So, whichpeople who worked on bitshares projects ended up NOT being scammers?

[alt]

why so many scammers here?
I think the reason is very clear.
this community like the kindly word, like beauty word, can't accept strict word.
Bytemaster give 50K USD to a random person, support him for a GOLD gateway. he know this person only several days.
bitcrab, who run the most success CNY gateway, get nothing from here, many people even told the worst word to him.
James Gong, Shenbo, Gulu,  ever run several business based Bitshares, was left becsuse of Bytemaster's merge. they go to Etherum, and they are very success now.
and many others who talk something strict to Bitshares, they are not welcome here, and left finally.

many project/workers, they said beauty word here, they give a shit, but they get money easy.
this is why so many scammer come here. because of the stupid community.

[fav]

Solcert or Solomon and nonsense as my friend @tonyk used to call it does not look very promising either.. I hope that does not end up being a scam but...no updates from @SolomonSollarsNSense for a while does not look good..I remember back in the days I decided to through some bts to solcert instead of peerplays..how stupid was that??

he's kind of active on telegram though

[mf-tzo]

Solcert or Solomon and nonsense as my friend @tonyk used to call it does not look very promising either.. I hope that does not end up being a scam but...no updates from @SolomonSollarsNSense for a while does not look good..I remember back in the days I decided to through some bts to solcert instead of peerplays..how stupid was that??

[davidpbrown]

Moonstone wallet was a scam?

Damn.. I was hoping to be surprised about MoonStone.. all that nonsense has left a bad impression of BitShares. Tis a pity.

I should have seen the signs.. too must hype and marketing from Dan/Stan/cowboys than genuine intent to follow through to completion but rather did not want to believe it :/

Still I like the tech and the idea but it's a long way back.. the first step back would be Moonstone honouring their commitment to moonfund holders.. but that does seem unlikely now.

[chryspano]

It's true.
most share holders are blind

Yea, me too! 

look at the followers of xeroc, almost 90% are inactive account. never use DEX.

I didn't know that I had to use the DEX in order to qualify to set a proxy or hold bts.

and some big share holder never vote or discuss.
http://cryptofresh.com/u/pr1modiaprile
http://cryptofresh.com/u/tsuratsura-3557

How do you know that? do you know who are the owners of those accounts? for some reason they might want to keep their votes as reserves or whatever

[alt]

It's true.
most share holders are blind or unconcerned. it's very hard to change this, many people have to dump and leave.

look at the followers of xeroc, almost 90% are inactive account. never use DEX.
http://cryptofresh.com/u/stan
http://cryptofresh.com/u/alohacs
http://cryptofresh.com/u/evan
http://cryptofresh.com/u/invictus
http://cryptofresh.com/u/virtual-ventures
http://cryptofresh.com/u/coldstorage1

and some big share holder never vote or discuss.
http://cryptofresh.com/u/pr1modiaprile
http://cryptofresh.com/u/tsuratsura-3557

the vote system are scam for some person in some sense.
I would rather say it's not scam, it's just stupid, it's just need more time to grow up.

Bitshares may not be a scam, but its a great platform for extracting value from shareholders.  4 proxies having the ability to control the entire system is insane.  Especially when the proxies can vote in their own workers at whatever pay they want.  Centralization.

You do realize that this is personally offensive? Have I not taken sufficient measures to balance the conflicting interest as worker and proxy? Do you at all realize how my worker is setup?
Also, by blaming the proxies, you are essentially blaming the shareholders that handed over their voting power to them. It's their freedom to do so and I they disagree with what I do/did, then they should remove their vote (which is what I asked them to do prior to voting for my own worker, btw).

I get that you are offended, but this isn't an attack on you.  I think you are an honest person who wants to see bitshares grow.  It's to point out how centralized the system is.  It's a basic design that is a huge flaw.  It allows the exchanges at anytime to take over and control the whole system.

It's a good thing that you informed your voters about this, but it still is a massive conflict of interest.  Voters set you as a proxy so that they don't have to follow every detail.  Whats the point of them setting you as a proxy and still having to follow along with day to day operations to see your disclaimer that you will be voting in your own worker?

Bottom line is 4 people control the system now, and if the exchanges wanted to, they could control everything.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I know most people here sweep this risks under the rug, but it's why bts isn't gaining new investors.

Is it? Fix this one thing and presto.. gain new investors?

[yvv]

I have already voted, like many other people have, with my feet by dumping my bitshares. 

