Author Topic: Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.  (Read 13575 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Riverhead

Just curious if the btc was returned to bter? I have about 27 btc-b I'm waiting on and this certainly doesn't help.
In fact, return BTC is not correct, because the trade ( sell BTS for BTC) had happend already, and the trade is real.
he need to return back the fake BTS
it means if he have sold 1million fake BTS, he need return back 1 million real BTS to bter.
because due to the trade, BTER's balance of BTC is correct, but the balance of BTS is not correct.
Excellent point. Shouldn't be two hard to figure out how much that is and would go a ways in restoring some creditability to mindflux. I believe btercom was their bts account.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.

I think we need to be careful what we wish for.
It seems to me that bitcrab has enough power to fork BitShares and start over thus effectively push BitShares out of China.
At least I would do that if I were him.

There will be a significant market cap drop if he does that.
We need to be prepared for this.

He has already stated that he would just go to ethereum... so the fork is unlikely if you want to take what he said at face value. If you don't want to take it at face value, this whole thing could just be a staging ground to begin that fork process. First driving a wedge with the chinese community between bitshares and in the process driving the market cap into the ground and thus ensuring a move to Chinashares being complete with little/low risk.

Bitcrab said he is a fighter.. he has boasted this a few times.. that means this isn't a discussion/debate.. its a battle in his view.. and he simply sees him winning or losing it by either getting what he wants or not.

Bitshares community has to decide how to handle irreconcilable players.

If that is really true that only proves he doesn't care about BitShares at all from my pov. It also means BitShares will be hostage of his whims at any point in time.

I would like if we could reach a consensus where everyone gives in a little but the overall outcome is the best for both parties. However I don't like the "This is either going to be like I want or screw you approach". Assuming this is resolved, nothing guarantees us that in the future something similar won't happen and everyone will be at the mercy of his whims.

But in the end, it's the votes that count. If he wins it's because the majority thinks he is right so can't argue about that. Either both parties try to reach an agreement or in the end someone will have to leave or adapt.

The only thing we can take for sure is voting decides everything. Even though my personal opinion is against bitcrab's atm, in the end, if he wins it's because the majority thinks he is right and the majority will move on. Only the minority will be "damaged", but the majority of stakeholders will move on. That's what I like about BitShares. This can be very polemic but a vote is a vote. In the end it's what decides.

Everyone claims he is destroying BitShares but if he wins, does that really mean that? Or does it mean that a minority has a different view from the majority of the stakeholders? Majority holds the decision power. Whatever the outcome is, it will be the grand part of players choosing that option so that only means the other party was wrong. The fact we don't agree doesn't necessarily mean he is going to destroy BitShares. He is going to "damage" the minor part of BitShares while the majority will simply move on like things are supposed to be.

In an ultimate analysis, the one who looses is the weakest link. The other is the strongest and will move on, rightfully.

I think the only real damning things he has said are in regards to his dismissive attitude towards the refer program. That is what has freaked a lot of people out because so many are building businesses around that. Him being in the exchange business could care less.. it's just something in the way of getting lower fees.

There is something else to consider in this as I thought about all the players involved. Transfer is one function.. other FBAs that come online and introduce new and useful features are going to have their own fees which the refer program will be able to take advantage of also.

We are kinda like a shop right now with a few products on our shelf and without any other inventory we are really over focused on just our few products pricing/promotion/adoption etc.

What if these few products really don't matter? What if its a new one that comes along?

I'm just trying to think 5 steps ahead and take all elements into consideration while this whole thing rages on.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline puppies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1659
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: puppies
IMO this is what should be highlighted by Amanda on the daily decrypt.  In many ways we are just like bitcoin.  We bicker and fight.  We attack each other personally.  We threaten to take our ball and go home.  In the end though, we vote and we move on.  I have no doubt that bitcrab cares about bitshares and wants to do what he sees as best for the network.  I have no doubt that mindphlux cares about bitshares and wants to do what he sees as best for the network. 

https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
Just curious if the btc was returned to bter? I have about 27 btc-b I'm waiting on and this certainly doesn't help.
In fact, return BTC is not correct, because the trade ( sell BTS for BTC) had happend already, and the trade is real.
he need to return back the fake BTS
it means if he have sold 1million fake BTS, he need return back 1 million real BTS to bter.
because due to the trade, BTER's balance of BTC is correct, but the balance of BTS is not correct.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2016, 03:06:48 pm by alt »

Offline Riverhead

Nothing to explain here, I fucked up. Remove your votes if you must. I will gladly resign from all positions if I need to have as I don't wan't to take part in something that results in a major civil war that leads to a fork.

