Bitcoin Forum

Cryptsy is a great place to trade alt coins, it is my favorite place.

However, myself and many others noted that there are too many coins on it. On one hand, some coins virtually have no trades each day, on the other hand some new and great coins can not be traded there because of the limitations of the resources (servers, disks, memory etc). One suggestion is that we periodically delist those coins that consistently have very low trading volumes. Does cryptsy have such process in place?

From last 24 hour's data, here are the top 15 coins with lowest volumes (last 24 hrs):

NBL/BTC    Nibble → BitCoin    4.00000000
CNC/BTC    CHNCoin → BitCoin    14.21960000
CPR/LTC    CopperBars → LiteCoin    16.13666584
BTB/BTC    BitBar → BitCoin    21.71669444
ELC/BTC    ElaCoin → BitCoin    33.09783564
PYC/BTC    PayCoin → BitCoin    39.00000000    
NMC/BTC    NameCoin → BitCoin    45.22503747
BTG/BTC    BitGem → BitCoin    50.33281928
YBC/BTC    YBCoin → BitCoin    79.13253595
NVC/BTC    NovaCoin → BitCoin    117.27379414
HYC/BTC    HyperCoin → BitCoin    302.00000000
DBL/LTC    Doubloons → LiteCoin    450.29868286
BTE/BTC    ByteCoin → BitCoin    525.11783463    
DVC/LTC    DevCoin → LiteCoin    599.18201988       
TRC/BTC    TerraCoin → BitCoin    609.79722491

I'd suggest that they be delisted, so cryptsy can list better and active coins for trades. This is also in the best interests of cryptsy.

I did not suggest these are bad coins. For example, NMC/NVC/TRC are great coins, but they mostly trade at exchanges like btc-e.com. People come to cryptsy not for trading these coins, but they are great ones.

Support! Very valid points. Very low volume=no interests, and thus should be delisted.

wrong above. bte is in that list as an example,., and recent polls by me have proven there is still quite a bit of interest in it

To be fair, some have more coins and some have less coins, maybe (trading volume)/(total coin supply) is a better measure for the trader's interests, and we can use 7-day average. This will be a more precise indicator.

interest or not, is not what you said, it is shown in the trades. There's no disguise of it. Making polls you can do whatever you like, is of no indication to me at all.

im ot arguing with that, but the current trades can change over time also the insanely high diff on bte and slow block time affects the trade's

I agree, that's why I suggested to use a 7-day average, or even 14-day average.

i think it should be voted on in order to decide. i know bte would be traded a lot if it wasnt diff locked like it is atm

16 CPR is like 10000 blocks worth of coins. I would say that's pretty decent flow lol

Nice research though

A "delousing" process.

You can just de-select the coins you don't want to see on Cryptsy.
I don't see a problem here.

ahmed is making a lot of sense listen to him..
and nuggets had 0 trading in one 24 hr period yet that is not in your list..

what do you suggest you replace these coins with then ? today's crappy scam coin of the day ?
why feed the monster ? your basically helping promote shady dev's that want to hide and pump new coins every 24 hrs.
People jump on every single coin they hear about then demand they be on exchanges and your guys and the shady dev's are killing the scene..

and i did my research too (looked at cryptsy's main page stats lol)

I agree, that's why I proposed to use 7-day average value of (trading volume)/(total coin supply), this should give the true picture.

Also, I know I touched someone's nerve, yes these crappy coins that have no interests at all. Post whatever you like to say, but your words will not change the *facts*.

thanks, i can name 50% of coins there which have lost dev support

Wouldn't it make more sense to measure how many bitcoins or dollars or something worth of coin traded?

Especially since what will pay for more disk space and so on - server resources - is presumably the actual fees, converted into whatever currency such bills get paid in?

Why does it matter whether a million dollars of trade in a coin happens to be one billionth of the number of those coins that exist, or 100% of them, or whether it is a fraction of a coin or a billion coins?

Even if more than 100% of all the coins of a given type that were ever minted trade (due to velocity, every coin of it changing hands several times a day), if the fees on that don't cover the server/hosting/etc resources consumed it is one of the ones that needs to go.

Just being popular shouldn't matter if it can't pay its bills...

-MarkM-

+100000 markm

Thanks. It occurred to me to look at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/inbtc.html ... Supposedly one Martian BotCoin was worth 309.49363387 BiTCoins some hours ago when that table was collated.

Cryptsy should be so lucky as to have someone trade a Martian BotCoin there. Even though 21 million of them exist, all pre-mined. :P

-MarkM-

I also did some research...
And went through about a dozen obscure coins on Cryptsy...
And they all pretty much averaged about 0.5 BTC/day = $65/day...
So if fees are 0.2% that's $0.13/day gross profit.

Are these people slave workers wearing dog collars? I'm basically speechless.

hey i have namecoins.
Nothing wrong with them.
They're stable and be used for .bit domains if I ever wanted one for some reason.

Yea, and Doubloons are historic, one of the first clones! Pfft to your posturing against them ;)

I don't think so.

Cryptsy is the place where you could buy most if not every crypto with a marketcap bigger than imagination. It's their niche to trade a lot of alternative coins and helps the altcoin community. Their prices f.e. are used to calculate the marketcaps. Removing a coin wouldn't benefit many noticable but'd upset a lot of people.

HYC, CNC, CRC, NAN, GIL Markets will be closing on OCT 1st.

Delisting is a good idea. What are your criteria, though? Average Volume, maybe?

Its more the strength of the network and the DEV support and of course volume plays a part.

There are at least another 10 coins that are abandoned and low network hashrate.  I hope you have a more stringent listing process too so that crap is not just replaced with crap.

Is hardware/bandwidth/etc limitations really that great? I don't imagine a trade pair that doesn't have much volume would actually take up that many resources. If I am wrong, please explain!

It would be nice if there was a market health stat. Im not sure exactly which variables would be factored in but i'm sure something could be made that helps indicate which markets are actually trading and sustainable.

As an example, I'm currently running 24 altcoin daemons. Collectively they are consuming 5.5GB worth of RAM (one client is gobbling up 1.7GB of that!) and about 33% constant load equivalent of one CPU core. Peer to peer traffic is a little harder to work out, but it's going to be at least 200-300GB per month. So it does add up.

  NMC, NVC & TRC don't deserve to be on any de-listed list anywhere once listed. Nor do others unless their values fall far too low to be worthy of an Exchanges services. You must be joking!  NMC, NVC & TRC are major contenders and to request their de-listing is not even remotely proper, nor prudent.


 Patience will be rewarded. Many are far too impatient.


 Only Prudent Regulations are sensible. Not self serving ones.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Let the Real Free market work. Otherwise the alternative is this: Meet the New Bosses, Same as the Old Bosses.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



 Decentralized. Real Competition. True Free Marketplace.


 Not Controlled for self serving types that demand Power & Control over all others including their competition.



 By all means flame away. I for one don't care what flamers say or do, nor do I care about them in the least. This place is full of those types, but they wont win in the end.

 Lastly, this isn't an attack. But a wake up call! I hope you understand that. If not your it's your loss.


Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware!