Bitcoin Forum

With the closure of LQC on Coinotron.com we believe there is no sufficient infrastructure in place to justify further offering LQC trading, especially in light of the risk of double spending attacks. Please withdraw your coins by latest 30 Nov 2012.

We are sorry to see another chain being taken offline from our exchange, but considering the low hashing power of the chain, we can no longer take the risk of potential double spend attacks.

Sad to see it go  :(

I'm sure it can still be put to some use as others have suggested

So is this a good time to ask if you can add TRC Terracoin ?

Why can't we complete trades that we have on the exchange? Why not at least give us a deadline when you will close trading rather then such an abrupt closure?

The abrupt trading stop was in response to the feedback we got when we switched off I0Coin.  People where complaining that it was unfair to those who only access the exchange occassionally. Usually the delisting follows with a noticeable price drop. Those who have open buy orders are then typically caught in surprise.

I have 14,964 LQC to trade OBO, even nothing if no one else responds. I can't get the client to work.

Then consider this a point of feedback to the contrary.  I was ecstatic to see I purchased a quarter million I0Coins when the price dropped.  I don't consider Vircurex the be all end all of alternate cryptocurrency existence.

The coins existed before Vircurex and they will stick around for a while after Vircurex.

I'd love to gobble up some cheap Liquidcoins if I was given the chance.

I will be contacting steelhouse if I get time to mess with the client before the withdrawal period ends (otherwise, I'll be donating my LQD to the highest bidder (zeros welcome) as well.

I'll take your LQC coins off uwhat issue u having with the client? i uploaded a blockchain to download if that ur issue? 

I need a LQC address to send them too also.  i have more in a backup wallet.  So I don't want to use a gimmick to get the client working.

You can send them right here bud:

vf1cF9amdcV9qt1G7UuAXyg2iWSXfWVsRZ

What's the client doing? Only issue I ever have with it is it sometimes fails to close completely, then whines when I try to restart it.

Eh... clear the order book, then make the announcement?

Clearing the orderbook helps to eliminate the surprise trades, but it does not solve the risk (on the contrary this risk exponentially rises) of double spend attack after the massive hash rate drop due to the announcement.

Just sent you 122 LQC ;D

Selling 50000 Liquicoins, at any price in BTC

Sold !!!

TY! Happy turkey day!

Good call.  Tho you'd have to be pretty messed in the head to waste time doing a 51% attack on a dying currency at that point, no?  And if the order book is clear, there's no orders to fill during the attack?

Guess it's a no-win scenario.

No problem :)

We disussed the process for quite a long time, yes one of the options on the table was to clear the orderbook but ultimately we decided against it for (summary of our discussions)
 - 51% attack
 - trading bots, there are a few active and they'ld be immediately trading again
 - how to deal with the fact that we (the Exchange) modify/delete orders of people without their consent. That's quite a different fact from just stop offering the service of trading.  Users (especially those users who had bought Put-Options) could argue that they lost out a whole deal of money due to the order cancellation by the service provider.

All-in-all decommissioning a chain will always be an upleasant task, some users will prefer the orderbook reset, others will prefer the immediate termination, etc.

It's not much different from real live (or Cryptostocks, question what's your suggested process on delisting securities on your exchanges? We might need to align ourself here not to generate too much confusion or misunderstandings in the community) , when a security gets delisted on an exchange, the exchange doesn't delete the orderbook and then reopens it for a short time to let some of the shareholders do a last moment transaction.

That's an excellent question.

The stock/bond exchange doesn't have to worry about the 51% attack issues, so I figured it would be:

- clear order book
- announce delisting XX days in the future.
- allow trading for those days, with all traders taking the risk that the asset issuer will continue the asset after delisting.
- halt trading, still allowing asset issuer and asset holders to see what they hold when trading is stopped.  (keeping in mind that on the exchanges I'm dealing with, all asset issuers can see their asset holders at all times)
- XX days (30?  90?) after trading was halted, remove the asset from the exchange.

The bots aspect worries me a bit, but bots have always been risky to operate, for a ton of reasons.  I think it's the bot operator's problem if the bot tries to trade after the order book clears.

Cheers.