Incorrect Bitcore(BTX) Circulating Supply on CMC

[minestro]

Really good thinking man... love it!

Yep, I think we need to push for option #1 till they obey.
Too bad CMC has become so big. Maybe we (dev team) need to start flashing the true circulation in font 144 in every communication, on the website and in every platform they can so that it become obvious to everyone that CMC is falsy representing BTX.

Not a good idea The only thing that would happen if we promote aggressively informations opposing the ones on CMC would be the people would start calling BTX a scam, because it's promoting untrue informations. So ATM as bad as it sounds, we would have to obey the decisions of CMC and hope we can make our case the best we can.

[1714572962]

1714572962

[1714572962]

1714572962

[1714572962]

1714572962

[SimpleCoiner]

It is what it is: Option 1

Sooner or later a lot of that coins will appear in the market, affecting the market numbers (price, volumes...). Any other option is absurd.

I don't think we have to "obey" CMC ... Who are they ? To me they are acting this way due some hidden interests, unknown for the rest us. What we have to do is to listen the BitCore community.

At the end, if CMC doesn't want to be rational, we can choose to obey or to adapt ourselves to the new situation considering more options, including a Bitcore fork to undo transactions for unclaimed BTC coins returning them to circulation again (via more airdrops, or any other method) to satisfy these new CMC rules "made expressly for us".

I'm not in crypto to obey arbitrary decissions from third parties, so it should be a BitCore community and developers decission.

[keyzersoze]

But BTX is not a fork.
Bitcoin Cash is a fork, therefore CMC has some kind of insurance in the circulation. And I'm certain that because of the vast exposure BCH got, they knew people would be more inclined to claim their free BCH.

Totally agree with you that over time, ppl will claim their free 0.5BTX, but nobody can predict the future. 6 months in crypto is like 6 years in real life, and I'm not convinced many people will try to claim their BTX past Q1-2018.

As a large BTX holder, I would love the see BTX climb in the top 30/50 quickly, but if they don't reflect the accurate circulation, so be it. This doesn't remove anything in the trust in the dev team and the bright future I see for Bitcore. A lower reflected circulation means scarcity for ppl, and this will put pressure on the price for the upside.

If there was a way to know the claimed BTX for the virtually forked coins portion of the circulation, that would be ideal. Since option #4 is not possible, if we can get CMC to reflect the true circulation, in that case option #2 is a good compromise.

Two points are bothering me. Scarcity, yes somehow. But it's countered by the less exposure the coin gets while being kept low because of the low capitalization.
And don't you think that the simple fact, that anyone looking at those numbers is always going to see those ghost coins and the large gap between total and circulating supply, and therefore is spreading only fud? IMHO CMC could make such rules but they would have to make them upfront and not afterwards.

With regards to scarcity, what's important is the $ market cap. I believe the dev team sees BTX in the top 10 (Steve said so in telegram today). If so, the market cap would at approx $1.8B. A reflected circulation of 16M means a $112 price. A circulation that excludes the virtually forked coins means a $225 price. Fewer coins in circulation mean scarcity, which means higher price.

But scarcity is only scarcity if the demand is there I get where you're going, but there are 2 factors in determining the price and that's not only supply but also demand. And the demand is rising with the exposure, which actually hugely determined by media coverage which is very influenced by the standing of a currency on coinmarketcap.
There are many facets to this discussion. Like if you choose option 2 what happens if the BTC whales start clamining their coins and the number of claimed coins is let's say about 1 Mio and if that is not being reflected by the circulating supply? Not listing 1/9 of the real circulating would also be a large failure.....
I slightly disagree on the difference of the BCH and BTX claiming situation. At least up to the point, that BTX i my eyes already reflected the smaller and slower claiming ratio by only making it half of the current supply.
But I think mostly we're sharing the same opinion. After all it looks like it would have been better if the devs would have talked to CMC before the airdrop. But again that would put CMC in a position no one wants them to be, perhaps no one besides themselves.

Really good thinking man... love it!

Yep, I think we need to push for option #1 till they obey.
Too bad CMC has become so big. Maybe we (dev team) need to start flashing the true circulation in font 144 in every communication, on the website and in every platform they can so that it become obvious to everyone that CMC is falsy representing BTX.

This idea, I like. A good start at least.

[keyzersoze]

It is what it is: Option 1

Sooner or later a lot of that coins will appear in the market, affecting the market numbers (price, volumes...). Any other option is absurd.

I don't think we have to "obey" CMC ... Who are they ? To me they are acting this way due some hidden interests, unknown for the rest us. What we have to do is to listen the BitCore community.

At the end, if CMC doesn't want to be rational, we can choose to obey or to adapt ourselves to the new situation considering more options, including a Bitcore fork to undo transactions for unclaimed BTC coins returning them to circulation again (via more airdrops, or any other method) to satisfy these new CMC rules "made expressly for us".

I'm not in crypto to obey arbitrary decissions from third parties, so it should be a BitCore community and developers decission.

THIS!!!!!!

