Nxt and the rise to the top.

[barabbas]

Obviously we seem to have a language problem. I stated I don't care about the fairness or not of the process but I do care about the distribution resulting because it IS a problem, whether fair or unfair. Also you should take a look at the forging process and you will discover you are WRONG in your assumptions. Finally, I don't "complain". I state educated concerns, rather. As for so called "whales" with the current volume there are no whales, in fact, just people dumping and a few picking up perceived cheap coins. Whales need volume to operate and a few BTC every day is NOT in their realm. They are, at this point, just a figment of your imagination, a scapegoat as it were for you to rationalize -only in your mind- why the price action is so negative instead of looking at the real picture.

Well, I'm afraid none of us is using correct terms... I know split stake in multiple accounts have a little punishment, so isn't exactly proportional, but you are saying that ALL fees goes to big holders, and that is false.
And ok, you aren't complaining, you are exposing concerns and I don't care either if it's fair or unfair, but I can't see your points... I also said that distribution could be a problem, I agree with that, but this problem will get solved with time, and current situation accelerate this process

I'm not saying that "imaginary whales" or nxt millionaries are the ones behind this prices, there are many factors, the more important, is that MOST of the money in alts isn't from people which cares about cryptos, they are speculators which found a nice place to make money without really much money. I'm sure that there are people holding many nxt  in an exchange and never used the nxt wallet, and they don't care about it, nor bitcoin or any other alt, only for how much does it worth in fiat money, and nxt being so complex to use like you said  discourage speculators which only know how to use btc-qt wallet and experiment with something new to play with nxt, resulting in a such low volume, in adittion, the biggest players from this markets are whales from the BTC and LTC mining times, and given that most of they aren't now the whales in the nxt ecosystem, they are much more cautious because some "new whale" can dump a shitload of nxt in them. Does this make any sense to you?

I have the feeling that you and me will never agree, seems like you aren't looking either to the real picture, you are convinced of your point and there are many more factors, and concretely, the cause you are pointing is the less important for me. "maybe you are right, who knows... if you have this feeling too, let me know and we stop the discussion "

Again we have a language problem, obviously. See, when talking about "complexity", much like about "virginity", one can hardly face a situation where "which is partially true", as you put it, applies. It either is or isn't. And then, if it is, there might be levels, or degrees but no "partiality". It is very difficult to agree on anything when the statements come through so inappropriately. Once again, the complexity of the "coin"/platform is an inhibitor in adoption. At every level of computer/crypto knowledge. That isn't subject to opinion or "partiality", ok? the degree or level of inhibition, may be up for "personal opinion", but not the indisputable fact. There cannot be argument there. Same thing applies to "distribution" and same thing applies to the decimation of the price in DIRECT relationship with the growth and "success" of the platform. Those are FACTS, not subject to opinions or agendas. And, as such, perhaps, worthy of evaluation and debate for to any normal, common-sensical person they would perhaps indicated we are going in the wrong direction, rather than the appropriate one. Same also applies to (in your opinion) "little punishment": Fact is the stake or forging isn't proportional ("exactly" is redundant and unnecessary). You cannot be "a little non-virgin", get my meaning?

Now, as for "positives", isn't it needed a reevaluation of the general direction and perhaps current structure of the project, since success equals decimation of price? A legitimate question based on irrefutable FACTS.

Now, for you it isn't because you, well, you just believe or hope that THE FUTURE will solve all those questions and problems short of by itself. The future has this thing: It tends to be a CONSEQUENCE of previous actions/facts. And, in general, when it comes to investment, THE FUTURE needs to be bound in time by results. The future of Bayern Munich is going to be probably brilliant IF necessary measures are taken (and they need to be taken or it won't be brilliant at all), but the foreseeable future is that it won't even be in the Cup's finals, let alone contend for it, get it? Of as some old saying puts it: In the future we all be bald. And dead. So, no matter how much you want it to be attached to your agenda, the futures is, well, already past when it comes to proper examination: Before you read this long post, it was future. Now that you have read it, it is past.

[1714974363]

1714974363

[1714974363]

1714974363

[1714974363]

1714974363

[criptix]

No one argues that the PLATFORM  can be "useful". The question is does that usefulness add value to the coin or the project at large?

Yes. To use the platform you need to pay the transaction fees. Any and all successful use cases will add to buy demand for Nxt and add value if sustained over time.

