Constructive criticism creating synergies!

[openledger]

What we need to jump-start liquidity is the deployment of trading bots, as they are designed to do just that and earn money in the process. And this is already happening. Its a slow process because the API is not fully ready for that but it will eventually happen.

I like this, and for sure the best way possible. There might be an interest in looking at Nubits, how the operate their bots, and have people provide liquídity on the base of a monthly income in terms of a % of interest. It has worked very nicely for many months now.

[cass]

And on a positive note: I think you decision to offer 60% in the affiliate program was very cool. And very bold business-wise. It really shows to me that your are truly committed for the long run. That builds confidence.

 

 

[jakub]

@jakub - I agree with much of what you're saying.  But with respect to the marketing message in question, keep in mind that it's directed at current CCEDK users, not the general public.

@tbone, that's a good point.
And that's why I think the current CCEDK users should receive an update just as I described it in my post above.
And keep it informative, it should not sound like advertising too much. Just an update to keep the user aware of what is going on.

[openledger]

 

[jakub]

In so many ways it is impossible to not associate CCEDK with Openledger. Openledger is supported by CCEDK in all the ways possible, and unlike the ugly duckling, we know that it will be a beautiful swan soon, but it needs the support to grow and become fully up and running, and thats where CCEDK is stepping in to say we will be there as long as it needs this support. If we dont, what do you think peopl in the real world will think in terms of where is the legal framework coming from, where is the fiat gateway coming from etc. It is all backed by CCEDK, and investors will need to know this connection in order to have knowledge about it all and not thinking it is a mere fluke and not supported by anyone.

OpenBTC, LTC, DASH, DOGE and more to come as well as OpenEUR, USD, CNY and the soon to be as well(believe it or not) integrated nanocard and its support of smartcoins will be again CCEDK as the connection, and will not work without, so it is to me impossible to leave one out when mentioning the other, as Openledger is part of CCEDK interests for the future, and CCEDK is needed for Openledger to bring the features fiat gateway, nanocard, and various crypto which we are able to ring to Openledger as well.

I get your point. Now I agree that there needs to be the CCEDK brand for the gateway, nanocard etc. So what we have now is a temporary transition period while CCEDK is evolving from being a centralized exchange into being the essential supporting infrastructure behind OL. That makes sense to me. So maybe this needs to be clearly communicated to the world by the mailing list? Especially to the CCEDK users, as they will appreciate being involved in the information loop: they would get a clear message what is going on and what the end result is meant to be.
To sum up: your explanation makes perfect sense to me here on the forum and what is missing is spreading it outside of this forum.

We cannot provide all tools and everything at once, and the fact that nobody is still supporting the liquidity on the already established currencies on OpenLedger only tells me that the community itself is not yet fully ready to support Openledger, so if the community is not yet ready to support Openledger which is meant to be the future of all of this, why is it that CCEDK as an exchange should go all in and then wait for anyone else to participate as they feel ready for it?

This whole thing is a co operation between many parties, and we are trying from our side to bring news step by step, helping to improve the overall experience to any new user signing up on Openledger. We need same full support from all bitshares community in order to be able to do all the good things we want to help bring to the table.

I think making appeals to the community to support liquidity will not work. I speak for myself only and this is how I feel: I don't want to trade just for the sake of adding liquidity if that means I could lose money in the process. Actually I've made several trades on OL already but my primary motivation was to leverage my insider knowledge and earn money, not to help with liquidity (so the added liquidity was only a byproduct of my actions). What we need to jump-start liquidity is the deployment of trading bots, as they are designed to do just that and earn money in the process. And this is already happening. Its a slow process because the API is not fully ready for that but it will eventually happen.
Therefore what the community could do is support worker proposals for trading bots. As a proxy I would definitely vote for that and maybe I could even buy a UIA to support it financially. But I would not risk my money for making trades that I don't really need to make.

[openledger]

So if you need to keep CCEDK, just don't associate it with OL, that's all that's needed to alleviate most of the confusion.

In so many ways it is impossible to not associate CCEDK with Openledger. Openledger is supported by CCEDK in all the ways possible, and unlike the ugly duckling, we know that it will be a beautiful swan soon, but it needs the support to grow and become fully up and running, and thats where CCEDK is stepping in to say we will be there as long as it needs this support. If we dont, what do you think peopl in the real world will think in terms of where is the legal framework coming from, where is the fiat gateway coming from etc. It is all backed by CCEDK, and investors will need to know this connection in order to have knowledge about it all and not thinking it is a mere fluke and not supported by anyone.

