in your keyid wallet folder (something like "%APPDATA/KeyId" .. or so) .. there is a wallets folder that should contain the "default" wallet.
rename it to walletkeyid and copy it into the wallets folders of BitShares ("%APPDATA%/BitShares/wallets")
In the CLI of bitshares you can simply open up the second wallet with "wallet_open walletkeyid" and take a look at your vested funds.
I hope the devs are working on a nice way to do this with the GUI too

Opening the Keyid/DNS wallet with the most recent bts client worked (pulled from github an hour ago).
But wallet_check_sharedrop returned just an empty array.

Also my Keyid/DNS keys seem not to be part of the (updated) genesis.json file.

@xeroc: thanks but unfortunately that doesn't help much. I am using the DNS client to retrieve the keys as these are DNS balances.

Unless the client produces a lot of keys that do not 'hold' any DNS, my keys seem not to be part of the allocation as mentioned in the OP.
So either I missed something or there seems to be a problem.

I will export all the keys or increase the scroll buffer to check every single key (by script) tonight.
Just was wondering that there are so many keys that are not in the genesis file.

If anyone knows an easy way to check if/how much a public key 'holds' please let me know.

I ran into problem checking my allocation. 'wallet_account_list_public_keys' returns a lot of public keys (>100).
I tried to manually crosscheck some keys, but haven't found a reference/a mention into the genesis file.

Then I tried to map the account balance to the keys, but did not manage to.
I guess 'wallet_account_balance_ids'  didn't do what I thought it would, or at least I could not use the keys as reference to map it to the keys I could use to check the allocation.

synopsis:

- An account with about ten transactions in total has a lot of keys which seem not to be part of the genesis file.
- Is it possible that most of the keys don't hold a balance and why?
- How can I identify the keys that hold a balance?

Thanks in advance!

Hey Guys,

Withdrawals from bter are broken for days. They show the withdrawal as being sent but it does not arrive/ does not get accepted in the chain.
Does anyone know if they intend to upgrade their client before the snapshot?
I appreciate all the efforts I really do, but two years is a very very long time for an exchange in this space.
What can we do to help them? Who has a responsive contact @bter?

This is sooo frustrating.

It would be nice to hear how bter will distribute the BTS to DNS holders.

@toast: do you have any information from them?

Is it save to withdraw the DNS instead of leaving them on bter?
Or do you lose the compensation that way?

Hey Peter,

thanks for sharing your thoughts instead of just leaving.
From your post I read that your concern is mostly investment related and you are invested in BTSX and AGS, right?
So I guess your concern is not about the paradigm shift but more on the financial side.

  It's become abundantly clear with their recent decision that I3 is only looking out for their own interests at the expense of their investors/supporters.

I my point of view the disjunct set of investors' and I3's interests just became very small. They want BTS to succeed as much as you do.
Yeah, I3 switches gears and paradigms a lot. But in most cases they have a very good reason for that.
(E.g. not being able to liquidate funds to fund devs and operations, facing the problem that the available workforce is somehow starting to compete, ...)
And if they screw up, they'll fix it. Just have a look at toast, who put in enormous effort to make the people whole that lost the most due to the merger.

But I also shared a big concern of yours:
As an investor it was very blurry in what you really were investing when buying e.g. BTSX or DNS. Who was behind a DAC? What was I3 really committed to?
I my point of view this kept investors pretty much in the uncertain and may even hindered some from investing.
Actually, that 'flaw' is gone now.  Was the (still ongoing) transition handled nicely? I guess we all know the answer to that.
But the outcome is actually pretty good. I3 now has a clear focus and commitment. After the dust settles it should make you much more comfortable than before.
I also do not like the vesting of my funds but when looking at the bigger picture this merge is by far the best way to go.
Especially if you hold a big position in BTSX the recent events put you in a much better position.
If you disagree, I would be curious why.

I'd like to apologize for some reactions if your post was a genuine one. The post just checked a couple boxes which provokes this kind of reactions.

toast, thank you so much!

Das muss wohl jeder für sich entscheiden. Ich jedenfalls fühle mich mächtig verarscht von bm und seinen Versprechungen (von denen er jetzt offenbar nichts mehr wissen will).
Sein DNS-"fix" ist i. W. Schweigegeld für diejenigen, die sich am lautesten beschwert haben. Scheint ja auch in diesem Sinne zu funktionieren.

Glaub mir, ich kann das gut verstehen. I3 war schon immer gut alles ueber den Haufen zu werden.
Einmal technisch, aber auch in der kompletten Ausrichtung (PTS -> AGS). Ich glaube ich habe sonst noch nie so viel hard forks in kuerzester Zeit gesehen (PTS und BTSX).

Mein Problem ist aber immer noch die Art und Weise wie bm kommuniziert. Ich sehe ja ein, dass man manchmal alles ueber den Haufen werfen will/muss.
Aber das 'Wie' ist hier entscheidend. Die Argumentation von wegen "ich haette mit VOTE auch allen Konkurrenz machen koennen" ist wirklich hart.
Zuerst Geld einsammeln (AGS), und dann sagen Ihr habt mir das Geld nur fuer die Entwicklung und nicht fuer die DAC gegeben. rly?
 
Ich finde einen Merger gut da es das Beste fuer bitUSD ist und damit auch fuer die anderen DACs die auf bitUSD bauen (DNS/Play etc.)
Trotzdem, die neue Verteilung  bevorteilt I3, aber ich kann gut damit leben da die Mittel dort gebraucht werden.
Es sieht so aus als waeren sonst I3 die Mittel ausgegangen (Probleme mit PTS liquidity) und es wurde zu schwer die Funktionalitaet (DNS/VOTE/BTSX) zwischen den DACs zu trennen.
Ich sehe im moment keine bessere Moeglichkeit und daher versuche in nach Vorne zu schauen.

Haette man das Ganze anders angehen muessen: Oh ja! Die Execution des Ganzen war katastrophal. 
Wo siehst du den groessten Missstand in der Allocation?


btw: "Schweigegeld" habe ich nicht bekommen, meine DNS liegen @bter.
Ich hoffe noch auf den fund oder darauf, dass auch bter den snapshot macht.