Author Topic: Why BitShares is being delisted from Bittrex?  (Read 18376 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline smb8989

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ShawnB
Yes, Bittrex looks pretty silly on this one, but that's their business.

Some people are willing to flush their company's reputation for short term gains, I guess.

I'll take a look at those test cases and maybe do a Steemit post on it.
-----Thanks for posting Stan to let us know what your thoughts are. You guys have truly designed a stunning piece of work. Love the layout and the speed. I will continue to support and buy no matter what price it goes down to..cheers

Offline smb8989

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ShawnB
We have to use more Dex, why the hell is not used massively? it is stupid to rely on centralized exchanges.
...totally agree with you friend..if anyone isn't invested in decentralized exchanges they need their head examined...it protects our God given rights to freedom and privacy..I've been watching youtube guys and there are so called Youtube analysts that have no idea what Bitshares is..i even saw a guy with over 10000 subscribers say they have no pairings and offer no coins...i was dumbfounded..we need to make sure to correct these guys because people are just blowing BTS off

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
I agree too.

But we see what happens when powerful exchanges use their power behind the scenes to hurt others.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile

It does bother me to see this sort of thing being normalized, when did full transparency and the death of financial privacy become a good thing?

If you ask me, not only should all transactions be private by default with optional opt-out, but also market orders should be anonymous, revealing who the trader is , is a significant leak of privacy, that's internal information that the whole internet from order being placed to eternity should have no business knowing about.


Why not work with it on the other side, and have convenient in-wallet functions for exporting trading data, in a non automated manner, to make tax reporting easier .. instead of setting up a system where everyone is guilty by default and the government tracks everything everyone does.

Totally agree with these statements.  +5%

Offline karnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
    • View Profile
I know a lot of exchanges are threatened by the movement toward transparent order books on decentralized exchanges - likely to be embraced when TXSRB.org finishes its negotiations with the American SEC.

It does bother me to see this sort of thing being normalized, when did full transparency and the death of financial privacy become a good thing?

If you ask me, not only should all transactions be private by default with optional opt-out, but also market orders should be anonymous, revealing who the trader is , is a significant leak of privacy, that's internal information that the whole internet from order being placed to eternity should have no business knowing about.


Why not work with it on the other side, and have convenient in-wallet functions for exporting trading data, in a non automated manner, to make tax reporting easier .. instead of setting up a system where everyone is guilty by default and the government tracks everything everyone does.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Yes, Bittrex looks pretty silly on this one, but that's their business.

Some people are willing to flush their company's reputation for short term gains, I guess.

I'll take a look at those test cases and maybe do a Steemit post on it.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline whiskeybravo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Thanks Stan for chiming in.

How did Bitshares fare when you assessed yourselves against the Coinbase "Securities Law Framework for Blockchain Tokens"

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QxOV2dgxO3C_TyVE0-41ZwLlzPmB-EE1NNshJGuedCU/edit#gid=0

https://www.coinbase.com/legal/securities-law-framework.pdf

Its been stated that Bitshares is not a security and does not fit this criteria.  It would be helpful and more clear if someone could check off the point scale in the framework  so folks are clear on the characteristics of how Bitshare is not a security.

Some have also raised concerns about the name being misleading and potentially attracting scrutiny because of its resemblance to security "shares".

Your thoughts?

Bittrex has also provided their policy for why they may delist coins.  https://support.bittrex.com/hc/en-us/articles/202583874?input_string=delisting+of+bts-btc.

They state:

"We look for coins that have high community demand, innovations to crypto-currency technology, or a contribution to science and humanity. We believe in aggressively taking chances on coins and letting the free market sort out which coins should thrive.

Bittrex reserves the right to keep or remove any market from its exchange.

Markets which are more eligible for removal include but are not limited to:

- Markets with less than 0.5 BTC (or equivalent) of average daily volume over a 7 day period and have been on Bittrex for 4 weeks or more.
- Markets that consistency dip below the minimum volume requirement.
- Markets with 0 daily volume.
- Markets with low liquidity. Less that 15 BTC on the Buy side of the order book for Bitcoin markets.
- Coins with no developer support or public developments.
- Coins without working blockchains.
- Coins which do not adhere to their target block times.
- Coins with weak blockchain security. e.g. Low hash rates which can be exploited.
- Coins which violate our policies.
- Coins which have compliance issues."