OpenBTC, LTC, DASH, DOGE and more to come as well as OpenEUR, USD, CNY and the soon to be as well(believe it or not) integrated nanocard and its support of smartcoins will be again CCEDK as the connection, and will not work without, so it is to me impossible to leave one out when mentioning the other, as Openledger is part of CCEDK interests for the future, and CCEDK is needed for Openledger to bring the features fiat gateway, nanocard, and various crypto which we are able to ring to Openledger as well.

What I see is a vast amount of bitshares users not yet migrated, I see lots of funds out there stuck at exchanges, so all we do is move on towards helping making Openledger the decentralized version of CCEDK with bitshares platform as the base and powered by graphene.

We cannot provide all tools and everything at once, and the fact that nobody is still supporting the liquidity on the already established currencies on OpenLedger only tells me that the community itself is not yet fully ready to support Openledger, so if the community is not yet ready to support Openledger which is meant to be the future of all of this, why is it that CCEDK as an exchange should go all in and then wait for anyone else to participate as they feel ready for it?

This whole thing is a co operation between many parties, and we are trying from our side to bring news step by step, helping to improve the overall experience to any new user signing up on Openledger. We need same full support from all bitshares community in order to be able to do all the good things we want to help bring to the table.

If all work based on a positive way of thinking, and believing in this project as something unique and all will start supporting by bringing in liquidity, constructive help and development, and genuine interest to make all things better, then you have to see present time as the time where this ugly duckly is about to take shape and become that beautiful swan everyone is hoping it to be.

Last, a good friend of mine said action speaks louder than words, so I think sentences which I have seen plenty of times on forum "I will place liquidity, if someone else does it first" is holding development back and does not support the idea of progress.

[liondani]

The assumption of CCEDK users by now all know about OpenLedger from various news letters and has an interest in knowing more about Openledger and the smartcoins, as well as the excitement from our side to share the news, is why we felt no reason not to share this easy acces to smartcoins via btc instant order feature on CCEDK.

I think the general expectation was that CCEDK would fully migrate to OL. That did not happen. But as it is entirely your business decision, I'm not criticizing that.
All I'd like to point out, is the external user perspective: from the outside it looks inconsistent because OL was strongly advertised (before the launch) as a significant improvement over centralized exchanges. So the perception is this: you advertise something but you yourself are not really using it. Once again, business-wise it might make sense. I'm just telling you how it might be perceived by the outside world. And perception does matter, even if it's irrational. So if you need to keep CCEDK, just don't associate it with OL, that's all that's needed to alleviate most of the confusion.

 

@ccedk Have you thought to fully migrate? I think that would be wise... (Just my personal opinion not knowing the details)

PS would you do that if CNX made a better deal to you???

[tbone]

@jakub - I agree with much of what you're saying.  But with respect to the marketing message in question, keep in mind that it's directed at current CCEDK users, not the general public. 

[openledger]

If you could take the best part of CCEDK (i.e. the gateway features) and integrate them into OL - that will be the final touch that's needed to make it the best exchange on the market.

Yes! I really would like to get my euros (that are deposited to CCEDK) to Openledger (as UIA's). Unfortunately the market for bitEUR / EUR is not very liquid a the moment at CCEDK, but in the long run it will be very important. People need a way to change their bitEUR to normal euros that they can transfer to their bank accounts. And vice versa, people who do not care to own BTS or other volatile assets need a way to buy bitEUR with their euros.

Do you have any timeframe how soon we could have OPENEUR?

According to BM, within the coming week or two

[Samupaha]

If you could take the best part of CCEDK (i.e. the gateway features) and integrate them into OL - that will be the final touch that's needed to make it the best exchange on the market.

Yes! I really would like to get my euros (that are deposited to CCEDK) to Openledger (as UIA's). Unfortunately the market for bitEUR / EUR is not very liquid a the moment at CCEDK, but in the long run it will be very important. People need a way to change their bitEUR to normal euros that they can transfer to their bank accounts. And vice versa, people who do not care to own BTS or other volatile assets need a way to buy bitEUR with their euros.

Do you have any timeframe how soon we could have OPENEUR?

[fav]

And on a positive note: I think you decision to offer 60% in the affiliate program was very cool. And very bold business-wise. It really shows to me that your are truly committed for the long run. That builds confidence.

 

[jakub]

The assumption of CCEDK users by now all know about OpenLedger from various news letters and has an interest in knowing more about Openledger and the smartcoins, as well as the excitement from our side to share the news, is why we felt no reason not to share this easy acces to smartcoins via btc instant order feature on CCEDK.