The question then is even more basic: Since the platform is very successful and the increase in business (and scams) has been and continues being nothing short of exponential, the "transaction fees" must be mighty inappropriate (where do they go? --oh wait, don't answer that, it is my understanding that they go, 99.99% to the holders of the majority of NXT, right?), since, obviously, such success, as posted above, has only brought the decimation of the price of NXT to les than 1/4 of what was only weeks ago, right? Or am I missing something here?

TX fees go 100% to forging (ie actively participating in the network) accounts:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution

Some of the stuff you are missing:
Decimation would actually mean that NXT was at 90% of its previous price....and could you tell me exactly how many weeks ago NXT was at 3.6 dollarcents ?
Is it 50 weeks or 52 ? We do have a name for these longer time periods, B. Still, good tactic. 

First, obviously we have a very different interpretation of what "price decimation" is. For you it would mean at least going to 1000 sat, since NXT touched 10k sat not too long ago (a few months, very few). For me decimated price means anything beyond 1/2 lost. And it has gone not just there but 2/3 lost and even, as close as 24 hours ago, 3/4 lost.

this is utter bullshit, like 95% of what you say.
the last time NXT was 10 k was in JUNE 2014 and the all time low is 3,5 k sat for the past 1 year.

bitcoin lost ~80% since january 2014, early adopter have millions of coins, PoW is semi-centralized - is it a scam or is it going to die?
atleast get your facts right if you cherry pick them.


also you are probaly a payed shill: retired/jobless actor + 20 hours a day on bct - just perfect coincidence?

[barabbas]

No one argues that the PLATFORM  can be "useful". The question is does that usefulness add value to the coin or the project at large?

Yes. To use the platform you need to pay the transaction fees. Any and all successful use cases will add to buy demand for Nxt and add value if sustained over time.

The question then is even more basic: Since the platform is very successful and the increase in business (and scams) has been and continues being nothing short of exponential, the "transaction fees" must be mighty inappropriate (where do they go? --oh wait, don't answer that, it is my understanding that they go, 99.99% to the holders of the majority of NXT, right?), since, obviously, such success, as posted above, has only brought the decimation of the price of NXT to les than 1/4 of what was only weeks ago, right? Or am I missing something here?

TX fees go 100% to forging (ie actively participating in the network) accounts:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution

Some of the stuff you are missing:
Decimation would actually mean that NXT was at 90% of its previous price....and could you tell me exactly how many weeks ago NXT was at 3.6 dollarcents ?
Is it 50 weeks or 52 ? We do have a name for these longer time periods, B. Still, good tactic.  

First, obviously we have a very different interpretation of what "price decimation" is. For you it would mean at least going to 1000 sat, since NXT touched 10k sat not too long ago (a few months, very few). For me decimated price means anything beyond 1/2 lost. And it has gone not just there but 2/3 lost and even, as close as 24 hours ago, 3/4 lost.

this is utter bullshit, like 95% of what you say.
the last time NXT was 10 k was in JUNE 2014 and the all time low is 3,5 k sat for the past 1 year.

bitcoin lost ~80% since january 2014, early adopter have millions of coins, PoW is semi-centralized - is it a scam or is it going to die?
atleast get your facts right if you cherry pick them.


also you are probaly a payed shill: retired/jobless actor + 20 hours a day on bct - just perfect coincidence?

And, like in all you say, there's simply BS. I myself purchased coins at 2,6k 24 hours ago -and it went down to 2,5k-. But keep bulshitting and guessing, it is ridiculous but somewhat funn y... Remember: Last night, 24 hours ago, lowest price 2,5k. Cryptsy (for some nice wager I'll show you my own transaction at 2,6..., deal? Or just the usual bull crap?)

Edit to add: It is Bull crap as usual, right?

[lopalcar]

Again we have a language problem, obviously. See, when talking about "complexity", much like about "virginity", one can hardly face a situation where "which is partially true", as you put it, applies. It either is or isn't. And then, if it is, there might be levels, or degrees but no "partiality". It is very difficult to agree on anything when the statements come through so inappropriately. Once again, the complexity of the "coin"/platform is an inhibitor in adoption. At every level of computer/crypto knowledge. That isn't subject to opinion or "partiality", ok? the degree or level of inhibition, may be up for "personal opinion", but not the indisputable fact. There cannot be argument there. Same thing applies to "distribution" and same thing applies to the decimation of the price in DIRECT relationship with the growth and "success" of the platform. Those are FACTS, not subject to opinions or agendas. And, as such, perhaps, worthy of evaluation and debate for to any normal, common-sensical person they would perhaps indicated we are going in the wrong direction, rather than the appropriate one. Same also applies to (in your opinion) "little punishment": Fact is the stake or forging isn't proportional ("exactly" is redundant and unnecessary). You cannot be "a little non-virgin", get my meaning?

