I was thinking of putting out an offer to borrow shares to short them. I wouldn't be able to without transfers.
Also, the business model of Oz.AUD (not yet migrated to 2.0) requires transfers to function.
We can always add the option to short shares, and offer your own shares to be lent out for shorting, and get a small payment. We'll be adding specific functionality to allow Oz.AUD to function. |
|
|
|
|
It would be a fee, % of the average (over 5 days) trade price of an asset.
This would mean assets that haven't traded pay no fee.
I agree with copumpkin, in that part of the fee for GLBSE trades is to pay for the market to match it, and if transferring then only 1/2 that fee would be applicable.
So if the trade fee is 0.5% then the transfer fee is 0.25%
Reasonable?
|
|
|
|
How do we implement asset transfers (transfers, not trades, trades work just fine) in a way that is fair to all?
Transfers should have a fee. The fee should be based on the last trading price or initial offering price and should be the normal .5%. This would solve all of the problems (any sales outside the system) and still getting you guys paid for host the trading and IPO. I feel this is the simplest solution and accounts for most if not all transfers. If everyone is OK with this option, then this is how we'll go about it. A transfer fee for asset/share transfers, 0.5% of a 5 day average trade price Is this acceptable? |
|
|
|
Without sending an email to support@glbse.com , using the email address you signed up with we are unable to know which account is having the problem and therefor unable to do anything about it. Please see this announcement we made on the forum on how to get support for GLBSENefario. |
|
|
|
Personally I don't see any reason why asset transfers would be wanted by anyone doing legitimate business. The exchange exists for a reason and all trades/transfers should be made publicly on the exchange. Allowing these asset transfers goes against transparency and seems to contradict the principles of Bitcoin.
You're absolutely right. Why foster competition between trading platforms ? Why fight centralization of the market ? Why not ensure that everything is controlled by a few folks ? Are you out of your effing mind ? Now now, lets keep this thread on topic, how do we implement asset transfers (transfers, not trades, trades work just fine) in a way that is fair to all? |
|
|
|
|
Great thread
I just want to restate what our support account said, that is that transfers are suspended temporarily, and will be back up in action before the gigavps IPO, which will not in any way be impeded.
Trading (buying/selling shares) is as normal, and has NOT been stopped.
There are NO LIMITATIONS on transfering bitcoin between accounts.
I also want to apologize for the miss-communication and any unease it may have caused.
Many of you are aware that I've been rather busy as of late, and have not had time to keep track of the details of most shares and IPO's as they come onto the market.
I only became aware yesterday that GigaVPS was doing a pre-sale of shares, and not only that but doing everything manually. Clearly this is something that we will have to bake right into GLBSE IPO's, the ability to do pre-sales (so the whole process is transparent and automated).
It's a great idea with many obvious advantage and uses.
As to why would GigaVPS bother to use GLBSE (as opposed to doing everything by hand), we'll I'm sure he's busy making his shareholders profit, it also allows him to take advantage of the voting functionality on GLBSE. The biggest advantage is not to GigaVPS himself, but to his shareholders. Being listed on GLBSE allows his shareholders to cashout into a ready and waiting market that is growing extremely fast.
As was stated, there are legitimate uses for have account to account transfers of assets. We will allow unrestricted transfers between users personal accounts and asset issuer accounts.
The question that still needs to be answered is how to allow transfers of assets, while at the same time being fair to GLBSE.
We would very much like your input on this issue.
Nefario
|
|
|
|
Wooops, forgot to take the 2factor auth part off the signup form. The general idea being that two factor auth is only enabled from settings, stopping people from turning it on without knowing what they are doing. Everyone who has had it enabled and was not able to get their 2factor auth code please send an email to support@glbse.com using the email address you signed up with. copumpkin, if you have any issues with GLBSE you need to contact support@glbse.com first. The support address is there to help you out and solve any issues you have. Nefario. |
|
|
|
Would it be possible to make the "contact email" in the settings direct the user to sending a message to my GLBSE mail account?
Wha? Your mail account on GLBSE (i.e. the little mail icon) or The email address you use for GLBSE For the first option each asset page already has a "mail asset issuer" link. |
|
|
|
|
I'll be moving the admin panel from the assets page to portfolio soon enough.
|
|
|
|
In charts total volume to date (since GLBSE2.0 opened) how shows.
Awesome. Would it be possible to insert an extra space between these lines so the numbers don't run together? And asset issuers can update the details of their asset (not the contract itself though, thats next).
How do you do this? I don't see an option anywhere. Go to your assets page, look at the admin panel, there is a link to update details there. |
|
|
|
as far as I could find out, you only can activate 2step auth for any of the 3 options and it's a one way street.
once you enable it for any of the options, it stays on and can not be changed later.
the good news is, all 3 options when activated, return the same code so it's enough to write it down once.
if you missed three chances to write down a code can't help you.
if you can't do anything now means you already clicked on all 3 buttons that activate 2step auth for withdrawal, transfer and password change and you're done. if you did not have 2step auth activated prior to that step, no idea how to help you now.
if you need a new account, just create a new one (with a different email, though) and use the new one.