Congratulations, one of those 4 proxies got your stake.

This community is so weird, no one ever wants to hear the reasons why bitshares has plummeted in price and popularity.  People just want this to be an echo chamber on how great and cool things are.

This is DPOS dude, show your stake to be heard.

[lil_jay890]

Still by that logic it means that if I wanted to set Xeroc as my proxy I should follow all worker proposals, then see what Xeroc is voting for, then decide whether or not I should still have Xeroc as my proxy.  Why wouldn't I just vote for everything on my own instead of setting a proxy?  The whole point of a proxy is so that the shareholder isn't burdened with checking worker proposals constantly, and I'm sure many of the shareholders who have proxies set are not constantly checking what their proxy is doing.

Of course you need to follow what your proxy is doing, not every day, but at least once in a while. This is similar to electing a congressman, you need to follow the news in media to make sure that your delegate is doing what you expect him to do, and if he does not, you change your vote during next election. This way you don't need to make a vote on every single political issue every day. The difference between bitshares and real world political system is that in bitshares, if you think that it is easier for you to make every single vote on your own, hey, you are welcomed to do so.

Once again these are all things that people "should" be doing.  Just because someone "should" do something, doesn't mean they will do it.  People "should" take there bts off the exchanges, yet they don't.  So far we have seen the system centralize into 4 proxies (3 of which are chinese, and I believe controlled by the same person), so it's centralized between 2 parties.  Relying on what people "should" do is a mistake.  People are going to do what's easiest, not whats best.

What people "should" do is up to each person himself to decide. If community chose to trust to 4 proxies, this means that there are no more trustworthy members other than these 4. If you don't like how they vote, sorry dude, you are outvoted, this is how voting with stake works. If you don't like it, make your party, get your stake and change it.

I have already voted, like many other people have, with my feet by dumping my bitshares.  This community is so weird, no one ever wants to hear the reasons why bitshares has plummeted in price and popularity.  People just want this to be an echo chamber on how great and cool things are.

The whole "deal with it, that's the way it was design and if you don't like it leave" argument is dumb.  People have dealt with it and left.

[yvv]

Still by that logic it means that if I wanted to set Xeroc as my proxy I should follow all worker proposals, then see what Xeroc is voting for, then decide whether or not I should still have Xeroc as my proxy.  Why wouldn't I just vote for everything on my own instead of setting a proxy?  The whole point of a proxy is so that the shareholder isn't burdened with checking worker proposals constantly, and I'm sure many of the shareholders who have proxies set are not constantly checking what their proxy is doing.

Of course you need to follow what your proxy is doing, not every day, but at least once in a while. This is similar to electing a congressman, you need to follow the news in media to make sure that your delegate is doing what you expect him to do, and if he does not, you change your vote during next election. This way you don't need to make a vote on every single political issue every day. The difference between bitshares and real world political system is that in bitshares, if you think that it is easier for you to make every single vote on your own, hey, you are welcomed to do so.

Once again these are all things that people "should" be doing.  Just because someone "should" do something, doesn't mean they will do it.  People "should" take there bts off the exchanges, yet they don't.  So far we have seen the system centralize into 4 proxies (3 of which are chinese, and I believe controlled by the same person), so it's centralized between 2 parties.  Relying on what people "should" do is a mistake.  People are going to do what's easiest, not whats best.

What people "should" do is up to each person himself to decide. If community chose to trust to 4 proxies, this means that there are no more trustworthy members other than these 4. If you don't like how they vote, sorry dude, you are outvoted, this is how voting with stake works. If you don't like it, make your party, get your stake and change it.

[lil_jay890]

Still by that logic it means that if I wanted to set Xeroc as my proxy I should follow all worker proposals, then see what Xeroc is voting for, then decide whether or not I should still have Xeroc as my proxy.  Why wouldn't I just vote for everything on my own instead of setting a proxy?  The whole point of a proxy is so that the shareholder isn't burdened with checking worker proposals constantly, and I'm sure many of the shareholders who have proxies set are not constantly checking what their proxy is doing.

Of course you need to follow what your proxy is doing, not every day, but at least once in a while. This is similar to electing a congressman, you need to follow the news in media to make sure that your delegate is doing what you expect him to do, and if he does not, you change your vote during next election. This way you don't need to make a vote on every single political issue every day. The difference between bitshares and real world political system is that in bitshares, if you think that it is easier for you to make every single vote on your own, hey, you are welcomed to do so.