Now, as for "positives", isn't it needed a reevaluation of the general direction and perhaps current structure of the project, since success equals decimation of price? A legitimate question based on irrefutable FACTS.

Now, for you it isn't because you, well, you just believe or hope that THE FUTURE will solve all those questions and problems short of by itself. The future has this thing: It tends to be a CONSEQUENCE of previous actions/facts. And, in general, when it comes to investment, THE FUTURE needs to be bound in time by results. The future of Bayern Munich is going to be probably brilliant IF necessary measures are taken (and they need to be taken or it won't be brilliant at all), but the foreseeable future is that it won't even be in the Cup's finals, let alone contend for it, get it? Of as some old saying puts it: In the future we all be bald. And dead. So, no matter how much you want it to be attached to your agenda, the futures is, well, already past when it comes to proper examination: Before you read this long post, it was future. Now that you have read it, it is past.

Once again, you are being to radical with the language barrier... if you feel better when if I say "forging isn't proportional to stake".... then ok, but is very to close to be proportional, that's my point...
And about the coin complexity... well, I doubt is more complex than bitcoin, simply is new and different, with more tools ofcourse, that cause the GUI have more buttons and so...
And yes, I talk about the FUTURE based in the PRESENT where the distribution is improving due to this whales continued dumping as YOU said, so this present situation will lead to a future situation where this is solved, not by magic...
It's very tiring try to comunicate with someone which treat you like a fool and who doesn't even try to rethink what I try to write with all my goodwill... so if you will answer me again with simylar answer, you can save it for yourself, I agreed with you in some points, but instead to discuss about the ideas, you limit to analice the text as if I were a native english speaker "which isn't the case" catching all the incongruences...

[barabbas]

Again we have a language problem, obviously. See, when talking about "complexity", much like about "virginity", one can hardly face a situation where "which is partially true", as you put it, applies. It either is or isn't. And then, if it is, there might be levels, or degrees but no "partiality". It is very difficult to agree on anything when the statements come through so inappropriately. Once again, the complexity of the "coin"/platform is an inhibitor in adoption. At every level of computer/crypto knowledge. That isn't subject to opinion or "partiality", ok? the degree or level of inhibition, may be up for "personal opinion", but not the indisputable fact. There cannot be argument there. Same thing applies to "distribution" and same thing applies to the decimation of the price in DIRECT relationship with the growth and "success" of the platform. Those are FACTS, not subject to opinions or agendas. And, as such, perhaps, worthy of evaluation and debate for to any normal, common-sensical person they would perhaps indicated we are going in the wrong direction, rather than the appropriate one. Same also applies to (in your opinion) "little punishment": Fact is the stake or forging isn't proportional ("exactly" is redundant and unnecessary). You cannot be "a little non-virgin", get my meaning?

Now, as for "positives", isn't it needed a reevaluation of the general direction and perhaps current structure of the project, since success equals decimation of price? A legitimate question based on irrefutable FACTS.

Now, for you it isn't because you, well, you just believe or hope that THE FUTURE will solve all those questions and problems short of by itself. The future has this thing: It tends to be a CONSEQUENCE of previous actions/facts. And, in general, when it comes to investment, THE FUTURE needs to be bound in time by results. The future of Bayern Munich is going to be probably brilliant IF necessary measures are taken (and they need to be taken or it won't be brilliant at all), but the foreseeable future is that it won't even be in the Cup's finals, let alone contend for it, get it? Of as some old saying puts it: In the future we all be bald. And dead. So, no matter how much you want it to be attached to your agenda, the futures is, well, already past when it comes to proper examination: Before you read this long post, it was future. Now that you have read it, it is past.

