Suits me.

I'm also open to the idea of community-created threads in the main Altcoins section. They can facilitate broader discussion and allow other people to discover XC (even if they're full of FUD).

hashtag101, you're just shouting at people.

When you start joining in a conversation - and doing so in a manner that respects the perspective of others - then you'll be welcome here.

For now, you are banned


Edit: same goes for you BlackWidow. Go create another newbie account.
Edit: Revelation, I said that the discussion is over. You shifted the goalposts and that's the end of it. I'm not willing to continue the discussion. If you would like to resume our other discussion (in that FUD thread) by supplying a single reason why you think I'm unethical, then do so. But we're done here.

Yes I do, but I invited Revelation into respectful dialogue two days ago. I'm doing my best to honour it.

(Also I've been awaiting some information before I can carry on with what I'm actually working on, so there was a gap here. Not to say it wasn't a tedious way to spend my time!)

You just changed your argument from:

"Synechist is unethically using Bter to quote the market price"

to:

"Synechist is bothersomely quoting Bter to argue against claims that the market price has dropped a lot."


You just shifted the goalposts. You saw that your line of argument has insufficient basis and then tried to switch to another line of attack.

That's game over in my favour. End of discussion.

Now if you'd kindly go to that FUD thread and supply some reasons why you think I'm unethical, perhaps there'll be grounds to pursue discussion with you. But for the time being, there aren't.

Because they'd all just bought BLOCK in order to for the Blocknet to launch.

Enough people think that the Blocknet has great potential for the future - enough potential for them to take on market exposure during the coming months.

It's a simple calculation for long term investors:

- buy BLOCK until the ITO reaches its minimum threshold, or else the Blocknet won't exist

- if we don't buy, we have no opportunity for gains

- if we do buy, we may make a short-term loss, but without making a short-term loss there'll be no long-term gains.

- therefore buy during the ITO.

A false picture of what? The inter-exchange spread? Because that's what I was pointing out.

It's an empirical fact that the spread between exchanges extended to 38k at that point in time.

Therefore I was not being unethical.

What's it gonna take before you get it through your head that I wasn't quoting the market price? Your negative disposition toward me is clearly clouding your judgement.

Here's the point: I did not claim that the market price is 38k.

That post was in response to another claim that the price was 18k or something.
My statement was purely drawing attention to the spread, in order to assert that due to illiquidity, it's incorrect to straightforwardly quote the price on Polo and thereby assert that the market has dropped.

So I did not claim the price was 38k, I claimed that another person's claim that the market was dumping was incorrect, due to him not having taken illiquidity into account.


But do you see what you're doing? You're taking my statements out of context and then misinterpreting them in order to support your as-yet-unfounded claim that I'm unethical.

Yes, the timing is interesting.

As is the fact that some of the people involved in the smear campaign were using multiple accounts to make it appear to have more collective opinion behind it (eg. DanIsDone, Unicornfarts and rdnkjdi: same person).

Thanks, fudsters. A co-ordinated attack is a good sign that the FUD is organised, somewhat centralised, and not a grassroots phenomenon.

"not ethical"
- you have yet to respond with a reason for why you think this, on that FUD thread.

Until you do so, I'm unwilling to continue discussing this with you, because the discussion lacks a basis for your central claim.

Go and reply to me on the FUD thread.

//
Your recommendation that "At best, (I) should be using the mid-point price and not the highest of the two" is roughly equivalent to this statement of mine: "Low liquidity. Prices diverge. It means neither a drop nor a rise if it's within the cross-exchange spread."

Are you willingly ignoring my words again? It appears that you're making an effort to spin my statements into a negative light by quoting only part of them and then interpreting that part askew.

This, Revelation, is slander. Carry on like this and you'll get a ban.

I'm not sure, but Mr. Obama would be mistaken if he were to think that the internet fell under US jurisdiction.

It's a continual source of bafflement to me that US institutions so often appear unaware of their merely national authority.

Oh hi Spoetnik.

You're banned.

Bye.

You're quite wrong about this.

Taking a position is a function of liquidity and position size.

The lower the liquidity and the larger the position, the higher the likelihood of a short-term loss.

So a sound investment could necessitate making an initial loss.

Therefore it's incorrect that "at any instant we can see whether or not someone made the right investment decision."

I'd suggest that since your advice is to hold off from giving advice if your position is in the red, you hold off from offering advice on investing.

Did you willingly ignore the following?

Not that this is advice, but, uh, buy on Bittrex and sell on Bter?

Low liquidity. Prices diverge. It means neither a drop nor a rise if it's within the cross-exchange spread.

It's up 55% from the ITO price on Bter.

You, Itod, are twisting my words.

Consider the statement "there will be no more BLOCK on Bittrex to sell."

From the original context of the discussion, this pertains to the following hypothetical scenario:
- the buy wall was entirely bought
- and following the ITO, no withdrawals or deposits of BLOCK are allowed.

As it happens, the buy wall was not entirely bought, so the scenario never materialised.

But even though it didn't come about, I was still exactly right. The price did not decline during this period.


So don't you try slander me.

We would keep this thread, but this comes at the cost of Teka having to moderate this thread instead of the team being able to co-ordinate.

As far as I'm aware the general altcoins section is for discussion and the ANN section is for announcements. So I'm guessing we'd do well to create an announcements-only thread here and at least one discussion thread in the general section.

Still not sure what mprep will do though. Anyone know the guy?

This isn't a question about whether everyone gets a voice (because everyone does, already), it's a question about how best to keep news and updates prominent while facilitating discussion - all without inciting mprep to delete anything.

The idea I suggested might:
- decentralise the conversations and empower the community to take the initiative with things.

- prevent news getting lost in the noise.

- serve to spread the word about XC to other people in the forum more effectively.

Worth a shot. I wonder whether Mprep would just delete one of them for the same slightly inscrutable reason.

("Use the official thread in the ANN section".... err, you mean the one we closed?).