[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread

[xibeijan]

I like what I have read about counterparty and my sixth sense is that it is more legit than competitors. However, I am not technical minded at all.

Could someone please explain the difference between counterparty and some of the other cryptos purporting to do the same thing, like mastercoin, namecoin, ethereum etc?

thank you

Functionality-wise, Counterparty has the most features live and available right now. It is also important to note that Counterparty can trade directly against BTC on the Counterparty decentralized exchange - something others cannot do.

The major difference and in my mind though is that Counterparty is developed under the same principles as Satoshi. The platform was developed for the people to use and *never* was there and will there be some IPO that favours and enrichens the developers. The developers of the platform had to buy in exactly the same way in which everyone else during the proof of burn period.

All other platforms either:

* Have an extremely small number of large holders, or
* Have a 'social contract' to 'richly reward early adopters, or
* Have raised funds in a commercial fashion,

Counterparty is built by the people for the people.

Makes sense regarding the funding at inception. That is definitely a plus. Is there a broad based consensus that the features on there are better? What about the developer team? Are they more skilled or more serious or even just more full time than competitors?

Counterparty had a smaller team made entirely of volunteers and had much less development time when compared to competing projects. Counterparty now has the most technologically advanced platform and the best user interface.

I can't take the lies anymore.

Go compare NXT's UI (http://nxt.org) to Counterpary's UI.  NXT's is definitely winning on the UI front.  Counterparty has feeds, betting and CFDs, which NXT doesn't do yet.  NXT has a decentralised asset exchange with faster trading via 1 minute block times and doesn't waste any energy because it's proof-of-stake.  Counterparty has 10 minute block times and relies on Bitcoin, which requires a couple nuclear power plants to run.

I would not say Counterparty is the most "technologically advanced" either, since it's simply embedding it's protocol inside Bitcoin, something that has disadvantages.  Sure it means less code and less work, but it also means some tradeoffs.

There are advantages and disadvantages when comparing Counterparty with other decentralized exchanges.  NXT is by far the most user friendly I have found.

[1714802569]

1714802569

[1714802569]

1714802569

[1714802569]

1714802569

[1714802569]

1714802569

[1714802569]

1714802569

[1714802569]

1714802569

[xibeijan]

Ooo wait... spoke too soon.

I am now getting this...

> counterpartyd send --source <sorry> --destination <hidden> --quantity 123 --asset XCP
Transaction (unsigned): XXXXX
Sign and broadcast? (y/N) y
Transaction (signed): XXXXX
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/X/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/counterpartyd.py", line 693, in <module>
    args.unsigned)
  File "/home/X/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/counterpartyd.py", line 187, in cli
    print('Hash of transaction (broadcasted):', bitcoin.broadcast_tx(signed_tx_hex))
  File "/home/X/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 547, in broadcast_tx
    return send_raw_transaction(signed_tx_hex)
  File "/home/X/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 55, in send_raw_transaction
    return rpc('sendrawtransaction', [tx_hex])
  File "/home/X/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 165, in rpc
    raise exceptions.BitcoindError('{}'.format(response_json['error']))
lib.exceptions.BitcoindError: {'message': 'TX rejected', 'code': -22}

How can I send XCP?  Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

Check out: https://www.counterparty.co/resources/faqs/i-got-an-error-tx-rejected-code-22-what-is-that/

Thanks.

I confirm

* Enough BTC: Yes
* At least a few confirmations: overs 1 months
* Bitcoind is running and configured properly: no errors in my debug.log
* Waited 10-20 min, 2 week, 2 months: always get this error

Here's my bug report:

counterpartyd --unsigned send --source <from> --destination <to> --quantity 200 --asset XCP
Transaction (unsigned): 0100000002c1eef0f50d2951e0ce71f70dff630291e6de6b1795a0ccc4f20ab944e4cebaa900000 0001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6f30fb50add2d27ec4d64a771888acffffffff084360e4a725dd0c 4c696f2a002ec7522e8235c32bae2d3e01cfa9240dcd80d9020000001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6 f30fb50add2d27ec4d64a771888acffffffff036c2a0000000000001976a914b22854289bda0c16 0cb353a00e2a2fda86b640ef88ac6c2a000000000000475121032bff26e6179750c88ffb4aa1eb6 a8cfc00878d72222ea0bcd768f28de29a6b29211c434e5452505254590000000000000000000000 0100000004a817c8000000000052ae36150000000000001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6f30fb50add 2d27ec4d64a771888ac00000000

Any progress with this?  I need to be able to send XCP.

