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 - Digital Lucifer

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 21
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: August 13, 2019, 01:28:28 pm »
I urge HOLDERS of BTS to re-think their proxy choices, their voting slate and benefits of BitShares. Currently BitShares proxy spotlight and voting slate is damaging not just network and individuals employed by it, but as well Brand and Reputation that we are trying to build.

Original concept and vision of Daniel Larimer was wrong, but what we evolved to is far worse than his original vision - as a Community and Consensus, not discussing technology development.

Maybe I'm not seen as suitable candidate for proxy (due to my foul mouth and complete transparency on opinions), since I've seen no changes on my voting power (apart few very precious individuals in terms of humanity and support), but you still have other choices to select them as a proxy and help movement of BitShares in positive way.

My personal NEUTRAL suggestions would be:



On behalf of Move Institute (Escrow), following actions has been taken:

- 645,090.41020 BTS was withdrawn from Worker Vesting (- fee 50.52054 BTS).
- EVOLV agreed to be paid in LTC, and our choice was LTC due to partnership of LTC and EVOLV for WCC 2019.
- Institute is trading against open.LTC on the DEX for few days without having any ability to collect amount needed for deposit payment. Currently there is 21.15718996 LTC successfully traded at the price between 2050 BTS and 2010 BTS per 1 LTC.
- Institute will be moving equivalent of 8000 USD to Poloniex account registered and KYC'ed with Milos Preocanin (me) in order to acquire missing LTC for the first/deposit payment. Export of trading history will be provided and posted here. LTC and remaining BTS will be returned to the DEX by the end of the working week (current worker account @healingvibes420).
- Institute will trade CNY for the worker team hours with agreement of the worker team. BitUSD/BTS market don't have healthy price or volumes to be traded against.
- Institute was paid 3530 CNY for the services done until now.
- All the market sharing fees will be withdrawn and sent back to the blockchain.

As soon as the first round is done, more detailed information on the worker status will be published.

Move Institute is uploading new website that will have transparent accounting for BitShares holders similar to We expect website to reflect changes/updates by 15. August 2019.

Due to NDA and real-life laws/regulations - for the review of signed agreement, please send request to [email protected]

For more info on the activity of escrowed account please visit


Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: bitcrab - make the ecosystem grow
« on: August 13, 2019, 06:23:49 am » will be voted up one hour later.

Many thanks. Please keep in mind few other workers that are actually important for network and can't survive loss of funds/inactivity.


Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: bitcrab - make the ecosystem grow
« on: August 13, 2019, 06:15:49 am »
This is not a permanent action, perhaps it will last at least several weeks.

I'd like to support good projects, but actually we need to review the workers and control the budget, especially in bear market, for long time the inflation from workers is too high and out of control, if we continue to let things be like this, I don't think BTS has a good future.

another point is that the action is mainly done by cn-vote, which is a multisig proxy in China community, all the votings  are decided by themselves.

This is reality:

There is no several weeks that these workers will survive:

- Decentralized 2019
- NABTS Conference

Now to be more clear.


- doesnt see funding by end of the current week, all services around it will be terminated including complete DNS structure of the domain. There will be no DEX, no website, no emails, no and all the authors will vanish due to missing payments.
I have no intentions to borrow money again just to stay around network and help BitShares grow, because certainly my pockets are not any deeper for the past 19 months of work, but debts are.
- Decentralized 2019 had serious downtime payment and if ends up in being underfunded that money will be gone.
- NABTS Conference, as escrow (Institute) who is legally responsible for signed agreement we do have some legal responsibility to respect it.

I agree we need management, but not in hostile way like others do. Playing politics means to sit down and talk together on possible solutions, not just act as we believe its the best fit.

hope you understand my position well

P.S. I will try to setup a witness or two to compensate worker in the meantime, but I don't see any other solution to this matter. You as a holder should be aware that 86k USD for entire year of development, seo, marketing, content writing was VERY TIGHT BUDGET in the first place, but was allowed by escrow/holders, so we already did more than we should from the day one. This is not first time refund400k is keeping it off this year and we can't afford another period of being inactive. I don't have to remind you that worker already suffered many months of devaluated salaries due to another hostile forcing of BSIP42 through witnesses at the time.


Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: bitcrab - make the ecosystem grow
« on: August 13, 2019, 05:25:22 am »
voted refund400K.

it's time to control the inflation of BTS.

This move is nothing good for people around this network, its structure, stability or future.

a) The worker that is supporting research on BitAssets is gone.
b) Infrastructure worker that holds 20+ API is gone.
c) worker is gone and 4 people are living of it. As full-time employees which that budget salaries are bread&butter for them, including myself.
d) all event conferences will be cancelled and all the funds that are paid already will be lost.