Once again, you are being to radical with the language barrier... if you feel better when if I say "forging isn't proportional to stake".... then ok, but is very to close to be proportional, that's my point...
And about the coin complexity... well, I doubt is more complex than bitcoin, simply is new and different, with more tools ofcourse, that cause the GUI have more buttons and so...
And yes, I talk about the FUTURE based in the PRESENT where the distribution is improving due to this whales continued dumping as YOU said, so this present situation will lead to a future situation where this is solved, not by magic...
It's very tiring try to comunicate with someone which treat you like a fool and who doesn't even try to rethink what I try to write with all my goodwill... so if you will answer me again with simylar answer, you can save it for yourself, I agreed with you in some points, but instead to discuss about the ideas, you limit to analice the text as if I were a native english speaker "which isn't the case" catching all the incongruences...

I'm just trying to grasp what you write, because it is quite confusing some times. And what comes through clearly, in some cases, are points which are in direct opposition with the reality which is the base of this discussions from the get go. Once more, 2 points: 1.- The "success" of the platform (counted in growing number of features and growing number of so called "assets"), is going in DIRECT proportion to the disarray in the price of the coin, which has been decimated of late. 2.- The complexity of NXT, from the wallet to ANYTHING ELSE, is -in my opinion- an intimidating factor that is responsible for the lack of general adoption both in the crypto scene and, especially, out there in the regular world. You have admitted to the complexity, somewhat, but then again you try to diminish that factor effect by putting it on the same level of complexity as Bitcpoin, which is utterly absurd for hundreds of reasons not the least of which is that you can get (and use to buy practically all goods, real world use goods) in ATMs in many (and growing) of the big cities of the world. And you dismiss the #1 FACT by appealing to a "future" (without any time constrains), that simply makes the debate stall. As it is. Sorry ut with those approaches to actual, factual, corroborated PROBLEMS and EFFECTS, it is impossible to have a real debate or even a conversation. Sorry also that you perceive the clarifications as being diminishing of you personally, not my intention. But the conversation is in English and yours is quite confusing... but NOT the cause of our disagreements at all.

[Daedelus]

But if the transaction fees from the new business coming on the platform doesn't translate in some short of wealth, obviously we have a serious problem monetizing the platform and, logically, the more business coming the less advantageous (bloating comes to mind) and, under that premise, the slump in the price would be justified? You could say "no". And you could say anything you want but the FACT would remain that, big or small reward, the richest take it all.

Sorry for the delay, I don't have as much time to spend on here.

Could explain your logic here pls? You say existing businesses provide no wealth (for ease, we'll assume correct). So you argue it follows that no future businesses can provide wealth? Logically, the more businesses there are the more chance of one of them 'clicking, no? You mentioned bloating but that isn't logical as the bloat (transactions) will each have a transaction fee associated. Provided the fee isn't set too low, 'bloat' is good.

Could you post the blockchain data that has led you to think this pls? And presumably you define 'the richest' as anyone who holds more than 1M NXT?

[barabbas]

But if the transaction fees from the new business coming on the platform doesn't translate in some short of wealth, obviously we have a serious problem monetizing the platform and, logically, the more business coming the less advantageous (bloating comes to mind) and, under that premise, the slump in the price would be justified? You could say "no". And you could say anything you want but the FACT would remain that, big or small reward, the richest take it all.

Sorry for the delay, I don't have as much time to spend on here.

Could explain your logic here pls? You say existing businesses provide no wealth (for ease, we'll assume correct). So you argue it follows that no future businesses can provide wealth? Logically, the more businesses there are the more chance of one of them 'clicking, no? You mentioned bloating but that isn't logical as the bloat (transactions) will each have a transaction fee associated. Provided the fee isn't set too low, 'bloat' is good.

Could you post the blockchain data that has led you to think this pls? And presumably you define 'the richest' as anyone who holds more than 1M NXT?

Several things: No, I define the "rich as the top 70 or so holders of the coin. Clear enough, I hope. You can lower the figure even to the top 50, ok?

Blockchain bloating is as of now still unresolved concern of every altcoin, not just NXT so no, it isn't a "good" thing at all (it slows the transactions, you know, a no-no in crypto if it ever is to reach any level of real world adoption.

Now, the UNDENIABLE correlation between the growth in features and "assets" of the NXT platform with the decimation -you can use the adjective of your personal preference here- of the price (market cap) would indicate to anyone with even a minimal amount of brains in their skull that something WRONG is definitely going on for the opposite, if anything, is to be expected, right? In the present as well as the (near) future -ad you MUST know that the markets always trade the future-. Maybe, as you kind of point out, the "fee IS set too low". I don't know. What I know is the obvious correlation that, by extension, clearly indicates that the bigger the "success", this kind of "success" anyway, the lower the price/market cap. And that bis worrysome and definitely worth debating in order to determine corrective action.