But you fucked up twice.
Once when you made (or attempted to make) a dishonest profit.
And it happened for the second time, just a moment ago: when you said you did not get any BTC out it but alt just proved you did.

You got your second chance but you just blew it away.
Just curious if the btc was returned to bter? I have about 27 btc-b I'm waiting on and this certainly doesn't help.

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.

I think we need to be careful what we wish for.
It seems to me that bitcrab has enough power to fork BitShares and start over thus effectively push BitShares out of China.
At least I would do that if I were him.

There will be a significant market cap drop if he does that.
We need to be prepared for this.

He has already stated that he would just go to ethereum... so the fork is unlikely if you want to take what he said at face value. If you don't want to take it at face value, this whole thing could just be a staging ground to begin that fork process. First driving a wedge with the chinese community between bitshares and in the process driving the market cap into the ground and thus ensuring a move to Chinashares being complete with little/low risk.

Bitcrab said he is a fighter.. he has boasted this a few times.. that means this isn't a discussion/debate.. its a battle in his view.. and he simply sees him winning or losing it by either getting what he wants or not.

Bitshares community has to decide how to handle irreconcilable players.

If that is really true that only proves he doesn't care about BitShares at all from my pov. It also means BitShares will be hostage of his whims at any point in time.

I would like if we could reach a consensus where everyone gives in a little but the overall outcome is the best for both parties. However I don't like the "This is either going to be like I want or screw you approach". Assuming this is resolved, nothing guarantees us that in the future something similar won't happen and everyone will be at the mercy of his whims.

But in the end, it's the votes that count. If he wins it's because the majority thinks he is right so can't argue about that. Either both parties try to reach an agreement or in the end someone will have to leave or adapt.

The only thing we can take for sure is voting decides everything. Even though my personal opinion is against bitcrab's atm, in the end, if he wins it's because the majority thinks he is right and the majority will move on. Only the minority will be "damaged", but the majority of stakeholders will move on. That's what I like about BitShares. This can be very polemic but a vote is a vote. In the end it's what decides.

Everyone claims he is destroying BitShares but if he wins, does that really mean that? Or does it mean that a minority has a different view from the majority of the stakeholders? Majority holds the decision power. Whatever the outcome is, it will be the grand part of players choosing that option so that only means the other party was wrong. The fact we don't agree doesn't necessarily mean he is going to destroy BitShares. He is going to "damage" the minor part of BitShares while the majority will simply move on like things are supposed to be.

In an ultimate analysis, the one who looses is the weakest link. The other is the strongest and will move on, rightfully.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.

I think we need to be careful what we wish for.
It seems to me that bitcrab has enough power to fork BitShares and start over thus effectively push BitShares out of China.
At least I would do that if I were him.

There will be a significant market cap drop if he does that.
We need to be prepared for this.

He has already stated that he would just go to ethereum... so the fork is unlikely if you want to take what he said at face value. If you don't want to take it at face value, this whole thing could just be a staging ground to begin that fork process. First driving a wedge with the chinese community between bitshares and in the process driving the market cap into the ground and thus ensuring a move to Chinashares being complete with little/low risk.

Bitcrab said he is a fighter.. he has boasted this a few times.. that means this isn't a discussion/debate.. its a battle in his view.. and he simply sees him winning or losing it by either getting what he wants or not.

Bitshares community has to decide how to handle irreconcilable players.


+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline Samupaha

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: samupaha
Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.

I think we need to be careful what we wish for.
It seems to me that bitcrab has enough power to fork BitShares and start over thus effectively push BitShares out of China.
At least I would do that if I were him.

There will be a significant market cap drop if he does that.
We need to be prepared for this.

It's also possible that Bitcrab doesn't give up and will go on with his harmful plans and destroys Bitshares. Either-or, this is a fucked up situation.

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo
I don't see how any of this will result in a fork. We are still in the phase of discussion and solution finding.
It helps no one to separated the network into two even more illliquid networks and splitting user bases. It wouldn't even make sense for bitcrab.

At least I would like to see an ACTUAL PROPOSAL being voted on, then shareholders can voice their opinion by casting an indirect vote.
Furthermore, not every possibility has been discussed.

One way to resolve this in the short term (until we have figured out BSIP#10) is to require LTM for some more operations, currently only witness, committe_create and account create requite LTM. How about we require LTM for asset creation aswell?