deleting an account is something only nefario can help you with
Setting up the account was a mess. Everything I did led to a "Internal Service Error" and after twenty tries with different emails, usernames, and two step auth settings, I finally got in. However, I don't know which email it is using or which two step auth choices I selected, and the password is temporary and very weak. Also, nothing shows up under settings, so I can't view/change email, view which two step auth settings are selected, or change password. The settings page shows absolutely nothing. I'd rather have the account deleted and try registering again. However, Nefario is not responding to days old PMs, even though it shows him as "online" many times since I've sent the PMs. This has been a very frustrating start to GLBSE. This has now been cleaned up. Creating a new account no longer asks the user if they want to use twofactor authentication. That's now only available in the settings. I think too many users just clicked OK to it without actually looking at what it was. I've also added the ability to change your email and password from settings. In charts total volume to date (since GLBSE2.0 opened) how shows. And asset issuers can update the details of their asset (not the contract itself though, thats next). Any issues please email support@glbse.com |
|
|
|
I'd go with GMT/UTC 00:00 as "new day" personally... any other time is as arbitrary anyways but this allows for some "chunking". On a different note: I went through the hassle of claiming one of my 2 GLBSE 1.0 accounts, but getting an error that "Claim code: xxxXXXxxxXXXxxx has not been found, please check for typo's[sic!]" even though it's copy-pasted from the 1.0 account popup (32 characters strong). Is there some wait time until the systems are synced or is this a bug? Also I plan to claim my other account too and transfer it's assets over to the first one (likely via a throwaway account that claims account #2 and just transfers assets) - but it would be nice to have the history too, so if it is at all possible to claim 2 old accounts into 1 new account, please tell me.  This is a bug, one that I'm working on, a couple of people have had this problem. Yes it's possible to claim more than one GLBSE1.0 account into a single GLBSE2.0 account. |
|
|
|
That doesn't appear to be working correctly. Not a big deal, just reporting a bug. Also, a more traditional approach would be using the prior day's closing price instead of the last trade. Great work on 2.0 so far.
Define closing price when the exchange never closes, would it be 00:00 GMT or something along those lines? |
|
|
|
Nefario, There appears to be a bug in the way your script decides what color to make a stock in the assets list. MergedMining shares are currently showing up as red, which seems to indicate they have dropped in value. However, looking at the list of share sales, you can see that shares are currently at a monthly high. So it should be green, right? http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/mergedminingI'll investigate this, the way it currently works is the color depends on the price of the last trade compared to the one before it. So for example, if the latest trade was for more than the one before it then it's green. |
|
|
|
JSON support for current account balance and shares held.
oh yes, an API, so we can buld a better site  (sorry nefario, but the site really needs some layouting/design work in my mind), maybe convert to twitter bootstrap that everyone seems to use these days?  .... ok |
|
|
|
|
I could have other blockchain based systems (litecoin, namecoin etc) as an asset being traded, and you would be able to trade it in the same way you do anything else, by buying and selling for BTC.
The extra effort comes when I need to install the daemon, and ensure the wallet is secure yadda yadda, this is the hard part and at the moment not a top priority right now.
I've got a few updates on the way with simple improvements.
Nefario.
|
|
|
|
Nefario, I think you over reacted because of your dealings with Lambert and that’s understandable. You want to keep too many incidents like that from happening on GLBSE but you can’t! No one blames you for Lambert and no one would blame you for Goat if he ended up being a scammer. I will continue to use GLBSE but I would like you to reconsider using your power to control funds like a Bitcoin regulatory agency. That goes against the reason I use Bitcoin. If I wanted frozen funds I’d trade auction-rate securities on Wall Street.
I don't know if you read the OP, I apologised, this means it won't be happening again. |
|
|
|
|
We will attempt to automate user verification as much as possible so that assets that wish to provide this for their shareholders (ID information held by GLBSE on their behalf) as we have currently been doing.
We actually don't want to do this as it's a waste of our time and effort but there ARE NO THIRD PARTIES OFFERING THIS. If there were we would stop immediately and leave it to them.
Business idea, a trusted member of the community starts a ID verification company that does what we have been doing so far, they could get capital for the project by listing on GLBSE, depending on who does it I would even wave the fee.
We will not be creating a rating agency.
We will be creating a prediction market and building it right into GLBSE for all assets issued on GLBSE (and allow the prediction of things outside GLBSE also).
|
|
|
|
I have no stake in this discussion, but seeing as how this is pretty much the extent of the "contract", I would say hashking was reasonably justified in believing that we would receive the full 0.1BTC. However, I am not familiar with GLBSE's interface (I find the design very hard to understand) but if it was clear at the time when he sold that he would not be getting the full amount, then I would say buyer beware.
Hashking, did you submit a market order? Or, were you able to see the price that you would receive for your shares before submitting your order?
In GLBSE you must specify the price to buy or sell at, there is no instant buy or sell order, you have to specify the quantity and the price. This means that HK looked at the buy orders that were there and put in .008 (or whatever the price was) and clicked sell. There is no way for you to put in a sell order at 1.0 and the trade happen at less than that amount. |
|
|
|
So should I take away the dividends from the people I already paid?
No. That's not fair to your new bond holders. If he can prove he held those bonds on the day that the dividends are scheduled to be paid in the bond description, then he should receive that money. You also need to add to that description that you need to be contacted about buying back bonds. You can't expect future holders to go through your forum op for everything. In business, cover all your bases or someone will run them. Happy Opening Day baseball fans!  The functionality to pay people based on the dates they held the shares is not a part of GLBSE(yet). Yes people (asset issuers) make promises to pay on certain days and times, these are all subject to permissive circumstances. Sometimes there are delays for various reasons. Are there terms in the Tygrr-Bank contract for what happens if a certain condition is not met (i.e. payments made late)? Unless there are terms that outline what happens in such an eventuality I don't think you can just make them up yourself. What you can hope for is a best effort attempt to make it up. Shares in Tygrr-Bank were not frozen, the market could decide for itself what was the best thing to do. If someone decides to sell at a loss because of some bad news then that is their decision. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