Once again, the excuse that it is a slump in crypto doesn't fly: BTC itself sit at roughly a 40% gain from recent lows in similar period of time as the decimation of NXT cap/price. And many other established coin projects have also significantly increased in that period also. So if you are looking for solutions, instead of serving agendas by denying the obvious FACTS, you better get to the nitty gritty of why this apparent discordance is indeed happening and, more importantly, thinking ways to turn the ship around. Because it is going in all the wrong directions as of recent months.

[Daedelus]

Do you know the difference between correlation and causation? No one would deny the price has gone down in proportion to the rise of assets. These things are correlated. You have yet to show how exactly the rise of assets has caused the decline in price. This is a very specific distinction that you seem to be unaware of.

If we accept your narrative, then it is an UNDISPUTABLE FACT That the rise of Nxt assets has also caused the decline in price of [insert other coin name that has declined in the same timeframe].

Or that I brushed my teeth this morning and the sun rose. Therefore, it is an UNDISPUTABLE FACT that brushing my teeth this morning made the sun rise. This FACT is obvious to anyone with even a minimal amount of brains in their skull, I made the sun rise.


So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.


Edit: Nxt has the option of blockchain pruning (on testnet) to deal with bloat. As long as the fee is paid, the data bloat people paid for will stay hosted.

[Daedelus]

I'll drop back later, looking forward to the blockexplorer links and some factual discussion

[barabbas]

Do you know the difference between correlation and causation? No one would deny the price has gone down in proportion to the rise of assets. These things are correlated. You have yet to show how exactly the rise of assets has caused the decline in price. This is a very specific distinction that you seem to be unaware of.

If we accept your narrative, then it is an UNDISPUTABLE FACT That the rise of Nxt assets has also caused the decline in price of [insert other coin name that has declined in the same timeframe].

Or that I brushed my teeth this morning and the sun rose. Therefore, it is an UNDISPUTABLE FACT that brushing my teeth this morning made the sun rise. This FACT obvious to anyone with even a minimal amount of brains in their skull, I made the sun rise.


So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.


Edit: Nxt has the option of blockchain pruning (on testnet) to deal with bloat. As long as the fee is paid, the data bloat people paid for will stay hosted.

Again careful with the 'facts', for BTC to be up 40% from "recent lows", you are talking about 1BTC = $171. This was last seen in January 2014. You could stretch 'recent' to Jan 2015 maybe but...  

 What does the blockexplorer have to do with any of the mentioned? The same than your preposterous "causals", totally unrelated and seeking only to disperse the real content and facts with mere crap. Just like your -again totally erroneous- mention of the recent low price of BTC which was in the low to mid 160s, only a few weeks ago, as opposed to your stated $171 (maybe you will also entertain a frindly wager, since I personally have transaction at near that level on Coinbase, how's that?). Just pure mere crap. Even to disputed something intended as an approximation (that happens to be EXCEEDED, unless BTC turn suddenly down between the time I write this and post it, it sit at MORE that 40% above recent lows, ok?).

The absurd "defense" of an obvious blind agenda, also pretends comparison with other coins, which it isn't not only irrelevant but absurd beyond description for there have been coins that have disappeared, other that have fluorised, others that have stagnated around similar levels and some others, finally, with some degree of losses, more and less than NXT, as the case might be, but that includes all kinds of outright scams, discovery of hidden instamines and a myriad of other circumstances... hardly any case in which the "success" of the project has resulted in the decimation of the cap/price.

Try again. It's quite funny to watch your efforts... although, sadly, doesn't bring the discussion any further, much less in the approximate direction of a correction of what obviously is not just not working but working for the other team.

[Daedelus]

So you can't show a causal link, just point out the correlation?


More fact, less opinion is required. The last low was Jan 14, my mistake. So I deleted that before I posted my BRB. Just for fun, let me have a a go at a barrabbas reply...  




What absolute crap cherry picking the best possible case for your comparison! Do you think everyone is an idiot? It is FACT that Bitcoin is down ~20% from recent highs. Just mere crap that you mention it to support your complete BS diversions. Why don't you answer questions with facts? It is UNDISPUTABLE that you could back up your claims with the FACTS about transactions from the blockchain data. Why don't you do it? It is quite funny to watch you try and squirm out, it is quite funny actually. Why not repeat the same claims again? Maybe people will forget you don't apply logic.