[baddw]

Yeah! We don't want the developers backing the technology to have any funding!

Yeah!  We want to give millions of dollars to kids straight out of college, with no strings attached or legal ownership structure in place, so they can produce an open-source product which can then be copied by anybody!

(Perhaps over-stated, but then so was yours.)

[led_lcd]

Yeah! We don't want the developers backing the technology to have any funding!

It's so taboo of Swam's and Ethereum's founders to try to support their work by raising funds.  This is sooooo different than Satoshi whose retargeting parameters for baby bitcoin did not favour early miners.

I prefer decentralization of interest for the ongoing viability of a platform. I prefer that technology as important as important as we are uncovering is owned by the people who it will serve, and not by a select few.

[xibeijan]

Yeah! We don't want the developers backing the technology to have any funding!

Yeah!  We want to give millions of dollars to kids straight out of college, with no strings attached or legal ownership structure in place, so they can produce an open-source product which can then be copied by anybody!

(Perhaps over-stated, but then so was yours.)

Mine was in response to something overstated, but it seems you have come back to agree with my point.  Funding for developers is good.  I believe Bitcoin has introduced a new kind of "legal ownership" that does not require lawyers and institutions to confirm.

[mishax1]

multiAPIConsensus: Parallel call failed (no server returned success). Method: create_order; Last error: JSON-RPC Error:
Type: Server error

Code: -32000

Message: insufficient funds

while selling swarm for xcp. I don't have xcp.  means?

[JahPowerBit]

multiAPIConsensus: Parallel call failed (no server returned success). Method: create_order; Last error: JSON-RPC Error:
Type: Server error

Code: -32000

Message: insufficient funds

while selling swarm for xcp. I don't have xcp.  means?

Do you have some dust BTC in this address? Seems you just did a unconfirmed transaction with this address.

[baddw]

Yeah! We don't want the developers backing the technology to have any funding!

Yeah!  We want to give millions of dollars to kids straight out of college, with no strings attached or legal ownership structure in place, so they can produce an open-source product which can then be copied by anybody!

(Perhaps over-stated, but then so was yours.)

Mine was in response to something overstated, but it seems you have come back to agree with my point.  Funding for developers is good.  I believe Bitcoin has introduced a new kind of "legal ownership" that does not require lawyers and institutions to confirm.

Funding is good.  Of course I agree, but the Counterparty developers obviously had the means to self-fund, and as far as I can tell have made more progress and put more end-user-usable work into the product than the developers of other Bitcoin 2.0 projects such as Mastercoin and BitShares.  NXT stands out as having not raised much money at all, only 23 BTC?  And that was apparently after most of the work had been done?  And all NXT were distributed to some 70 individuals?  I'm sorry but if you are talking about developer funding being an important part of a coin/token/DAC platform, I don't see how you can really support NXT.

I agree that Bitcoin/DACs creates a new form of ownership, whether recognized by law or not.  However, when I'm sending real-world money (or tokens representing substantial amounts of real-world money) to another real-world person who is supposed to be doing real-world work, I would like some real-world recourse if they decide to abscond with it.  Once the coin/DAC has been created, it's open-sourced and in use by many people, and there's fair-market pricing available for it, I am willing to buy into whatever, but anything "IPO"-like requires a leap of faith in the people, not the cryptography.  I am sometimes willing to make that leap, but only in very small amounts.

[led_lcd]

Mine was in response to something overstated, but it seems you have come back to agree with my point.  Funding for developers is good.  I believe Bitcoin has introduced a new kind of "legal ownership" that does not require lawyers and institutions to confirm.

What part of my post was overstated? If there are any inaccuracies in what I said, I'd be happy to correct them.

I didn't say that funding for developers was bad. The developers in Counterparty had the same opportunity to participate as everyone else and obviously they are invested in their own platform. Their fortunes are more intimately linked to the outcome of the platform than if a bunch of money was handed over to them to take care of.