IMHO, this discussion is neither going towards civil war nor will it end bitshares' referral program. It's just a matter of moving focus for revenue

Totally.  I would be very surprised if the majority of the community would be so foolish as to react against their own best interests over a parameter setting that is still in discussion.  Granted, the issue has been somewhat clouded by committee member positions (we should get used to that by the way) but the dividing lines are certainly not china vs the rest. Committee members don't have followers, we are not at war.....ridiclous.  The vast majority of people simply want to build businesses, connect with each other, own their wealth in a stable corruption resistant environment.

jakub

  • Guest
Nothing to explain here, I fucked up. Remove your votes if you must. I will gladly resign from all positions if I need to have as I don't wan't to take part in something that results in a major civil war that leads to a fork.

But you fucked up twice.
Once when you made (or attempted to make) a dishonest profit.
And it happened for the second time, just a moment ago: when you said you did not get any BTC out it but alt just proved you did.

You got your second chance but you just blew it away.

Offline mindphlux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
oh, who said this?
Quote
(mindphlux), [28.01.16 15:45]
I believe bitcrab is toxic to the success of bitshares

"I believe" can usually be considered an opinion.

An attack would be "bitcrab, you're an asshole and you're toxic to the success of bitshares"
Learn the difference between opinions and attacks please.
Please consider voting for my witness mindphlux.witness and my committee user mindphlux. I will not vote for changes that affect witness pay.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
I don't see how any of this will result in a fork. We are still in the phase of discussion and solution finding.
It helps no one to separated the network into two even more illliquid networks and splitting user bases. It wouldn't even make sense for bitcrab.

At least I would like to see an ACTUAL PROPOSAL being voted on, then shareholders can voice their opinion by casting an indirect vote.
Furthermore, not every possibility has been discussed.

One way to resolve this in the short term (until we have figured out BSIP#10) is to require LTM for some more operations, currently only witness, committe_create and account create requite LTM. How about we require LTM for asset creation aswell?

IMHO, this discussion is neither going towards civil war nor will it end bitshares' referral program. It's just a matter of moving focus for revenue

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
oh, who said this?
Quote
(mindphlux), [28.01.16 15:45]
I believe bitcrab is toxic to the success of bitshares

Offline mindphlux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
shame on you, all I saw is you and many other people attack bitcrab
and you have to lier continue, here is some copy from the telegraph

What I am doing is *not* attacking, I'm opposing his plan. That is a *BIG* difference. At no time I ever used bad words or personal attacks, I am merly stating my opinion regarding his plans.

Samples:

Quote
I do not think lower fees will magically solve the problems that we're having. The referral program needs to stay intact in order to attract marketeers and users.
How do you earn new users when there's no incentive?

Quote
This. bitcrab is using exchange funds to get people with his 'agenda' voted into the committee and is now staging to do a hostile takeover.  Not to mention that the committee was mislead by him once already, I really hope that users wake up and remove bad actors like him for the stability of the network. This is not good.

Quote
I think you're abusing your power here in this case.

The users of your exchange have not authorized you to vote with THEIR stake.

Those quotes are not attacks, they're opinions and I'm entitled not not like what he's doing.

And yeah, I fucked up. But at least I'm not trying to to start a flamewar here. You can continue to use that episode in October to further discredit me but in reality we're moving towards a fork, and you're doing your part of it by getting people to remove votes for people who oppose you. Good luck with BitsharesCN!

@mindphlux , and how do you explain this?

Nothing to explain here, I fucked up. Remove your votes if you must. I will gladly resign from all positions if I need to have as I don't wan't to take part in something that results in a major civil war that leads to a fork.


Please consider voting for my witness mindphlux.witness and my committee user mindphlux. I will not vote for changes that affect witness pay.

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo
What a great shame.  This community needs to make sure that committee positions are held by people with untarnished reputations that can uphold the ideals which built this network and respect the core purpose of Blockchain technology implemented for a public ledger.  Perhaps no person can be beyond reproach indefinately and we do all make mistakes, but there must be powerful incentives/accountability to make sure those holding these honoured positions of trust make the attempt and understand their tenure will be over forever if they fail.

The fees issue is on the way to being resoved through compromise and discussion.  The issue of integrity within the commitee is far more urgent.  Any genuine conflict of interest must be exposed as must untrustworthy or exploitative behaviour.......the reaction to which should be immediate and final.  Unless we think that there are too few competent people with integrity that are interested in BitShares out there.