Ok, I tried my best. But in comparison, it isn't near long enough and doesn't contain enough diversionary threads  


So... unless you believe that I make the sun rise... we're back to this:

So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.

[barabbas]

So you can't show a causal link, just point out the correlation?


More fact, less opinion is required. The last low was Jan 14, my mistake. So I deleted that before I posted my BRB. Just for fun, let me have a a go at a barrabbas reply...  




What absolute crap cherry picking the best possible case for your comparison! Do you think everyone is an idiot? It is FACT that Bitcoin is down ~20% from recent highs. Just mere crap that you mention it to support your complete BS diversions. Why don't you answer questions with facts? It is UNDISPUTABLE that you could back up your claims with the FACTS about transactions from the blockchain data. Why don't you do it? It is quite funny to watch you try and squirm out, it is quite funny actually. Why not repeat the same claims again? Maybe people will forget you don't apply logic.

Ok, I tried my best. But in comparison, it isn't near long enough and doesn't contain enough diversionary threads  


So... unless you believe that I make the sun rise... we're back to this:

So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.

No, no matter how much you insist, we are and we will always be back at #1.- There's a direct correlation, causal or not, between the "success" of the platform and the decimation of the price/cap. and #2.- It is my opinion that perhaps the sheer complexity of the project, from the coin wallet (causing problems in every trading house to this day) to the barrage of "assets" (most of them of very ridiculous nature) and other features

Now try to divert from those point at your leisure. But careful with fact, like that other motor mouth above, unless you are willing to put your money where you mouth is, ok?

[Daedelus]

No, no matter how much you insist, we are and we will always be back at #1.- There's a direct correlation, causal or not, between the "success" of the platform and the decimation of the price/cap.

No-one denies the correlation (as I stated explicitly 2-3 posts again). Causal is very important.  Otherwise, brushing my teeth can be legitimately cited for making the sun rise solely because they are correlated. But you don't seem to want to comprehend this basic logic.

and
#2.- It is my opinion...

HURRAH!!!!!!   It seemed before that you were presenting your opinion as INDISPUTABLE FACTS..    

...that perhaps the sheer complexity of the project, from the coin wallet (causing problems in every trading house to this day) to the barrage of "assets" (most of them of very ridiculous nature) and other features[/b]

Please provide info on which trading houses are having problems with the wallet, if you can. I would like to get them some help. I haven't heard the problem you claim since Mintpal were saying they were interested in integration.

Nxt (the technology, as that is all it can be) isn't responsible for the assets that are listed on asset exchange. In the same way the internet isn't responsible for the websites that are displays on it. And cream rises to the top; look for assets with a track record and competent devs. Don't buy from new accounts promising the moon. Pretty basic stuff, no more complex than small cap stocks.

Due to the undeveloped nature of the market, I say it was much easier than small cap stocks. E.g. You have direct access to the devs/owners for queries, the histories to look through and assess are shorter, ideas are usually quite focussed and simple etc. The risk is obviously much higher but that is a feature of anonymous crypto/internet, not a specific feature of Nxt's Asset Exchange.

[Daedelus]

Also, if you want more people to share your opinion...

So... unless you believe that I make the sun rise... we're back to this:

So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.

[criptix]

No one argues that the PLATFORM  can be "useful". The question is does that usefulness add value to the coin or the project at large?

Yes. To use the platform you need to pay the transaction fees. Any and all successful use cases will add to buy demand for Nxt and add value if sustained over time.

The question then is even more basic: Since the platform is very successful and the increase in business (and scams) has been and continues being nothing short of exponential, the "transaction fees" must be mighty inappropriate (where do they go? --oh wait, don't answer that, it is my understanding that they go, 99.99% to the holders of the majority of NXT, right?), since, obviously, such success, as posted above, has only brought the decimation of the price of NXT to les than 1/4 of what was only weeks ago, right? Or am I missing something here?

TX fees go 100% to forging (ie actively participating in the network) accounts:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution

Some of the stuff you are missing:
Decimation would actually mean that NXT was at 90% of its previous price....and could you tell me exactly how many weeks ago NXT was at 3.6 dollarcents ?
Is it 50 weeks or 52 ? We do have a name for these longer time periods, B. Still, good tactic. 

