That doesn't make sense. Delegate balance has nothing to do with bitassets. Delegates dont forge in proportion to their votes, it is fixed and goes to one person.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Quote from: vikram on July 26, 2014, 04:43:58 PM

Quote from: jcalfee1 on July 26, 2014, 12:44:52 PM
If my delegate account issues a BitAsset, would its forging power remain the same?  I ask, because I would want BitAssets to suffer just because it is more profitable to forge (or vice versa).

We currently use the term BitAssets to refer to market-issued assets. Any account can issue user-issued assets. This will not affect delegate block production. However, please note that a wallet with delegate block production enabled will not scan any transactions by default.

I'm wondering about bit assets (once implemented), not user assets.   If it were more profitable to have bitShares in the delegate balance why would anyone issue bitUSA?  If it were more profitable to issue bitUSA why would anyone be a delegate?  Hope this make sense..

Quote from: jcalfee1 on July 26, 2014, 12:44:52 PM
If my delegate account issues a BitAsset, would its forging power remain the same?  I ask, because I would want BitAssets to suffer just because it is more profitable to forge (or vice versa).

We currently use the term BitAssets to refer to market-issued assets. Any account can issue user-issued assets. This will not affect delegate block production. However, please note that a wallet with delegate block production enabled will not scan any transactions by default.

If my delegate account issues a BitAsset, would its forging power remain the same?  I ask, because I would want BitAssets to suffer just because it is more profitable to forge (or vice versa).

Upgraded to Approval Voting.
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki/AYNTK_Voting

Please proof read.

QuoteIn each round, all 101 delegates need to build one and only one block.

This is not true that each active delegate can only produce one block in each shuffle round. If some delegates are missing block, other active delegates may have the chance to produce its second block for each round. Since in a healthy network, delegates should not often miss blocks, this is only something need to clarify technically.

+5% for hierarchie and target ..

Quote from: toast on June 18, 2014, 05:06:25 AM
I think no, for several reasons:

"BitShares" refers to a bunch of different DACs, not just the exchange
"BTS X" refers to a family of bank&exchange DACs (each with finite number of BitAssets), if the first one is "BTS" then what do we call the others?
XT will be used as a snapshot target (100% of at least first X chain will be direct XT snapshot) and won't be upgraded to any X chains (that's the plan for now at least)

Eventually we will need a hierarchal naming scheme no matter what

BTS/X/XT
BTS/X/XC1
BTS/X/XC2
BTS/X/XF1

etc

This is a source of infinite confusion.  I can't speak about when we get to the need of hierarchal naming, but I think it would help things greatly if you guys referred to BTS X as BTS eXchange.   BTS XT should be BTS eXchange Target.  Seems goofy, but it would help mitigate the endless confusion around these things.  Or perhaps "BTS XT (eXchange Target)".  Just go ahead and spell it out in the literature/posts. At least at the first mention. 

It is like trying to remember names of people you met a couple of weeks ago. It is worse as you get older ..

XTS assuming a 4m supply I think

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Quote from: toast on June 18, 2014, 03:28:52 AM

Quote from: NewMine on June 18, 2014, 03:23:17 AM
You say pay, "10 XtS". What is XTS? Is that the same as  a BTS? Or a Bip?

XTS = units of BitShares XT

What is the AGS Explorer referring to when it says my BTS balance? XTS?

I think no, for several reasons:

"BitShares" refers to a bunch of different DACs, not just the exchange
"BTS X" refers to a family of bank&exchange DACs (each with finite number of BitAssets), if the first one is "BTS" then what do we call the others?
XT will be used as a snapshot target (100% of at least first X chain will be direct XT snapshot) and won't be upgraded to any X chains (that's the plan for now at least)

Eventually we will need a hierarchal naming scheme no matter what

BTS/X/XT
BTS/X/XC1
BTS/X/XC2
BTS/X/XF1

etc

Quote from: toast on June 18, 2014, 03:28:52 AM

Quote from: NewMine on June 18, 2014, 03:23:17 AM
You say pay, "10 XtS". What is XTS? Is that the same as  a BTS? Or a Bip?

XTS = units of BitShares XT

according to road maps, Bitshares XT means Bitshares X Testing, and i think the final state of Bitshares XT would be Bitshares X, will we change the name again by then?

seems people out of the community get used to calling it  BTS rather than XTS ,and many people confuse about BTS and XTS,can we  just  keep the naming BTS ?gut feeling ,i do not think XTS is a good name.

Quote from: NewMine on June 18, 2014, 03:23:17 AM
You say pay, "10 XtS". What is XTS? Is that the same as  a BTS? Or a Bip?

XTS = units of BitShares XT

You say pay, "10 XtS". What is XTS? Is that the same as  a BTS? Or a Bip?