I think the general expectation was that CCEDK would fully migrate to OL. That did not happen. But as it is entirely your business decision, I'm not criticizing that.
All I'd like to point out, is the external user perspective: from the outside it looks inconsistent because OL was strongly advertised (before the launch) as a significant improvement over centralized exchanges. So the perception is this: you advertise something but you yourself are not really using it. Once again, business-wise it might make sense. I'm just telling you how it might be perceived by the outside world. And perception does matter, even if it's irrational. So if you need to keep CCEDK, just don't associate it with OL, that's all that's needed to alleviate most of the confusion.

Making OpenLedger a decentralized version of CCEDK is not a task impossible, but all innovation takes time to present in full, and I think and hope you will all in due time find out what is all the good stuff getting added to Openledger step by step.

I fully understand it. Nothing gets done overnight.

Remember we are all interested in making this platform succeed, and if mailout like this is off topic or wrong , I can only say I am sorry for the confusion, and hope you will give me the time to check it all out and then present it the way it should be done, and we have one more successful presentation of OpenLedger.

Yes, this mail-out action was a bit misguided but that's just a small setback on a very long road.
I think the major error was to combine CCEDK and OL in one message. Just keep CCEDK as a separate entity, as some legacy system. For me the major flaw with CCEDK has always been its UI - you've a had a pretty good product (and unique offering regarding the European market) but it was never packaged well in terms of UX. And OL is radically different in this respect - the GUI is fantastic, it looks and feels cool. And it does cool things. If you could take the best part of CCEDK (i.e. the gateway features) and integrate them into OL - that will be the final touch that's needed to make it the best exchange on the market.

Lst, thank you for caring and showing the interest in making this more clear.

Yours sincerely an keep me posted with stuff like this. It hurts, but in the same time it is good for getting all out the best way possible, so comments like this is all o well apreciated, especially if I get the solution in the same time

You are welcome, Ronny. I do appreciate your efforts and that's why I want to help, even if it hurts.
And on a positive note: I think you decision to offer 60% in the affiliate program was very cool. And very bold business-wise. It really shows to me that your are truly committed for the long run. That builds confidence.

[openledger]

@ccedk, below is some tough feedback I felt I needed to offer to you - this is regarding the latest mail message I got from CCEDK mailing list.
Please take it as constructive criticism. I've written it because I do care. I really do.



(1) In a single message you freely mix references to CCEDK and Open Ledger. For an average user, it is absolutely unclear what the relationship is between CCEDK and Open Ledger. At first I thought you advertise direct deposits for bitUSD, bitEUR, bitCNY inside Open Ledger and it took me a while to recover from the confusion.

(2) "Make deposit in a single click" - frankly, I have no idea what it actually means. If it is so simple just describe the process in one simple sentence, just tell the user how s/he starts with fiat EUR and ends up with bitEUR (assuming this is the single-click process you refer to, as the header says: "SmartCoin deposits bitUSD, bitEUR, bitCNY")

To sum up, I'm a BTS insider and you've managed to make me quite confused what this is all about (so just imagine the confusion happening in case of a less oriented user).

And when I started clicking on the links hoping to find out more information, I ended up in some sections of the CCEDK website, which still explained nothing. Maybe this would work if CCEDK was well designed in terms of UX but sadly it is currently very far from that. And I guess CCEDK is not going to have an UX uplift any time soon, so you need to explain to your user what to do step by step, ideally with appropriate screen-shots.

Additionally, all links are obscured to this format: "ccedk.us11.list-manage.com/track/click?=u....".
That's not very user-friendly - personally I'd prefer to know where the link is going to take me before I click on it.

First off, I do take it as constructive critizism, we are all humans in this, and the excitement of new stuff may sometimes cause us to put on the wrong glasses.

The assumption of CCEDK users by now all know about OpenLedger from various news letters and has an interest in knowing more about Openledger and the smartcoins, as well as the excitement from our side to share the news, is why we felt no reason not to share this easy acces to smartcoins via btc instant order feature on CCEDK.

Making OpenLedger a decentralized version of CCEDK is not a task impossible, but all innovation takes time to present in full, and I think and hope you will all in due time find out what is all the good stuff getting added to Openledger step by step.

Evrybody is asking for everything at once, and nobody I see sofar is bringing liquidity to OpenLedger as market makers, all waiting for the other guy to be the first, and then things do take time all in all. This is not a complaint, but a simple fact of present situation, and something I believe will change over time, as everything takes time to build.

