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.
KO himwhat is the fee if using STEALTH transfer by CLI wallet ?
4. Fees shall be automatically distributed by the blockchain to the following accounts:
o 20% to the BitShares network.
o 20% to a Maintenance Account.
o 60% to holder(s) of the Privacy Mode Fees accumulation account
I think it must same as normal ?
I don`t think it is a priority feature , but I cannot oppose this feature because block chain can contain many things ,
but I oppose change the fee if using STEALTH transfer by CLI wallet
well that is the logical thing just for you and me...
but you should just study a bit of American history...so you know how BM is historically programed to think of freedoms, liberty, equality and words of that nature
their logic goes like this.... if I build a better looking house on your land I can claim the land as mine. After all they claimed a whole continent as 'theirs' following this tactic, what are a feature or two on BTS.
what is the fee if using STEALTH transfer by CLI wallet ?
4. Fees shall be automatically distributed by the blockchain to the following accounts:
o 20% to the BitShares network.
o 20% to a Maintenance Account.
o 60% to holder(s) of the Privacy Mode Fees accumulation account
This is what a transaction with a single transfer operation without a memo looks like:do you know the detail of internal ledger of accounts and balancesCode: [Select]{
"ref_block_num": 65534,
"ref_block_prefix": 878476643,
"expiration": "2015-11-07T21:12:09",
"operations": [[
0,{
"fee": {
"amount": 4000000,
"asset_id": "1.3.0"
},
"from": "1.2.28788",
"to": "1.2.97102",
"amount": {
"amount": 10000000,
"asset_id": "1.3.0"
},
"extensions": []
}
]
],
"extensions": [],
"signatures": [
"1f4a55c5ae64ba8084d20583697a45e73f54abebe72d11bf388a9258e6125859956356e9021c51f015b68885b5023f6b3a2d9f733c3f79ad10331e658fdd872b64"
],
"operation_results": [[
0,{}
]
]
}
The identification information of sender and receiver is the account ids in the "from" and "to" fields.
Note that "coins" are handled differently from Bitcoin in that BitShares keeps an internal ledger of accounts and balances, whereas Bitcoin uses unspent transaction outputs.
FC_ASSERT( (skip & skip_transaction_dupe_check) ||
trx_idx.indices().get<by_trx_id>().find(trx_id) == trx_idx.indices().get<by_trx_id>().end() );
transaction_evaluation_state eval_state(this);
return sign_transaction( tx, broadcast ); to finish sign. signed_transaction set_desired_witness_and_committee_member_count(string account_to_modify,
uint16_t desired_number_of_witnesses,
uint16_t desired_number_of_committee_members,
bool broadcast /* = false */)
{ try {
account_object account_object_to_modify = get_account(account_to_modify);
if (account_object_to_modify.options.num_witness == desired_number_of_witnesses &&
account_object_to_modify.options.num_committee == desired_number_of_committee_members)
FC_THROW("Account ${account} is already voting for ${witnesses} witnesses and ${committee_members} committee_members",
("account", account_to_modify)("witnesses", desired_number_of_witnesses)("committee_members",desired_number_of_witnesses));
account_object_to_modify.options.num_witness = desired_number_of_witnesses;
account_object_to_modify.options.num_committee = desired_number_of_committee_members;
account_update_operation account_update_op;
account_update_op.account = account_object_to_modify.id;
account_update_op.new_options = account_object_to_modify.options;
signed_transaction tx;
tx.operations.push_back( account_update_op );
set_operation_fees( tx, _remote_db->get_global_properties().parameters.current_fees);
tx.validate();
return sign_transaction( tx, broadcast );
} FC_CAPTURE_AND_RETHROW( (account_to_modify)(desired_number_of_witnesses)(desired_number_of_committee_members)(broadcast) ) } signed_transaction set_voting_proxy(string account_to_modify,
optional<string> voting_account,
bool broadcast /* = false */)
{ try {
account_object account_object_to_modify = get_account(account_to_modify);
if (voting_account)
{
account_id_type new_voting_account_id = get_account_id(*voting_account);
if (account_object_to_modify.options.voting_account == new_voting_account_id)
FC_THROW("Voting proxy for ${account} is already set to ${voter}", ("account", account_to_modify)("voter", *voting_account));
account_object_to_modify.options.voting_account = new_voting_account_id;
}
else
{
if (account_object_to_modify.options.voting_account == GRAPHENE_PROXY_TO_SELF_ACCOUNT)
FC_THROW("Account ${account} is already voting for itself", ("account", account_to_modify));
account_object_to_modify.options.voting_account = GRAPHENE_PROXY_TO_SELF_ACCOUNT;
}
account_update_operation account_update_op;
account_update_op.account = account_object_to_modify.id;
account_update_op.new_options = account_object_to_modify.options;
signed_transaction tx;
tx.operations.push_back( account_update_op );
set_operation_fees( tx, _remote_db->get_global_properties().parameters.current_fees);
tx.validate();
return sign_transaction( tx, broadcast );
} FC_CAPTURE_AND_RETHROW( (account_to_modify)(voting_account)(broadcast) ) }
-5%i don't get the purpose of this bids.
the 1 million shares of STEALTH will be transfered to once anyway, so why should i bid?
what i don't like at the moment is the 80% to STEALTH without the reverse feature talked directly on the first thread of this feature.
i agree with tonyk here - it is not a bid clear for for i am bidding and what are the terms.
a good idea (FBAs) executed in a rush.
The purpose of the BID is help onceuponatime to know how much he could sell his stake for and to give stakeholders an opportunity to see market demand when they vote for stealth.