[keyzersoze]

Really good thinking man... love it!
Yep, I think we need to push for option #1 till they obey.
Too bad CMC has become so big. Maybe we (dev team) need to start flashing the true circulation in font 144 in every communication, on the website and in every platform they can so that it become obvious to everyone that CMC is falsy representing BTX.

Not a good idea The only thing that would happen if we promote aggressively informations opposing the ones on CMC would be the people would start calling BTX a scam, because it's promoting untrue informations. So ATM as bad as it sounds, we would have to obey the decisions of CMC and hope we can make our case the best we can.

But we aren't promoting untrue information. We have the numbers and tx's to back up our claim, according to the way all other coins circulating supply is calculated. If anybody asks.
I haven't heard a single legitimate reason or counter argument from cmc, or from anybody else, why this should be any different.

[minestro]

It is what it is: Option 1

Sooner or later a lot of that coins will appear in the market, affecting the market numbers (price, volumes...). Any other option is absurd.

I don't think we have to "obey" CMC ... Who are they ? To me they are acting this way due some hidden interests, unknown for the rest us. What we have to do is to listen the BitCore community.

At the end, if CMC doesn't want to be rational, we can choose to obey or to adapt ourselves to the new situation considering more options, including a Bitcore fork to undo transactions for unclaimed BTC coins returning them to circulation again (via more airdrops, or any other method) to satisfy these new CMC rules "made expressly for us".

I'm not in crypto to obey arbitrary decissions from third parties, so it should be a BitCore community and developers decission.

We can decide what we want, but not what CMC puts on their page. But if you wanna go toe to toe with the no.1 place to go for information about crypto currencies, I don't think that's a good idea. I don't like it too, but trying to compete with CMC about credibility is IMHO a battle you're going to loose. We need to find a compromise in a diplomatic way, at least for starters. What doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer option 1. 1 would be tje ideal solution.

[agostine]

How is this really any different than still counting Satoshi's coins or the millions of lost Bitcoin as being "in circulation"?

This is exactly why it's so ridiculous, why is this even a discussion.

Exactly

Option no 1 is fair play.

[keyzersoze]

It is what it is: Option 1

Sooner or later a lot of that coins will appear in the market, affecting the market numbers (price, volumes...). Any other option is absurd.

I don't think we have to "obey" CMC ... Who are they ? To me they are acting this way due some hidden interests, unknown for the rest us. What we have to do is to listen the BitCore community.

At the end, if CMC doesn't want to be rational, we can choose to obey or to adapt ourselves to the new situation considering more options, including a Bitcore fork to undo transactions for unclaimed BTC coins returning them to circulation again (via more airdrops, or any other method) to satisfy these new CMC rules "made expressly for us".

I'm not in crypto to obey arbitrary decissions from third parties, so it should be a BitCore community and developers decission.

We can decide what we want, but not what CMC puts on their page. But if you wanna go toe to toe with the no.1 place to go for information about crypto currencies, I don't think that's a good idea. I don't like it too, but trying to compete with CMC about credibility is IMHO a battle you're going to loose. We need to find a compromise in a diplomatic way, at least for starters. What doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer option 1. 1 would be tje ideal solution.

What about the credibility of the coin? Having to explain those 8 million, every time someone asks. And never having an unquestionable circulating supply.

Has to be option one. Diplomatic is the only way, but option one is the only reasonable option.

[keyzersoze]

Btw, why is option 3 even in there?
When in my opinion, option 2 shouldn't even qualify.

[keyzersoze]

It would help if we had more info.
What are the arguments cmc has presented, and how can we present our response and position, In the most effective and productive manner? That should be top priority on our list.
Not trying to find arguments and excuses as to why we maybe should settle for option 2.

[gwestcot]

Btw, why is option 3 even in there?
When in my opinion, option 2 shouldn't even qualify.

Option 3 is here to show all of the potential options and to be as impartial as possible.

[eance]

Option 1. However, I have my reservations regarding CMC point of view.

[CryptosapienZA]

Option two of course, why would it be the first option? there is no sense with that at all.
Has anyone noticed that bitcore was just another pump & dump situation? just look at the price, it was less than 25$ by the beggining of the last week, and then suddenly pumped to more than $45 each one of them.
Now it is at $29 each and a lot of people invested money in there because they wanted to earn some free money from that.
Lets see how it goes, but it is a good project, only that it seems very shady to me, and that is why i will never put my funds into that coin.

Well to be fair option one is simply the way that CMC calculates every single other coin. Do you think all of Bitcoin Cash has been claimed? Do you think all of Bitcoin is truly "in circulation"? We are fine with being calculated by option 2 as long as everyone else is also calculated by option 2. We really just want fair treatment.

I instinctively chose option 2 but after reading this ^^ post. You make some valid arguments. CMC can't have double standards. How coins in circulation are calculated should be the same across board. So my final answer is option 1

[fromcoins]

Option 2: Circulating Supply does not include the "virtually forked" coins but still all of other coins

This option would not consider the "virtually forked" coins to be in circulation but all other coins would still be counted in the circulating supply. The circulating supply for this option would be 1,625,941.46974566. All additional airdrops and coins mined beyond block 84700 would of course have to be added to the running total.