Remember we are all interested in making this platform succeed, and if mailout like this is off topic or wrong , I can only say I am sorry for the confusion, and hope you will give me the time to check it all out and then present it the way it should be done, and we have one more successful presentation of OpenLedger.

Lst, thank you for caring and showing the interest in making this more clear.

Yours sincerely an keep me posted with stuff like this. It hurts, but in the same time it is good for getting all out the best way possible, so comments like this is all o well apreciated, especially if I get the solution in the same time

[fav]

you can't change links in newsletters easily, you have to track. but that's not the issue here, I agree with @jakub - I did not get the message of this mail either

[donkeypong]

Yes, I just read that e-mail. And I did not find it very clear either. But I love what you guys are doing with CCEDK and OL.

[jakub]

@ccedk, below is some tough feedback I felt I needed to offer to you - this is regarding the latest mail message I got from CCEDK mailing list.
Please take it as constructive criticism. I've written it because I do care. I really do.



(1) In a single message you freely mix references to CCEDK and Open Ledger. For an average user, it is absolutely unclear what the relationship is between CCEDK and Open Ledger. At first I thought you advertise direct deposits for bitUSD, bitEUR, bitCNY inside Open Ledger and it took me a while to recover from the confusion.

(2) "Make deposit in a single click" - frankly, I have no idea what it actually means. If it is so simple just describe the process in one simple sentence, just tell the user how s/he starts with fiat EUR and ends up with bitEUR (assuming this is the single-click process you refer to, as the header says: "SmartCoin deposits bitUSD, bitEUR, bitCNY")

To sum up, I'm a BTS insider and you've managed to make me quite confused what this is all about (so just imagine the confusion happening in case of a less oriented user).

And when I started clicking on the links hoping to find out more information, I ended up in some sections of the CCEDK website, which still explained nothing. Maybe this would work if CCEDK was well designed in terms of UX but sadly it is currently very far from that. And I guess CCEDK is not going to have an UX uplift any time soon, so you need to explain to your user what to do step by step, ideally with appropriate screen-shots.

Additionally, all links are obscured to this format: "ccedk.us11.list-manage.com/track/click?=u....".
That's not very user-friendly - personally I'd prefer to know where the link is going to take me before I click on it.

[donkeypong]

I love "Open Ledger Exchange'. Great name. I have used CCEDK and like it. But I must say I don't care for the name. Too many letters. Alphabet soup. My brain turns off after three our four letters and you have five. Open Ledger would be an awesome improvement!

[openledger]

Bitshares is the first blockchain added on OL, then we will see MUse coming up soon a well as Identabit, an teh way I see from my e-mail corerspondences it seems like we will soon have other join as well.

But the URL you chose to use explicitly contains the name "BitShares" (https://bitshares.openledger.info). How will you reconcile that with taking Muse and Identabit on board? The URL name won't be neutral, will it?

I think that is all a question of time and funds, and what you see now is what is not necessarily what you see in the near future. We are looking into this.

Good to hear it. In my opinion the not-so-good UX (to put it mildly) is the main reason why you've experienced low volumes on CCEDK. Open Ledger offers a bit of improvement in that respect but still it's an unfinished product and the market page in the GUI needs a major upgrade before we can be on par with established exchanges like Poloniex.

As I wrote in some other thread, the best option would be to have two incarnations of the GUI:
(1) a BTS wallet with an integrated exchange (and this should be the basis for a hosted wallet provider service)
(2) an exchange with an integrated BTS wallet (and this should be the basis for exchanges like OL)
 
I'll be glad to talk to you about supporting you with funding and UI development once my company sorts out its own finances - this should happen within the next 3-4 weeks.

Sounds great jakub, looking forward to hear more

[openledger]

Bitshares is the first blockchain added on OL, then we will see MUse coming up soon a well as Identabit, an teh way I see from my e-mail corerspondences it seems like we will soon have other join as well.

But the URL you chose to use explicitly contains the name "BitShares" (https://bitshares.openledger.info). How will you reconcile that with taking Muse and Identabit on board? The URL name won't be neutral, will it?

I think that is all a question of time and funds, and what you see now is what is not necessarily what you see in the near future. We are looking into this.

Good to hear it. In my opinion the not-so-good UX (to put it mildly) is the main reason why you've experienced low volumes on CCEDK. Open Ledger offers a bit of improvement in that respect but still it's an unfinished product and the market page in the GUI needs a major upgrade before we can be on par with established exchanges like Poloniex.

