deep passion to see bitshares succeed.  Please stay that way and not be distracted by the other thought.