Edit: overlap with what baddw said

[deliciousowl]

I can't take the lies anymore.

Go compare NXT's UI (http://nxt.org) to Counterpary's UI.  NXT's is definitely winning on the UI front.  Counterparty has feeds, betting and CFDs, which NXT doesn't do yet.  NXT has a decentralised asset exchange with faster trading via 1 minute block times and doesn't waste any energy because it's proof-of-stake.  Counterparty has 10 minute block times and relies on Bitcoin, which requires a couple nuclear power plants to run.

I would not say Counterparty is the most "technologically advanced" either, since it's simply embedding it's protocol inside Bitcoin, something that has disadvantages.  Sure it means less code and less work, but it also means some tradeoffs.

There are advantages and disadvantages when comparing Counterparty with other decentralized exchanges.  NXT is by far the most user friendly I have found.

Well. The NXT decentralized asset exchange only supports trading between NXT and assets, not assets and other assets. It also doesn't have automating distribution payments (dividends). Not to mention, there are various security issues with NXT, such as address collisions. These are very important factors to be considering, and are quite a bit more significant in the grand scheme of things than whether a block takes 1 or 10 minutes.

From a financial perspective, NXT is much worse. All existing NXT coins were distributed across only 71 different addresses, and remains very centralized today (from a financial perspective). Not only that, but reliably forging NXT blocks requires a lot of NXT, making the rich richer. This is made worse by making it possible to 'lease' forging power to other users, which makes mining pools more popular.

So in summary, NXTCoin is missing 95% of Counterparty features, makes the rich richer, is objectively less secure, and encourages mining pool centralization and forging multiple times simultaneously. Presumably that's why they decided to call it forging.

[nakaone]

I am a burner of btc for xcp so I basically followed the project over since its birth - great progress, however I still think xcp is underused and does not catch up with the great development of the protocol.

non-technical question/idea for the use of xcp regarding fundraising to the developers:

I think we all agree that the liquidity of the protocols currency is not enough to use it for fundraising. we should have all learned from the mastercoin/maidsafe disaster of pegging a currency for fundraising and avoid it. the second way of using two currencies for fundraising is given by protoshares/bitcoin in the btsx snapshot: it was much better to use the dutch auction (?) than the pegging by mastercoin, but still has its downsights.

When I read Swarms announcement yesterday I had a third idea of using a protocols native currency: I like Swarms general idea, but think it is half-baked at this time. So I did not decide to send large sums of btc. However I had the idea that this would be a great point of using xcps unique feature, that it can be taken in escrow on the blockchain: Imagine I could send an amount of xcp and decide for a finite time if I like the route the project is going and decide after the end of the timeframe if I would stick to the project. Is something like that possible?

I think it is the least artificial use of a protocols currency for fundraising, well basically it is the currencys practical use case.

From an economics perspective this has a lot of advantages, it avoids scams for the investors, it adds a use case for fundrasing. from the fundraisers perspective it adds some uncertainty regarding the amount of money, but on the other hand it adds an incentive to work properly and stay commited to the idea - I think this is in great coherence to the counterparty protocol. the second point from the fundraisers perspective is the liquidity of xcp - this has to be given by ongoing fundraising as well as different time spans of investors on chain escrows.

I think it would add on the least artifical way liquidity to the native currency
Comments?

[xibeijan]

Yeah! We don't want the developers backing the technology to have any funding!

Yeah!  We want to give millions of dollars to kids straight out of college, with no strings attached or legal ownership structure in place, so they can produce an open-source product which can then be copied by anybody!

(Perhaps over-stated, but then so was yours.)

Mine was in response to something overstated, but it seems you have come back to agree with my point.  Funding for developers is good.  I believe Bitcoin has introduced a new kind of "legal ownership" that does not require lawyers and institutions to confirm.

Funding is good.  Of course I agree, but the Counterparty developers obviously had the means to self-fund, and as far as I can tell have made more progress and put more end-user-usable work into the product than the developers of other Bitcoin 2.0 projects such as Mastercoin and BitShares.

Agree

NXT stands out as having not raised much money at all, only 23 BTC?  And that was apparently after most of the work had been done?  And all NXT were distributed to some 70 individuals?  I'm sorry but if you are talking about developer funding being an important part of a coin/token/DAC platform, I don't see how you can really support NXT.