How does this spell out? When definitely there are evidence that the coin was 'virtually forked' which does means it exists as seen in the blockchain and accessible for claimants, then of a sudden it is not counted amongst the coin in circulation.

[Kodyk5]

Option 1 is the best!

[thimei]

I think option 2 is at least minimum.

[Acidreload]

The ONE and only the ONE ^^

[SimpleCoiner]

It is what it is: Option 1

Sooner or later a lot of that coins will appear in the market, affecting the market numbers (price, volumes...). Any other option is absurd.

I don't think we have to "obey" CMC ... Who are they ? To me they are acting this way due some hidden interests, unknown for the rest us. What we have to do is to listen the BitCore community.

At the end, if CMC doesn't want to be rational, we can choose to obey or to adapt ourselves to the new situation considering more options, including a Bitcore fork to undo transactions for unclaimed BTC coins returning them to circulation again (via more airdrops, or any other method) to satisfy these new CMC rules "made expressly for us".

I'm not in crypto to obey arbitrary decissions from third parties, so it should be a BitCore community and developers decission.

We can decide what we want, but not what CMC puts on their page. But if you wanna go toe to toe with the no.1 place to go for information about crypto currencies, I don't think that's a good idea. I don't like it too, but trying to compete with CMC about credibility is IMHO a battle you're going to loose. We need to find a compromise in a diplomatic way, at least for starters. What doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer option 1. 1 would be tje ideal solution.

It's not about going toe to toe, this is about correct and real information. Bitcore deserves to be listed there correctly and we must try it the hardest we can. But in the last case, I even prefer that CMC remove Bitcore from their listings than to be there with numbers that cheat new Bitcore members, coming here always asking about this issue because they don't understand the wrong CMC numbers.

With the calculation method that CMC is currently using with Bitcore, it's impossible for any coin to be listed in high positions (not even for Bitcoin !).

Something is shady at CMC regarding this. This year there were coins that appeared in their TOP 20 from nowhere with most part of the coins not distributed, and big big chunks in the hands of the creators... And now they are arguing against Bitcore real numbers ? mmmm....

The Bitcore numbers in CMC were listed correctly for some hours and then they changed them. Why ? Who was the person/group that told them to change Bitcore numbers ? Something shady happened there...

[nmtz]

Option 1.

[gwestcot]

Option 4 , proposal
Define a maximum date to claim the btx to the btc holders and close that topic, The remaining coins are included in the airdrop, can this be done?

Greetings Community,

As many of you know, the Bitcore team have been trying to work through the issues with CMC about our circulating supply being incorrectly displayed. I believe CMC views our "virtually forked" coins to Bitcoin holders to not be in circulation so in response our circulating supply has been arbitrarily frozen at 1,195,602 as of November 6th. Since November 6th, we have tried to establish direct contact and consequently we have been waiting for our circulating supply to be corrected. We are now creating this poll to enlist the help of the community in determining a good solution to the problem. Below is a brief description regarding each option and also the spreadsheet that documents everything from the airdrops, first claiming period, virtual fork, development fund addresses, and even the supply from mining. We stopped the calculations at block 84700 so anything that has occurred after that is not accounted for in the spreadsheet. We hope that you find this poll satisfactory and if you have any questions then please be sure to ask.

Sincerely,

Your Bitcore Team

Option 1: Circulating Supply includes the "virtually forked" coins

This option would essentially mean that all coins not currently controlled by the development team are considered in circulation. The numbers are documented below in the spreadsheet and this would mean the circulating supply would be 9,945,943.897515 as of block 84700. We think that this treatment is very fair since the coins are not in our possession and it is exactly how Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and even additional forks have been calculated by CMC.

Option 2: Circulating Supply does not include the "virtually forked" coins but still all of other coins

This option would not consider the "virtually forked" coins to be in circulation but all other coins would still be counted in the circulating supply. The circulating supply for this option would be 1,625,941.46974566. All additional airdrops and coins mined beyond block 84700 would of course have to be added to the running total.

Option 3: Circulating Supply should be permanently frozen at 1,195,602

This option would mean that our circulating supply, despite any proven numbers, would be permanently frozen at 1,195,602.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gzHqrDDCHyfBtA4H4wl15VYHQzwwfULcJq1r4JcVnOA/edit?usp=sharing

Was there any response when, how and if they would consider the virtual forked coins as circulating supply. As there would be: never, when they are transferred from the fork address or when the fork address' amount is changed in any way?
They can't only say, "Sorry guys, it's done. The supply is going to be frozen forever.". Are they going to at least count the future airdrops into the circulating supply? That's all very strange.
Why do they don't count the virtual fork into the circulating supply? The money is accessible for the ones having the needed private key as every other address on the blockchain. I really don't get on what grounds they're arguing to not count the virtual forked coins. What's the criterium for a coin to be count into the circulating supply. There has to be a definition from their side.

IMHO that's completely BS. By their criteria to not count the forked coins, they would have to ignore most of the "sleeping whale" accounts in other blockchains. I really just don't get it and it feels very arbitrary.

That would require a hard fork so I don't think it is the preferable option.