First, obviously we have a very different interpretation of what "price decimation" is. For you it would mean at least going to 1000 sat, since NXT touched 10k sat not too long ago (a few months, very few). For me decimated price means anything beyond 1/2 lost. And it has gone not just there but 2/3 lost and even, as close as 24 hours ago, 3/4 lost.

this is utter bullshit, like 95% of what you say.
the last time NXT was 10 k was in JUNE 2014 and the all time low is 3,5 k sat for the past 1 year.

bitcoin lost ~80% since january 2014, early adopter have millions of coins, PoW is semi-centralized - is it a scam or is it going to die?
atleast get your facts right if you cherry pick them.


also you are probaly a payed shill: retired/jobless actor + 20 hours a day on bct - just perfect coincidence?

And, like in all you say, there's simply BS. I myself purchased coins at 2,6k 24 hours ago -and it went down to 2,5k-. But keep bulshitting and guessing, it is ridiculous but somewhat funn y... Remember: Last night, 24 hours ago, lowest price 2,5k. Cryptsy (for some nice wager I'll show you my own transaction at 2,6..., deal? Or just the usual bull crap?)

Edit to add: It is Bull crap as usual, right?

it wasnt visibile in the 1+ day charts where i was looking (1 to 1 1/2 year timespan back).
when i checked it was just a flash crash and the candles closed again at 3,4 k.

show me how much NXT you bought, from the 1 million volume in 6 hours from 3,7 k to 2,5 then back to 3,4 k.
this is really something very marginal besides the fact that we are at nearly 4 k again

*edit
cryptsy has <5% of nxt trading volume? 

[box0214]

as of today which exchange has the most activity for nxt?

[barabbas]

No one argues that the PLATFORM  can be "useful". The question is does that usefulness add value to the coin or the project at large?

Yes. To use the platform you need to pay the transaction fees. Any and all successful use cases will add to buy demand for Nxt and add value if sustained over time.

The question then is even more basic: Since the platform is very successful and the increase in business (and scams) has been and continues being nothing short of exponential, the "transaction fees" must be mighty inappropriate (where do they go? --oh wait, don't answer that, it is my understanding that they go, 99.99% to the holders of the majority of NXT, right?), since, obviously, such success, as posted above, has only brought the decimation of the price of NXT to les than 1/4 of what was only weeks ago, right? Or am I missing something here?

TX fees go 100% to forging (ie actively participating in the network) accounts:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution

Some of the stuff you are missing:
Decimation would actually mean that NXT was at 90% of its previous price....and could you tell me exactly how many weeks ago NXT was at 3.6 dollarcents ?
Is it 50 weeks or 52 ? We do have a name for these longer time periods, B. Still, good tactic. 

First, obviously we have a very different interpretation of what "price decimation" is. For you it would mean at least going to 1000 sat, since NXT touched 10k sat not too long ago (a few months, very few). For me decimated price means anything beyond 1/2 lost. And it has gone not just there but 2/3 lost and even, as close as 24 hours ago, 3/4 lost.

this is utter bullshit, like 95% of what you say.
the last time NXT was 10 k was in JUNE 2014 and the all time low is 3,5 k sat for the past 1 year.

bitcoin lost ~80% since january 2014, early adopter have millions of coins, PoW is semi-centralized - is it a scam or is it going to die?
atleast get your facts right if you cherry pick them.


also you are probaly a payed shill: retired/jobless actor + 20 hours a day on bct - just perfect coincidence?

And, like in all you say, there's simply BS. I myself purchased coins at 2,6k 24 hours ago -and it went down to 2,5k-. But keep bulshitting and guessing, it is ridiculous but somewhat funn y... Remember: Last night, 24 hours ago, lowest price 2,5k. Cryptsy (for some nice wager I'll show you my own transaction at 2,6..., deal? Or just the usual bull crap?)

Edit to add: It is Bull crap as usual, right?

it wasnt visibile in the 1+ day charts where i was looking (1 to 1 1/2 year timespan back).
when i checked it was just a flash crash and the candles closed again at 3,4 k.

show me how much NXT you bought, from the 1 million volume in 6 hours from 3,7 k to 2,5 then back to 3,4 k.
this is really something very marginal besides the fact that we are at nearly 4 k again

*edit
cryptsy has <5% of nxt trading volume? 