The NXT developers are among the best funded out there, but not from the IPO sale.  They sold some shares at higher prices post IPO.  There are several full-time developers backing NXT and they have completed way more innovative work (written a whole cryptocurrency from scratch) than the XCP devs (XCP is ~6KLOC... it doesn't have its own blockchain nor does it have its own p2p networking code).  At least take a serious look at the NXT project before commenting on it.

I agree that Bitcoin/DACs creates a new form of ownership, whether recognized by law or not.  However, when I'm sending real-world money (or tokens representing substantial amounts of real-world money) to another real-world person who is supposed to be doing real-world work, I would like some real-world recourse if they decide to abscond with it.  Once the coin/DAC has been created, it's open-sourced and in use by many people, and there's fair-market pricing available for it, I am willing to buy into whatever, but anything "IPO"-like requires a leap of faith in the people, not the cryptography.  I am sometimes willing to make that leap, but only in very small amounts.

There is no fundamental difference between issuing an asset on XCP or NXT than launching in IPO for a new cryptocurrency.  They both carry risks for investors and are unregulated.  You speak of "real-world recourse", but that is not something that bitcoin and cryptocurrency is about.  In fact, it's intrinsically unsupported.  You are talking about bringing regulation, the established system, into the cryptocurrency realm.

Many in the cryptocurrency movement don't want handholding and regulation.  Many want to discern NXT and XCP from copy and paste pump and dumps themselves.  For example, many of us burned bitcoin and took the "leap of faith" and invest into the XCP IPO, others bought XCP on the exchange. There is always a risk and always a leap of faith.

[Spratan]

I have just read the last pages, and I am in a very bad mood...

Guys, we must recognize that Counterparty is very useful but XCP is useless.
Even Swarm won't use XCP, and community even thinks it is better for XCP because of risks ?!...Are we kidding ?

What happens with community's minimal ambition, competition and risk tolerance ?

Did you notice that even Maidsafe is ahead us !!! What a "chaotic IPO" !!!!
Nxt is 10 times more valuated, and its assets exchange, which was after CP, is not better but far more used now. Battle lost.

Everyone has left the thread. The first month was really exciting, but almost nothing happens since. 1 or 2 pages per week...
It is the first coin nobody talks about value, like a taboo ! Very lately, they were news like talks with overstock, xbet.io, a kind of privacy with mixing , swarm on press, even coindesk and NOBODY CARES !

Community hopes XCP to rise in value with bets and CFD, but at the moment the vast majority of the wolrd don't even use bitcoin, nor bets, nor CFD...
XCP is 10 years ahead...and we all know what eventually happens. When the market will mature at least, there will be 20 better competitors...In 20 years, we will read that CP was the first but 10 years later another Coin/Protocol was created and has been leading the market since. Same causes, same consequences.

Counterparty devs (who are exceptionnal) seems to have philantrophic goals ! I even think we are over-helping competitors to copy / steal us...

I am provocating and challenging our really smart community to at least discuss real answers to XCP use and plans for valuation.
Please don't answer :
- "Sell your stake !"
- "HOOOODL"
- "It is a troll"
- "I am confident we wil find someday something"
- "Just work freely for CP"
- "It is for the technology sake" or it is an experiment"
It is for shitcoins supporters.

I can't see XCP successful if we can't answer precisely why, and even when or how much. Chance is not an option.

Sorry for be provocative, but we can't have a XCP as low as 0.0035 BTC anymore, it is insane. It should be in the top 5 easily NOW.

[NewLiberty]

I think it is the least artificial use of a protocols currency for fundraising, well basically it is the currency's practical use case.

A good suggestion, and proof of concept rolled into one.

[deliciousowl]

I have just read the last pages, and I am in a very bad mood...

Guys, we must recognize that Counterparty is very useful but XCP is useless.
Even Swarm won't use XCP, and community even thinks it is better for XCP because of risks ?!...Are we kidding ?

What happens with community's minimal ambition, competition and risk tolerance ?

Did you notice that even Maidsafe is ahead us !!! What a "chaotic IPO" !!!!
Nxt is 10 times more valuated, and its assets exchange, which was after CP, is not better but far more used now. Battle lost.