As I wrote in some other thread, the best option would be to have two incarnations of the GUI:
(1) a BTS wallet with an integrated exchange (and this should be the basis for a hosted wallet provider service)
(2) an exchange with an integrated BTS wallet (and this should be the basis for exchanges like OL)
 
I'll be glad to talk to you about supporting you with funding and UI development once my company sorts out its own finances - this should happen within the next 3-4 weeks.

identabit would be identabit.openledger.info an so forth

[jakub]

Bitshares is the first blockchain added on OL, then we will see MUse coming up soon a well as Identabit, an teh way I see from my e-mail corerspondences it seems like we will soon have other join as well.

But the URL you chose to use explicitly contains the name "BitShares" (https://bitshares.openledger.info). How will you reconcile that with taking Muse and Identabit on board? The URL name won't be neutral, will it?

I think that is all a question of time and funds, and what you see now is what is not necessarily what you see in the near future. We are looking into this.

Good to hear it. In my opinion the not-so-good UX (to put it mildly) is the main reason why you've experienced low volumes on CCEDK. Open Ledger offers a bit of improvement in that respect but still it's an unfinished product and the market page in the GUI needs a major upgrade before we can be on par with established exchanges like Poloniex.

As I wrote in some other thread, the best option would be to have two incarnations of the GUI:
(1) a BTS wallet with an integrated exchange (and this should be the basis for a hosted wallet provider service)
(2) an exchange with an integrated BTS wallet (and this should be the basis for exchanges like OL)
 
I'll be glad to talk to you about supporting you with funding and UI development once my company sorts out its own finances - this should happen within the next 3-4 weeks.

[openledger]

Hi Ronny, I have a couple of questions:

(1) You've launched Open Ledger but still keep https://www.ccedk.com/ running. Do you intend to have it this way in the future? Will these two exchanges be co-existing?

(2) Is Open Ledger intended as a shared initiative of CCEDK and other BitShares partners (e.g. Banx, Bunkershares) or does OL belong purely to CCEDK and these partners are going to have their own URLs?

(3) Currently Open Ledger has the GUI of a BTS wallet. Have you got plans to refactor the UI to look and feel like a proper exchange?

The two exchanges will be co existing as long as we see it worthwhile. The plan i however to move as many of our currencies to be traded on OpenLedger as well, so who knows how things will look like in say one year from now.

OL belongs purely to CCEDK in all legal aspects, it is initially meant as the defacto bitshares wallet with the purpose of adding value to the platform via the features and products available on CCEDK. OL as such is meant as a neutral platform inviting excahnges and partners to join with their own wallets but all trdaing on same platform, this is where the shared order books an market dept starts to kick in. Bitshares is the first blockchain added on OL, then we will see MUse coming up soon a well as Identabit, an teh way I see from my e-mail corerspondences it seems like we will soon have other join as well.

I think that is all a question of time and funds, and what you see now is what is not necessarily what you see in the near future. We are looking into this.

[Akado]

Hi Ronny, I have a couple of questions:

(1) You've launched Open Ledger but still keep https://www.ccedk.com/ running. Do you intend to have it this way in the future? Will these two exchanges be co-existing?

(2) Is Open Ledger intended as a shared initiative of CCEDK and other BitShares partners (e.g. Banx, Bunkershares) or does OL belong purely to CCEDK and these partners are going to have their own URLs?

(3) Currently Open Ledger has the GUI of a BTS wallet. Have you got plans to refactor the UI to look and feel like a proper exchange?

I would also like to know this, I'm a little confused on how things will work.

I thought CCEDK will still exist with it's own interface and that it would operate on top of OpenLedger behind the scenes, meaning from a user point of view,everything would stay the same with CCEDK at the interface level. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I would like to understand

[jakub]

Hi Ronny, I have a couple of questions:

(1) You've launched Open Ledger but still keep https://www.ccedk.com/ running. Do you intend to have it this way in the future? Will these two exchanges be co-existing?

(2) Is Open Ledger intended as a shared initiative of CCEDK and other BitShares partners (e.g. Banx, Bunkershares) or does OL belong purely to CCEDK and these partners are going to have their own URLs?

(3) Currently Open Ledger has the GUI of a BTS wallet. Have you got plans to refactor the UI to look and feel like a proper exchange?

