Yunbi started voting against all workers except refund/burn workers

[laow]

Good job! 
Bitcoin grows well without any paid "workers", think about Linux. Why can't bitshares?
Does the  Bitshares 2.0,  the Worker attract more developers? No, still these people, but Toast left, Vikram left, alt leaving.
Yep, we against increase the supply. Can you see any public company raise what he wants?
Bitshares need a good reputation more than its technology, then people come, developers come.

[tbone]

If we decide to display a message along these lines, it should probably only be displayed when someone is sending BTS to a known exchange account.  And perhaps the message could be a little more harsh in its tone if sending to a Yunbi account.  Just food for thought. 

[liondani]

give voting power only on bitAssets holders or/and shorters!!!   
(heavily weighted on them with more bts collateral)

[liondani]

It definitely needs to be worded better (more positively) (in a way that promotes and encourages keeping funds in and using the DEX)

 

[liondani]

There could be a warning on bitshares.org and any landing page where people download a wallet:

"WARNING.  Some centralized exchanges  may use any BTS you keep on them by voting with YOUR stake in ways that may not be in your best interest."

 

Yes, a red, bold warning about BTS when first timers visit Bitshares.org or download a BitShares Wallet. Marketing genius...

I am not sure if it would benefit us more than harm us.... Think like the average Joe...

[Pheonike]

Don't forget that that there are people who have BTS on exchanges that have never and probably won't ever use the out client.  That stake will always be in the hands of external exchanges.

[onceuponatime]

There could be a warning on bitshares.org and any landing page where people download a wallet:

"WARNING.  Some centralized exchanges  may use any BTS you keep on them by voting with YOUR stake in ways that may not be in your best interest."

 

Yes, a red, bold warning about BTS when first timers visit Bitshares.org or download a BitShares Wallet. Marketing genius...

It definitely needs to be worded better (more positively) (in a way that promotes and encourages keeping funds in and using the DEX)

[Empirical1.2]

There could be a warning on bitshares.org and any landing page where people download a wallet:

"WARNING.  Some centralized exchanges  may use any BTS you keep on them by voting with YOUR stake in ways that may not be in your best interest."

 

Yes, a red, bold warning about BTS when first timers visit Bitshares.org or download a BitShares Wallet. Marketing genius...

[liondani]

If I park my car in a parking garage that takes my keys and parks it, I understand I no longer have control of my car... but I also understand my car is not going to be used so the garage could operate another business of delivering packages around town for example.

we are parking our money to the banks and nobody cares if they run other business...

[Ben Mason]

There could be a warning on bitshares.org and any landing page where people download a wallet:

"WARNING.  Some centralized exchanges  may use any BTS you keep on them by voting with YOUR stake in ways that may not be in your best interest."

 

That's an interesting start! It's tempting to add ".....and where a proof of reserve is not offered, may be operating a fractional reserve which could lead to market price manipulation and lost funds."

[TravelsAsia]

There could be a warning on bitshares.org and any landing page where people download a wallet:

"WARNING.  Some centralized exchanges  may use any BTS you keep on them by voting with YOUR stake in ways that may not be in your best interest."

 

[onceuponatime]

There could be a warning on bitshares.org and any landing page where people download a wallet:

"WARNING.  Some centralized exchanges  may use any BTS you keep on them by voting with YOUR stake in ways that may not be in your best interest."

[Ben Mason]

I agree with svk...
From what I see the ANTI anti-dilution  movement declares all arguments for responsible spending  'stupid' or completely ignore them and continue claiming no such were made
The other tactic is claiming 'anti-dilutioner' somehow try to destroy BTS while the reality is ALL workers are well and voted in.
I know it will be too much to ask, having in mind the above behavior, but how about accepting for a second "dilution is generally not good right now, we have to try to prove or at least argue why this particular spending will be beneficial!" Every worker explaining in detail how his work will increase the market cap despite the dilution it will cost.
What I mean is addressing concerns upfront, instead of putting labels on groups and claiming they mean bad before their actions have prevented a single worker getting paid.

Any reasonable approach that advocates for accountable workers and appropriately used dilution is to everyone's benefit. This should be obvious to all. As obvious as no dilution under any circumstances is obviously not. There are other ways to change the situation for the better than stopping worker dilution, even in the short term. Let's do these things first and let development continue.

[lil_jay890]

There is no social contact because social contacts are not enforceable.  If you want to prevent exchanges from voting, then it must be coded into the blockchain somehow... And to me doing this sounds like a waste of money.

A large shareholder or group of share holders keeping their bts on the yunbi exchange may have requested that yunbi vote for a particular proxy as well.

[Ben Mason]

Agreed. In short there would need to be a consequence that prevents Yunbi from continuing their unilateral use of customer funds (without verifiable consent) or we need to innovate and adapt the platform so that similar exploits aren't possible or we need an alternative platform that has learned from these experiences and is more resilient.  I'm not saying for a minute that any of this is easy or without cost......trouble was inevitable from the outset.

From a slightly philosophical point of view, no human being on this planet has ever lived within a corruption resistant economy for any great period of time.  Even those currently fighting for an edge or tending towards greed for whatever reason may in fact prefer to live in a world that might  be possible should a platform like BitShares succeed. The confluence of old and new partly contributes to the problems all of crypto is currently facing. How do you convince someone who can exploit an edge today, in order to make a million, to sacrifice that edge in favour of something with integrity that helps many more than just himself? 

Apathy is one of the biggest challenges so the platform needs to provide all the support it can.....but then the platform must also be compelling enough to grow and gather network effect. It's this combination of issues that make continued innovation/development and integrity absolutely critical.

Such thing would not be possible with regular stocks, because there is a name attached to stocks certificate. There is no proof of ownership in bitshares. Possession means ownership.  If you give your funds away, even temporarily, you give your voting power away. Everybody just needs to realise this.

Sure. Perhaps awareness of the issue is all that is necessary to at least ensure that exchanges are forced to gather consent for their actions transparently. Or maybe heighten awarness of the fact that the owner of the key owns the funds. Certainly any other course of action requires a lot more work and uncertainty.....though may be more robust!

Perhaps we should start by trying to create awareness so people (not just BTS holders) can altogether avoid this unethical and despicable exchange.  Let's also consider specifically incentivizing BTS holders to get their BTS out of there and onto the DEX. 

And by the way, it's one thing to vote against all workers no matter what.  Such action can perhaps be chalked up to pure, unadulterated ignorance on the part of the "anti-dilution" crowd.  But it's another thing entirely to mount an attack by attempting to steal funds from the reserve pool.  For now, I'm not going to say what I think we should do about this if it continues.  But we should all should start thinking about it.  And we should think outside of the box.

Yes, awareness of the facts......totally, let's do it. I was not aware of an attack on the reserve pool, would you mind explaining that a bit further? If that is the case, I would say a more radical approach is absolutely required.