I can go through entire alphabet for the rest of the workers, but I'm not planning to.

If your wish is to completely destroy BitShares and chase away this small amount of good people/development we have around, please carry on.

If you wish something better for BitShares, please stop making moves that are against good people of this Consensus.



CTS (  是BTS的改进版。针对BTS社区讨论了几年都没有进展的问题,CTS大胆的进行了改革,比如:



     去年的年底,我们决定自己动手来实现理想。改代码,从c++学起; 搭网页钱包,从html学起;我们一步一个脚印,虽然动作难看,但我们一步步的向理想迈进。

Banned for 7 days. One more advertisement, comparing how citshares is better than bitshares or mentioning "mining" next to BitShares will end in permanent ban.


General Discussion / Re: Why BitShares is being delisted from Bittrex?
« on: August 10, 2019, 07:20:06 pm »
Still 150 mil BTS in What are people waiting for? I am surprised that users don't experience problems withdrawing their bts last minute. Or do they experience withdrawal issues?

Where you get this idea and what are you exactly talking about ?
I guess it's a re-post of an old post, aka spam.
Found it. Page 2 of this thread.


Thanks btw

General Discussion / Re: Cleaned out!
« on: August 06, 2019, 08:06:33 am »
I say it again this is the UI team's fault
they got many payment but continue give us a shit.
I don't known why anybody can be shown as a receiver in the form, even filled automaticly.
I don't known why anybody create a prosposal can be shown in your wallets
when we use a traditional financial app, we known we should only trade to the one in whitelist.

Well, I've just been fu*ked over by this 'proposal scam' and have lost $20,000 USD, my life savings and funds I have built on crypto over the past 7 years. I now have nothing.

I was trying to send a $40 payment to an phone wallet and it was taking a long time, so I checked my account again and saw this 'proposal' with some reference to verification to send funds, so I approved it thinking it was something new to verify my transaction. I had never seen this proposal tab before.

Next thing I know my balance is zero. Whoever was involved in developing this new "feature" which is costing people thousands of dollars due to being scammed, really needs to have a good think about WTF they are doing!

I have contacted OL support. I guess it is pointless asking if there is any chance of getting my money back?

If you want to view my account name it is: kurtduncan

Seriously pissed off!


Wallet UI is not traditional trading app but universal remote control with all the buttons to operate BitShares network with possibilties that named account carry.

There is:

- Header warning on scam proposals.
- There is no accept button on proposals from unknown source
- There is detailed description that proposal is updating YOUR ACCOUNT PERMISSIONS.


- Ignorant
- Smart before actually read all the warnings
- Clicking switch to enable APPROVE button
- Approving
- Curious

You will end up losing your funds in real-life world as well.

It's not fault of UI Team, it's fault of no KYC or proper tracking/ban for specific accounts (even on core level) that can prevent malicious ones to carry on with this.


General Discussion / Re: Why BitShares is being delisted from Bittrex?
« on: August 06, 2019, 08:02:13 am »
Still 150 mil BTS in What are people waiting for? I am surprised that users don't experience problems withdrawing their bts last minute. Or do they experience withdrawal issues?

Where you get this idea and what are you exactly talking about ?

How much market fee sharing is that app getting on average per day ?
Hi Thul 3
Fee income ranges from a few hundred to several thousand, and currently averages 200cny per day.

It would be very nice if you do export on your account for vesting/cashback so we can see a bit more transparency around this one.


Bitshares Mobile App work report

1. Bitshares Mobile App proposal work content: for the community to develop a fully functional mobile phone mobile open source software. Add other features based on community needs.
2. Due to the new marketing fee sharing, the team will refund the “operating cost” fee in the community worker.
3. The team is communicating with the Foundation about the mobile website's official website and app store, and is operated by the community and uses the community tap service (BBF).



1、Bitshares Mobile App提案工作内容:为社区开发一款功能完善的手机移动端的开源软件。根据社区需求完善添加其他功能。

3. Don't know have btspp spoke with BBF but they definitely had this discussion with Move ( on GitHub and it's being processed atm.

General Discussion / Re: Bitshares Marketing Group
« on: August 05, 2019, 10:57:13 pm »
Set to sticky, hopefully more people will see even if no activity.