Once again these are all things that people "should" be doing.  Just because someone "should" do something, doesn't mean they will do it.  People "should" take there bts off the exchanges, yet they don't.  So far we have seen the system centralize into 4 proxies (3 of which are chinese, and I believe controlled by the same person), so it's centralized between 2 parties.  Relying on what people "should" do is a mistake.  People are going to do what's easiest, not whats best.

These 2 parties have massive influence over bts currently.  Comparing this to a congressman is misleading... congressman have little power in their own right.  One rogue congressman isn't going to destroy the US goverment.  In fact even if the president doesn't have ultimate authority.  The power that the proxy system allows to be concentrated is ludicrous and dangerous.

[yvv]

Still by that logic it means that if I wanted to set Xeroc as my proxy I should follow all worker proposals, then see what Xeroc is voting for, then decide whether or not I should still have Xeroc as my proxy.  Why wouldn't I just vote for everything on my own instead of setting a proxy?  The whole point of a proxy is so that the shareholder isn't burdened with checking worker proposals constantly, and I'm sure many of the shareholders who have proxies set are not constantly checking what their proxy is doing.

Of course you need to follow what your proxy is doing, not every day, but at least once in a while. This is similar to electing a congressman, you need to follow the news in media to make sure that your delegate is doing what you expect him to do, and if he does not, you change your vote during next election. This way you don't need to make a vote on every single political issue every day. The difference between bitshares and real world political system is that in bitshares, if you think that it is easier for you to make every single vote on your own, hey, you are welcomed to do so.

[lil_jay890]

Whats the point of them setting you as a proxy and still having to follow along with day to day operations to see your disclaimer that you will be voting in your own worker?

Having to follow one person you trust is much easier than having to follow everyone and everything. How can someone vote for anything or anyone if he is completly clueless?

Bottom line is 4 people control the system now, and if the exchanges wanted to, they could control everything.

imo they don't control but they run the system and the stakeholders can remove the support at any time. Exchanges are only good at getting hacked anything else pays too little.

Still by that logic it means that if I wanted to set Xeroc as my proxy I should follow all worker proposals, then see what Xeroc is voting for, then decide whether or not I should still have Xeroc as my proxy.  Why wouldn't I just vote for everything on my own instead of setting a proxy?  The whole point of a proxy is so that the shareholder isn't burdened with checking worker proposals constantly, and I'm sure many of the shareholders who have proxies set are not constantly checking what their proxy is doing.

Also, run and control are analogous terms.  And your point of exchanges are only good at being hacked proves my point about the risk they pose.  Even if the exchanges never have any intent of taking control and damaging bitshares, a hacker could "easily" hack the exchange and take control of the BTS and destroy the system.

I know most people here sweep this risks under the rug, but it's why bts isn't gaining new investors.

[chryspano]

Whats the point of them setting you as a proxy and still having to follow along with day to day operations to see your disclaimer that you will be voting in your own worker?

Having to follow one person you trust is much easier than having to follow everyone and everything. How can someone vote for anything or anyone if he is completly clueless?

Bottom line is 4 people control the system now, and if the exchanges wanted to, they could control everything.

imo they don't control but they run the system and the stakeholders can remove the support at any time. Exchanges are only good at getting hacked anything else pays too little.

[lil_jay890]

Bitshares may not be a scam, but its a great platform for extracting value from shareholders.  4 proxies having the ability to control the entire system is insane.  Especially when the proxies can vote in their own workers at whatever pay they want.  Centralization.

You do realize that this is personally offensive? Have I not taken sufficient measures to balance the conflicting interest as worker and proxy? Do you at all realize how my worker is setup?
Also, by blaming the proxies, you are essentially blaming the shareholders that handed over their voting power to them. It's their freedom to do so and I they disagree with what I do/did, then they should remove their vote (which is what I asked them to do prior to voting for my own worker, btw).

I get that you are offended, but this isn't an attack on you.  I think you are an honest person who wants to see bitshares grow.  It's to point out how centralized the system is.  It's a basic design that is a huge flaw.  It allows the exchanges at anytime to take over and control the whole system.

It's a good thing that you informed your voters about this, but it still is a massive conflict of interest.  Voters set you as a proxy so that they don't have to follow every detail.  Whats the point of them setting you as a proxy and still having to follow along with day to day operations to see your disclaimer that you will be voting in your own worker?

Bottom line is 4 people control the system now, and if the exchanges wanted to, they could control everything.