Sorry for be provocative, but we can't have a XCP as low as 0.0035 BTC anymore, it is insane. It should be in the top 5 easily NOW.

XCP is a necessary intermediate for escrow and other functionality of Counterparty, and it opens up a lot of possibilities for future uses. It's part of how the protocol works, the market hype is hardly relevant to that. Every time someone wants to create an asset, 0.5 XCP is destroyed which increases scarcity. So while it is necessary for internal functionality, it will actually become more valuable as people create more assets. Please look into all the ways that XCP is used... For example, the potential for prediction markets without central control is massive.

Counterparty is the only feature-complete decentralized asset solution on the market, so why are you comparing it to projects that do not have any of the existing features? Because they spent most of their funding on marketing instead of results? Because market traders are not going crazy over the value? Because they promised you something years in advance?

Counterparty works, the rest only makes promises. Bitcoin took years to become noticed, and XCP is still in the early phases. Why do you expect Counterparty to immediately go to the moon? This is not some marketing-fuelled smoke and mirrors pump and dump, its real... Once people stop the 'hype' and actually try using the features, they may notice that only Counterparty provides what they need to conduct their crowdfunds, DAOs, distributions and decentralized bets.

I think you are too impatient, and more concerned about personal profits than how useful the existing functionality really can be.

[Spratan]

Thanks for your answer.

1/ With 0.5 XCP for each assets, it needs 40 000 assets and many years to gain 1% value...
Let's eventually forget this point, all of us !

2/ There is no such word as "impatience" when investing. You compare investments and determine best buy, and when.
We can't interest people with 1% gain in 5 years. Sorry to be profit-driven, but if community doesn't want profits with XCP, it is just entertainment or philanthropy. And 90 % less people, money and projects. Speculation is not greed. It means "foresee", that's all.

Let's say : If I can convince Apple to use Counterparty next week, will XCP price explode ? We hope so but answer is NO, .
Worst :
- For every other coin, it would be yes
- And Apple wouldn't be really satisfied because there is no investor, no hype, no user anyway.

Why and how precisely XCP can and will gain value ? From my point of view, there is no incitative to invest now. The consensus is "I can buy later at the same price, or hardly more" or "little gain to expect compared to others investments".

And we should not be naive : investors will choose competitors and others altcoins instead. And they ultimately prefer using coins in which they invested, so it is twice loss.

I am not the first, nor last to ask and to be fed up with answers like : "someday when everybody uses bitcoin perhaps".
We must list precisely why and how XCP can gain value (I have no idea now, just faith). I am sure, with such a technology, there are hidden points we won't figure out until we list it together. It is a 100 M$ list from my point of view.

[PhantomPhreak]

Thanks for your answer.

1/ With 0.5 XCP for each assets, it needs 40 000 assets and many years to gain 1% value...
Let's eventually forget this point, all of us !

2/ There is no such word as "impatience" when investing. You compare investments and determine best buy, and when.
We can't interest people with 1% gain in 5 years. Sorry to be profit-driven, but if community doesn't want profits with XCP, it is just entertainment or philanthropy. And 90 % less people, money and projects. Speculation is not greed. It means "foresee", that's all.

Let's say : If I can convince Apple to use Counterparty next week, will XCP price explode ? We hope so but answer is NO, .
Worst :
- For every other coin, it would be yes
- And Apple wouldn't be really satisfied because there is no investor, no hype, no user anyway.

Why and how precisely XCP can and will gain value ? From my point of view, there is no incitative to invest now. The consensus is "I can buy later at the same price, or hardly more" or "little gain to expect compared to others investments".

And we should not be naive : investors will choose competitors and others altcoins instead. And they ultimately prefer using coins in which they invested, so it is twice loss.

I am not the first, nor last to ask and to be fed up with answers like : "someday when everybody uses bitcoin perhaps".
We must list precisely why and how XCP can gain value (I have no idea now, just faith). I am sure, with such a technology, there are hidden points we won't figure out until we list it together. It is a 100 M$ list from my point of view.

Some reasons why XCP has value:

1) Trading with XCP on the distributed exchange is (and always will be) cheaper and faster than with BTC.

2) You can use only XCP for making bets, CFDs and asset callbacks. Forthcoming complex features and financial instruments will also likely be restricted to denomination in XCP.