I've submitted a draft of a research paper to the Decentralized 2019 conference in Athens, Greece (the same one that is sponsored by clockwork's worker proposal). If the paper is accepted by the conference's peer review committee, it will be published as the first BitShares-sponsored academic research, and I will travel to Greece to present the research at the conference. I'm providing a link to a draft of the research paper, but before I do, let me clarify a few things:
  • The paper considers an extremely oversimplified model of the BitShares system. The reason for this is threefold: 1) I wrote the paper in only a few weeks, so time constraints limited the amount of detail I could include. 2) At the start of a project, you really don't want to draw the wrong conclusions just because you rushed an overly-complex model to press. 3) A simple model often illuminates interesting points and helps guide the way forward.
  • One issue that the paper illuminates is that the BitShares incentive mechanism is probably very sensitive to our choices of MCR and MSSR, in the sense that sometimes if you change one of these parameters a little, it could have a huge effect on the behavior of BitAsset shorters.
  • The specific numbers used in the paper (MSSR= 1.005, 1.01, 1.02 and MCR= 1.4, 1.5, 1.6) are to be taken with a grain of salt. I used them to illustrate the general shape of the problem, not to draw any specific conclusions about those particular parameter choices.
Having given those caveats, I welcome your comments on the paper draft itself, available here.

Finally, the worker proposal which will fund ongoing research in this area needs a few more votes! Please vote for worker 1.14.204 or ask your proxy to vote for it.

As I said before even worker was around - PROPER ACADEMIC RESEARCH can only bring BENEFITS! Please let us know once draft becomes final and when we can(if we can) upload it to under Documentation (with full source)

Please continue


Worker ID: 1.14.204   
Name: 201907-uccs-research-project
URL to escrow/details


Okay. To have a precise statement. Do you mean A) or B) from below?

A) The BitShares account "still" pays the expenses? Background: On the blockchain, BTS with an equivalent value (at the time of transfers) of 130k bitUSD have been paid out already to "still".
B) The BitShares account "worker63fundholder" pays the expenses?

Furthermore, is there a budget overview of this worker somewhere? It has specifically asked for an equivalent value of 90k bitUSD, so the time when payments in BTS happen is very crucial. Sorry for the annoyance. How much equivalent value in bitUSD was already used from this worker in your opinion? Might be that this issue reduces to plain accounting, I simply don't understand it atm.

up to now the 147k CNY for 1st Devcon was paid by myself personally, without getting any fund from still or this worker.

jademont and I have talked about this with still several months ago, he rejected to provide more detail of the worker expense and just told us to get needed fund from what was left from the worker.

so one choice is to pay this 147k CNY to me from the left fund of the worker, as the expense detail is clear and is in plan of BTS Greater China Representative, and at the same time we will continue to request still to provide more clarification of the other expenses. although we are not 100% sure we can get this done.

Wait, wait... Witness Still haven't provide transparency for worker accounting and told you in polite way to fuck off and use leftover on unmanaged worker funds ?

Im sorry if im too direct, no bad meaning towards yourself or Jademont.

Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: July 30, 2019, 09:01:51 am »
1.) No, I don't have double standards, but true that I haven't explained how I measured all of them.

a) When I said not active, I really mean not active even as a login. E.g. Lafona logged in last time on forums not long ago, and as Admin I had possibility to check. In simple words, was using admin panel to check each of them. Where I said not active, that mean last login was 60 days ago.

b) Xeldal has been responsive in Telegram, and still is to this day.

c) Zhaomu same as Lafona had login not long ago.

Conclusion: I already said that all of this is my personal opinion, and info/facts/knowledge that I've collected myself - never said its 100% true or accurate.

I'd say all of current active witnesses are responsive. You know we created 2 patches recently, and most of them applied in time. Telegram is not the only channel for witness, there is also a Wechat group mainly used by Chinese witnesses.

But I still think many of them are not active. Or perhaps a better word is proactive. Personally I expect witnesses to be proactive.

Well, to be honest, while testnet witnesses had access to Telegram group, I've been mostly proactive (even I had fails as a testnet witness numerous times) and much better informed. Ever since it became closed group for mainnet witnesses only, rest of us lost a grip on info we used to have.

I agree that such move (mainnet access only to TG) is productive for mainnet witnesses since conversations on updates, problems and other related things became more focused without bunch of other people jumping into discussions.

I also agree that BP's should be more active (proactive), and history of above mentioned group from entire 2018 can confirm I was fighting for it, but we work with what we have and we can't change others. Another discussion would be proxies themselves, and certain incentives they set as requirements for BP's. So, it's not that BP's were like this since forever, it's the proxies who changed everything and allowed them to be as they are today.

I hope we agree that proxies are the ones who ultimately decide who is a BP and who isn't, and it's collective mistake not just from one side.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 21