[BTC-TC] Virtual Community Exchange [CLOSED]

[Lytse]

I cannot reach the server, is it down?

Works fine here.

OK, here too, thanks!

[TECHICENINE]

do you guys still offer naked shorting to inside players?..thanks
PM me again

eh, sure.

All you have to do is deposit 10k BTC and transfer it to "burnside" on the exchange.  

Then I'll consider programming in support for shorting.  

no i said NAKED short where can i sign up i want to play it safe if the server goes wonky..thanks

[twentyseventy]

I hate to follow up on anything 'TECHICENINE' has asked, but is there anything in the works for 'non-naked' / or 'covered' shorting?

Possibly a system where your initial capital could be held, covering you for up to a 100% increase in the price (after which, your 'margin' would be called)?

Sorry if this has been asked in the past-

[burnside]

I hate to follow up on anything 'TECHICENINE' has asked, but is there anything in the works for 'non-naked' / or 'covered' shorting?

Possibly a system where your initial capital could be held, covering you for up to a 100% increase in the price (after which, your 'margin' would be called)?

Sorry if this has been asked in the past-

No worries.  It's been discussed a bit before.  I wouldn't mind doing something along those lines, but it's pretty low on the priority list at the moment.  Totally sucks, but most of what I've been doing the last couple weeks has been behind the scenes.  Hopefully I can get into more fun stuff before too long. 

Cheers.

[twentyseventy]

No worries.  It's been discussed a bit before.  I wouldn't mind doing something along those lines, but it's pretty low on the priority list at the moment.  Totally sucks, but most of what I've been doing the last couple weeks has been behind the scenes.  Hopefully I can get into more fun stuff before too long. 

Cheers.

Well, I'll be waiting for it; thanks for the quick response and keep up the good work!

[FloatesMcgoates]

If the moderators dont approve AMC by tomorrow, then btctc will surely miss out on alot of business

[furuknap]

If the moderators dont approve AMC by tomorrow, then btctc will surely miss out on alot of business

That's the thing; LTC-G moderators have no incentive to vote. They get paid in any case from listing fees which are charged no matter whether they do the job they get paid to do :-/

Why would they care? Whether this gets approved now or at some point in the future is irrelevant to them. If it booms, great, they get paid a percentage of the share price anyway. If it doesn't, well, they still get paid the listing fees.

Only asset issuers bears any risk of listing. Moderators can just say 'meh!' and come back sometime in the future. In fact, if they don't do anything at all, they may even get paid listing fees twice.

.b

[TECHICENINE]

If the moderators dont approve AMC by tomorrow, then btctc will surely miss out on alot of business

That's the thing; LTC-G moderators have no incentive to vote. They get paid in any case from listing fees which are charged no matter whether they do the job they get paid to do :-/

Why would they care? Whether this gets approved now or at some point in the future is irrelevant to them. If it booms, great, they get paid a percentage of the share price anyway. If it doesn't, well, they still get paid the listing fees.

Only asset issuers bears any risk of listing. Moderators can just say 'meh!' and come back sometime in the future. In fact, if they don't do anything at all, they may even get paid listing fees twice.

.b

and who runs the whole circus prolly MM and his buddies..thanks

[EskimoBob]

I still hope that BTC-TC, LTCGlobaL (and Bitfunder) start demanding proper reporting and make sure, that important news are sent out via exchange and after that show up in this cesspool

Cheers!


 

[furuknap]

I still hope that BTC-TC, LTCGlobaL (and Bitfunder) start demanding proper reporting and make sure, that important news are sent out via exchange and after that show up in this cesspool

I agree. If cryptostock investments are to go anywhere, especially with the increasing focus from regulatory authorities, it needs to implement self-imposed guidelines and regulations. I think the exchange that first implements this will be the winner (and, I'm sorry to say, excluding MPEx due to user experience issues for now).

The thing is, it's small business for now, driven in no small part by community pressure rather than firm hands. The exchanges would need to invest and risk a huge change in their operations for a possible future income at some point. I'm not sure the exchange operators would approve of such vast changes.

.b

[TECHICENINE]

 " self-imposed guidelines and regulations "





ya this is how the current OTC markets operate sec don't care until they get a wave of complaints..thanks

[burnside]

If the moderators dont approve AMC by tomorrow, then btctc will surely miss out on alot of business

That's the thing; LTC-G moderators have no incentive to vote. They get paid in any case from listing fees which are charged no matter whether they do the job they get paid to do :-/

Why would they care? Whether this gets approved now or at some point in the future is irrelevant to them. If it booms, great, they get paid a percentage of the share price anyway. If it doesn't, well, they still get paid the listing fees.

