Has OpenLedger provided solvency with a Proof of Reserve?

[yvv]

UIA issuers have to provide proof of reserve for sure. This doesn't need to be done in the ledger though. A detailed explanation on where are funds are spent on external site would is enough.

Sure, it's just that as a new user, do you want to browse through multiple sites or do you want to have all the information in a single place? This way you can access it via client or via cryptofresh.

People shouldn't have to hunt for info.

The detailed reserve layout may be quite complex. Think about bit20 ETF of even more complex index. If it is possible to keep all the details in blockchain, fine for me, otherwise, a link to external site is good enough.
 

[Akado]

UIA issuers have to provide proof of reserve for sure. This doesn't need to be done in the ledger though. A detailed explanation on where are funds are spent on external site would is enough.

Sure, it's just that as a new user, do you want to browse through multiple sites or do you want to have all the information in a single place? This way you can access it via client or via cryptofresh.

People shouldn't have to hunt for info.

[Pheonike]

Yeah, it should not be coded into UIA creation.

[yvv]

UIA issuers have to provide proof of reserve for sure. This doesn't need to be done in the ledger though. A detailed explanation on where are funds are spent on external site is good enough.

[Akado]

I think the addition of such a field is a good idea, but it shouldn't be a required field to create a UIA. There are more uses of a UIA than we can possibly imagine, some of which a "Proof of Reserve" may not make sense or be useful.

The more rules and restrictions we invent to head off problems the more side affects it will create.

It is not a restriction or mandatory. It's just info that, if provided, brings more credibility to the asset. More credibility increases chances for adoption and success. Then it's up to each user to decide which asset they want to own/trade. It's only providing more info to whoever is making his due diligence.

[noisy]

 

[Thom]

I think the addition of such a field is a good idea, but it shouldn't be a required field to create a UIA. There are more uses of a UIA than we can possibly imagine, some of which a "Proof of Reserve" may not make sense or be useful.

The more rules and restrictions we invent to head off problems the more side affects it will create.

[Akado]

Just came across this on r/bitcoin https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4c99lq/how_not_to_do_proof_of_reserves_a_look_at_uphold/

Although transparency is one of the things we value the most, I don't recall OpenLedger providing a Proof of Reserve.

I think this is an important problem to address because sooner or later it will come around. Now imagine if the project that was exactly created due to transparency issues, had it's biggest partner so far no being transparent. Quite the irony.

With this I would like to suggest for a new field on the UIA creation template to be created. Called Proof of Reserve, with a link or links to any cryptocurrency accounts that can prove solvency, plus those need to be signed by the owner as proof they actually own the account. Then the committee, since they were elected by the community could add their "stamp" of confirmation that a message was signed, confirming the address is legit. Could that be done? Add a field on a UIA that the committee could have access? I guess if they have some kind of permissions over the asset they could do so? Even if low? This should be done so that the actual owner of the UIA couldn't change it after. So the committee would be the only ones with permission to flag that field as true or false.

This way the community could whitelist assets and everyone would know which ones are trustworthy and new users would also have less chances of getting scammed by fake assets, which, sooner or later, will happen.

We want transparency, we need to start with ourselves first. Otherwise it will come around when we least expect and make irreparable damage.