[Akado]

I would like to suggest - once it's running - to post an annoucement here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=84.0 since it's where most exchanges have their threads. Posting on the Alt coin section since it's related to BitShares will only attract trolls. That way you could place every article on your thread and have people know there's an awesome exchange out there, instead of wasting time with the alt coin section trolls

[santaclause102]

General friendly advice: Run the texts you write though a spell checker, there are always quite a few spelling / grammar errors in the forum posts and magazine article (forbes etc.) you put out there.  Mostly forgotten small words like "to" or "the". Check the last three paragraphs here http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogeraitken/2015/10/10/openledgers-crypto-financial-platform-officially-launching-as-central-bank-interest-revealed/4/ as an example

Quick question: will Openledger be more than a hosted Bitshares 2.0 wallet? It was often mentioed that Openledger is somehow the Exchange network itself and more than one of many hosted wallets? I am speaking of how it actually works not in terms of what may be marketed.

Value proposition summary: OpenLeder utilizes a distributed blockchain database for its order books and it's order book matching engine which has the following advantages for traders (assuming traders trade in smartcoins and not IOUs; in case IOUs are traded only the first of the two advantages applies):
- Transparent, verifiable and failsafe accounting: No need for expensive and intransparent audits, public auditing of order books, not possibility to reverse trades / operations.
- Counterparty risk free trading: No change for security breaches because traders control their assets entirely (with smartcoins) and trade them directly with other traders over our p2p protocol.
- Traders have access to other blockchain based financial services like p2p lending, non crypto derivatives and user issued assets trading, multisignature accounts, compliant securites trading in the future, and payment service including recurring and scheduled payments.

[openledger]

Ronnie!

Your Open Ledger website home page logo link is broken: "The requested URL was not found on this server. That is all we know. ".
I know if you change the logo image URL from .php to .html it would work!!!

Code: [Select]

https://www.openledger.info/index.phpto

Code: [Select]

https://www.openledger.info/index.html

Thanks for pointing out, it is already pointed out, so the guys are working on that, hope to have it corrected monday

[mint chocolate chip]

Ronnie!

Your Open Ledger website home page logo link is broken: "The requested URL was not found on this server. That is all we know. ".
I know if you change the logo image URL from .php to .html it would work!!!

Code: [Select]

https://www.openledger.info/index.phpto

Code: [Select]

https://www.openledger.info/index.html

[EstefanTT]

I like the name : The Open Ledger Exchange

 

I don't have any catchy sentence in mind right now but I think the word "trustless" should have it's place in it

[openledger]

I kind of like the thread John started with Identabit announcement, and would like to welcome him and his team on the journey to unchartered destinations in the sphere of BitShares ideology and great intentions, hopefully all turning into happy faces whereever you turn, when speaking about Bitshares and not to forget perhaps the most important part of the future sucess, that is all you participating in making it an endeavour beyond the borders of imagination:)

I think that was a nice opening, so I would like to make a similar thread as John did, only on CCEDK instead, involving all assets under CCEDK with special focus on a soon to come future wallet, decentralized exchange and vault all-in-one solution provided in co operation with Bitshares and Cryptonomex.

Although not yet fully decided, it seems we might be considering the name of this special and so very unique product as

The Open Ledger Exchange - www.openledger.exchange which would mean then www.bitshares.openledger.exchange as one of the partners having a blockchain represented in this wallet.

any suggestions as to how I could best make use of the other domains I have on openledger like www.openledger.biz, www.openledger.co, www.openledger.mobi, www.openledger.info is greatly appreciated as well

What I am especially looking for in this thread, is sentences to be used defining the strengths of this wallet concerning all the strong points of Bitshares 2.0 including in this sentence openledger when possible, in order for me to use it all in future marketing purposes promoting the wallet and Bitshares.

I would ofcourse also appreciate any short text you may come up with including Open Ledger, the Bitshares 2.0 values and what it will all be able to offer in no more than 300 characters, like a short description.

Anyone who has close knowledge to how to run a signature campaign effectively please do send me a PM, and you would perhaps be interested in being my generator and engine to have this project succeeed with maximum users signing up prior to launch, as I need one going starting the minute bytemaster confirms 30 days to launch.

Yours sincerely

Ronny Boesing
https://about.me/ronny_boesing

PS: Above links are so fresh, they will only work a little later today, all forwarded to CCEDK for now.

And I really have to promote below instant order service, dont forget to try it out, it is a great tool for quick change to USD or Euro or in case yoou already have fiat on CCEDK, well maybe its time to but some Bitshares!

https://www.ccedk.com/bts-usd#instant

https://www.ccedk.com/bts-eur#instant