Only asset issuers bears any risk of listing. Moderators can just say 'meh!' and come back sometime in the future. In fact, if they don't do anything at all, they may even get paid listing fees twice.

.b

I know I've seen some good suggestions (via email) regarding motivating mods to vote.  My personal favorite is a guaranteed 50% refund if an issue hasn't received eight ( votes or been approved within a two week span of the start of voting.  Refund too much and people will spam the system.  Refund too little and the mods won't have as much incentive to vote.

Any other thoughts out there?

Cheers.

[TECHICENINE]

If the moderators dont approve AMC by tomorrow, then btctc will surely miss out on alot of business

That's the thing; LTC-G moderators have no incentive to vote. They get paid in any case from listing fees which are charged no matter whether they do the job they get paid to do :-/

Why would they care? Whether this gets approved now or at some point in the future is irrelevant to them. If it booms, great, they get paid a percentage of the share price anyway. If it doesn't, well, they still get paid the listing fees.

Only asset issuers bears any risk of listing. Moderators can just say 'meh!' and come back sometime in the future. In fact, if they don't do anything at all, they may even get paid listing fees twice.

.b

I know I've seen some good suggestions (via email) regarding motivating mods to vote.  My personal favorite is a guaranteed 50% refund if an issue hasn't received eight ( votes or been approved within a two week span of the start of voting.  Refund too much and people will spam the system.  Refund too little and the mods won't have as much incentive to vote.

Any other thoughts out there?

Cheers.

yes there should not be any votes charge whatever to list and let the market makers decide..thanks B

[burnside]

yes there should not be any votes charge whatever to list and let the market makers decide..thanks B

Heh, how many of your 28 posts are in this thread?

Surely there are more interesting things to follow?

[TECHICENINE]

yes there should not be any votes charge whatever to list and let the market makers decide..thanks B

Heh, how many of your 28 posts are in this thread?

Surely there are more interesting things to follow?

you all have how many thousands of dollars tied up in there you should go all out open for business..thanks

[Trance104]

yes there should not be any votes charge whatever to list and let the market makers decide..thanks B

Heh, how many of your 28 posts are in this thread?

Surely there are more interesting things to follow?

you all have how many thousands of dollars tied up in there you should go all out open for business..thanks

I agree with Burn. You're going a little crazy.

If you can't risk the money, don't invest. That's the very FIRST "rule" of investing.

[Lohoris]

My personal favorite is a guaranteed 50% refund if an issue hasn't received eight ( votes or been approved within a two week span of the start of voting.  Refund too much and people will spam the system.  Refund too little and the mods won't have as much incentive to vote.

Any other thoughts out there?

I'm puzzled, I thought that if you didn't get listed, you got back the whole sum.
It doesn't make much sense to pay in order to have the possibility of getting listed or not.
0.1/5 BTC is the maximum amount I would consider "fine" to keep in case the security doesn't get listed...

[The_Jacobson]

My personal favorite is a guaranteed 50% refund if an issue hasn't received eight ( votes or been approved within a two week span of the start of voting.  Refund too much and people will spam the system.  Refund too little and the mods won't have as much incentive to vote.

Any other thoughts out there?

I'm puzzled, I thought that if you didn't get listed, you got back the whole sum.
It doesn't make much sense to pay in order to have the possibility of getting listed or not.
0.1/5 BTC is the maximum amount I would consider "fine" to keep in case the security doesn't get listed...

From the website

There is a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE of 5 BTC per security created.

[Lohoris]

From the website

There is a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE of 5 BTC per security created.

Yes, and I was stating that this doesn't make much sense :/ hoping in some clarifications...

BTW, where in the site there is that info? I really couldn't find it...

[The_Jacobson]

From the website

There is a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE of 5 BTC per security created.

Yes, and I was stating that this doesn't make much sense :/ hoping in some clarifications...

BTW, where in the site there is that info? I really couldn't find it...

On market tab click create security and its on asset issuer terms of service.

I think the problem is that with a fully refundable fee is that people will create bad securities and spam the system. But now there is no incentive for moderators to vote in a timely fashion so burnside is trying to make an incentive for them to do so (50% refund).

That's what I have gathered.