I don't think Bitshares falls into any of these categories except perhaps compliance.

Thoughts Stan?

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
We have had our lawyers check with the SEC, there is nothing going on with BitShares there.

There is no memory problem, they've been listing BTS for years.

There is no volume problem, we're in the Top Ten.

Latest back channel info is that BitShares has no supporting development team, yet GitHub shows tons of worker updates and the Telegram witness channel is alive with continuing coordination among very serious technical people.  Further, I average a couple articles a week on Steemit.com/@Stan.  Not to mention this forum, the BitShares DEX and HERO telegram channels and that all bytemaster's chains benefit from his current work on EOS which I choose to view as a giant BitShares R&D program.  Wouldn't have been hard at all to find a dozen active BitShares leaders to ask about any such concern.  I'm not exactly low profile myself.



I'm sure they will figure out a better excuse tomorrow.

I know a lot of exchanges are threatened by the movement toward transparent order books on decentralized exchanges - likely to be embraced when TXSRB.org finishes its negotiations with the American SEC.

BitShares has a nice inside track there, having been chosen by Stokens.com as the clean coin DEX on which it will build it's franchise of fully compliant jurisdiction-specific exchanges.

Yeah.  That might have certain nefarious centralized exchanges a bit worried...
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 05:42:52 pm by Stan »
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline severo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
We have to use more Dex, why the hell is not used massively? it is stupid to rely on centralized exchanges.

Offline CryptoNo0b

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
This is bullshit. Many crypto coins experienced similar fall more than once, and they are still far from being dead.

I'm sure it won't be dead either, but look at the price man  :'( I'm heavily invested and believe me, I'm already down 1000's of dollars.
Well, I've decided to hold no matter what. Hopefully, things will start to settle down once it's finally deleted from Bittrex and hopefully, Polo wo'nt do the same anywhere in the near future, because if it does then only God knows where the price will land.  :-X Now is the time to show some strength BTS community.

Offline jckj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
    • View Profile
Because bts lack value suproting ,less user and app growing. If dpos less value ,users and app suproting it means no using no value. btc can get value from very big group of users like facebook's shares.

Few users for dpos meas centralized bts , big group more than 100 million users may can call decentralized bts
« Last Edit: October 04, 2017, 03:35:15 pm by jckj »

Offline moinyoin

1. No one knows why. There has been no reason given by Bittrex at all. They stated they cannot give reasons or assurances on what is delisted.

2. There was no 51% attack and it's very resistant to such attacks. dPoS is designed to specifically resist concentration of wealth with Pareto principle by splitting power to 27 (currently) equally weighted witnesses who are fired if misbehaving. According to dpos white paper, it actually requires 2/3+1 witnesses to resolve all cases, so it's more resistant than 51%.

3. There was no ICO, afaik bitshares was distributed completely via processes like PoW and airdrops in projects it was created from. Therefore, it literally can't be a security. There's not even a company in charge that might've raised that money because it's governed by the very first DAO.

4. We don't know if it was targeted only due to having the word "shares" in title which means little.

5. We can just as easily speculate that bitshares, unlike etheruem, is too decentralized and poses risk to their platform, so it was delisted in fear of competition. The adoption by Bitspark with UN deal might've caused too much fear in its future. Again, speculation like any other.

6. Until China closed all the exchanges responsible for 80% of BTS volume, bittrex was barely even top 10 in importance. The timing of this seems very specific to weakened state its market value is in, but speculation.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2017, 12:23:39 pm by moinyoin »

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
http://stockemperor.com/currencies/sec-purges-cryptocurrencies/

Quote
Bitshares is largest from these cryptos, holds $155 mln in capitalization and fell in just a few minutes by a 24%, while Draco’s price decreased 60% and DAR -58%. This means effectively death for these virtual online coins and big losses for unlucky investors.

This is bullshit. Many crypto coins experienced similar fall more than once, and they are still far from being dead.