 How much would you consider significant, motor mouth? Because I was able to snatch as much as I could afford -liquidity- at the time...

[barabbas]

Please provide info on which trading houses are having problems with the wallet, if you can. I would like to get them some help. I haven't heard the problem you claim since Mintpal were saying they were interested in integration.

Sorry that I forgot to respond to this. Cryptsy is THE house that I know very well off that has had and still has continuous problems with NXT... as recently as 2 weeks ago with withdrawals not being possible FOR OVER A WEEK!. It is a well know fact that Cryptsy has had all kinds of problems with NXT since the very beginning and they don't seem to be even close to resolves for they continue to pop up.

I guess you were kind of counting on my not providing a straight answer (that would be a first, just for you to know). There have been others, including the one you mention too but I don't hyave first person, direct knowledge of them, therefore I don't mention them specifically. Cryptsy, being one of the biggest, I guess qualifies enough, right?

So, to put the baby to rest so to speak, IT IS INDEED A PROBLEM that a correlation clearly exists between the "success" of the platform and the decimation suffered by the price in recent months. FACT.

It is more than probable, for a huge percentage of crypto users will agree with that (and no, I don't have the specifics, but you yourself, in another thread, offer the BIGGEST corroboration of this possible), that the complexity of the coin, the wallet and the project, defined by me as the "intimidation factor", would precisely be he CAUSE you so direly are looking for FACT number one. Which, of course, were the points I wanted to hammer across in search of corrective solutions, before they were (tried to) diluted by you and other fan boys absolute nonsense in the last 2 pages of posts.

So, I would suggest that an efforts of significant proportions should be made to significantly REDUCE that complexity and to try to eliminate the "intimidation factor". I am convince such efforts could produce significantly positive results in adoption, at least inside crypto. And by that I mean going WAY BEYOND the scope of what has been done so far that, frankly, has only contributed to a clutter of "information" near impossible to sort out and, again, producing the exact opposite of the expected effect: Scaring people off rather than inform them and, through that information, making the intimidation disappear. I would even suggest something like one of two videos, as a good starting point. Perhaps a very simple FAQs section in the BTCT thread and on the Forum... NOT OPEN TO "CLARIFICATIONS" OR DEBATE, just simple, straightforward answers to common question. Perhaps also a whole thread dedicated to people who is new to the coin and (separated) the platform, in which to bring up the very basics along with the new features, again, in a simple, easy to understand BY EVERYONE, manner. I don't know, there are many actions that should be taken... first one, by a long shot, eliminating condescending post from fan boy jerkoffs with an agenda. Or, in more "civilized" terms, the solution would start only when recognition that the problem exist is achieved. In your particular case, starting by admitting that, precisely, yourself. Then -and only then- a debate, a productive one, is possible.

Not very likely, I'm afraid, if my intuition is to be trusted...

[Daedelus]

So, to put the baby to rest so to speak, IT IS INDEED A PROBLEM that a correlation clearly exists between the "success" of the platform and the decimation suffered by the price in recent months. FACT.

Why should I share your opinion?


(hint)

Also, if you want more people to share your opinion...

So... unless you believe that I make the sun rise... we're back to this:

So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.

[barabbas]

So, to put the baby to rest so to speak, IT IS INDEED A PROBLEM that a correlation clearly exists between the "success" of the platform and the decimation suffered by the price in recent months. FACT.

Why should I share your opinion?


(hint)

Also, if you want more people to share your opinion...

So... unless you believe that I make the sun rise... we're back to this:

So please post the blockchain data that shows the causation that you repeatable claim. And then show how this ties into the top 50/70 accounts and how the forging revenue has any relevance to business start ups and success. We can then discuss this data, rather than continue to re-read your unvarnished opinion.

You particularly, shouldn't and I know would not, no matter the FACT that you yourself acknowledged the staggering complexity of just one feature on the platform. You are just not the type, I'm afraid. The proverbial "you would not recognize it, much less accept it, even if it would bit you in the ass", fully applies. Sadly.

But in answering your questions, for others, because the REALITY and the FACTS as of this moment, fully available to anyone, support that opinion fully. People without agendas or kool aid fully recognizes this and simply stay away. And the price continues stagnant and going down, as a direct correlation/consequence.

When you are a fan boy you are a fan boy, and that carries a burden impossible to fully shake off. Realities. Facts...