3) All future proof-of-stake voting, e.g. for protocol changes, voting functionality, DACs, etc. will be determined by XCP holdings.

XCP is the native currency of Counterparty and its sole first-class citizen. If the Counterparty protocol has great value (as I'm sure that it does), then so does XCP.

[xibeijan]

I just need to be able to send XCP.

I confirm

* Enough BTC: Yes
* At least a few confirmations: overs 1 months
* Bitcoind is running and configured properly: no errors in my debug.log
* Waited 10-20 min, 2 week, 2 months: always get this error

Here's my bug report:

counterpartyd --unsigned send --source <from> --destination <to> --quantity 200 --asset XCP
Transaction (unsigned): 0100000002c1eef0f50d2951e0ce71f70dff630291e6de6b1795a0ccc4f20ab944e4cebaa900000 0001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6f30fb50add2d27ec4d64a771888acffffffff084360e4a725dd0c 4c696f2a002ec7522e8235c32bae2d3e01cfa9240dcd80d9020000001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6 f30fb50add2d27ec4d64a771888acffffffff036c2a0000000000001976a914b22854289bda0c16 0cb353a00e2a2fda86b640ef88ac6c2a000000000000475121032bff26e6179750c88ffb4aa1eb6 a8cfc00878d72222ea0bcd768f28de29a6b29211c434e5452505254590000000000000000000000 0100000004a817c8000000000052ae36150000000000001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6f30fb50add 2d27ec4d64a771888ac00000000

[fractastical]

I have just read the last pages, and I am in a very bad mood...

Guys, we must recognize that Counterparty is very useful but XCP is useless.
Even Swarm won't use XCP, and community even thinks it is better for XCP because of risks ?!...Are we kidding ?

What happens with community's minimal ambition, competition and risk tolerance ?

Did you notice that even Maidsafe is ahead us !!! What a "chaotic IPO" !!!!
Nxt is 10 times more valuated, and its assets exchange, which was after CP, is not better but far more used now. Battle lost.

Everyone has left the thread. The first month was really exciting, but almost nothing happens since. 1 or 2 pages per week...
It is the first coin nobody talks about value, like a taboo ! Very lately, they were news like talks with overstock, xbet.io, a kind of privacy with mixing , swarm on press, even coindesk and NOBODY CARES !

...
I can't see XCP successful if we can't answer precisely why, and even when or how much. Chance is not an option.

Sorry for be provocative, but we can't have a XCP as low as 0.0035 BTC anymore, it is insane. It should be in the top 5 easily NOW.

I agree. I think this requires a lot of marketing.  Many many people have heard of NXT and Mastercoin, but very few have heard of Counterparty. We need to change this.

#xcp #tothemoon

[PhantomPhreak]

I just need to be able to send XCP.

I confirm

* Enough BTC: Yes
* At least a few confirmations: overs 1 months
* Bitcoind is running and configured properly: no errors in my debug.log
* Waited 10-20 min, 2 week, 2 months: always get this error

Here's my bug report:

counterpartyd --unsigned send --source <from> --destination <to> --quantity 200 --asset XCP
Transaction (unsigned): 0100000002c1eef0f50d2951e0ce71f70dff630291e6de6b1795a0ccc4f20ab944e4cebaa900000 0001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6f30fb50add2d27ec4d64a771888acffffffff084360e4a725dd0c 4c696f2a002ec7522e8235c32bae2d3e01cfa9240dcd80d9020000001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6 f30fb50add2d27ec4d64a771888acffffffff036c2a0000000000001976a914b22854289bda0c16 0cb353a00e2a2fda86b640ef88ac6c2a000000000000475121032bff26e6179750c88ffb4aa1eb6 a8cfc00878d72222ea0bcd768f28de29a6b29211c434e5452505254590000000000000000000000 0100000004a817c8000000000052ae36150000000000001976a914cbeefd1b44465e6f30fb50add 2d27ec4d64a771888ac00000000

Try it with the option --encoding='op_return'. That should work, because it's just a send transaction. If doesn't, try bumping up the two DUST_SIZE values in the file config.py, restarting the server process, and trying again.

When Bitcoind rejects a transaction, it should say why in debug.log. The relevant message is usually rather hard to find, however.