[ANN][BITS][Bitstar] Now on Cryptopia, Nova and Yobit new wallet fork in testing

[kb4scv]

Yeah, a lot to the whole "fairness" thing, even though it was billed as a "fair" way to launch a coin.  Does not really seem that way to me, but they have their reasons for doing what they did and hopefully it all works out.

At least the Bits supply shrinks, so whenever Bits have a reason for more interest, should translate into higher prices for the coin.

[tranzactionezlive]

Yeah, a lot to the whole "fairness" thing, even though it was billed as a "fair" way to launch a coin.  Does not really seem that way to me, but they have their reasons for doing what they did and hopefully it all works out.

At least the Bits supply shrinks, so whenever Bits have a reason for more interest, should translate into higher prices for the coin.

I am over 1% shareholder in BITS and had no way of getting in on a "merger". That's less fair than corporatist crookery.

[MadCow]

Yeah, a lot to the whole "fairness" thing, even though it was billed as a "fair" way to launch a coin.  Does not really seem that way to me, but they have their reasons for doing what they did and hopefully it all works out.

At least the Bits supply shrinks, so whenever Bits have a reason for more interest, should translate into higher prices for the coin.

I am over 1% shareholder in BITS and had no way of getting in on a "merger". That's less fair than corporatist crookery.

I feel bad for you. Your 1% in BITS is a larger stake post burn, and maybe you can do a  trade with someone who has second thoughts and wants to decrease their BATL stake. My understanding is the new project has far more risk, and is dubbed "experimental", whatever that means. You might be glad you missed the burn deadline if it tanks. BITS is still a good project, especially with the SuperNET connection. Is BATL in SN?

[T3CLtd]

Why wasn't this announced on Poloniex which was the main exchange for BITS for over 2 years ?

It is unfair to many holders including myself who put up alot of time/investment into BITS.

Had you been an active member of the BITS community you would be more than aware of both the fact that Bittrex has been, bar far, the most active exchange for Bitstarcoin over the past two years and, what is more, that this experimental coin project and burn process was announced quite some time ago in this thread.

I am over 1% shareholder in BITS and had no way of getting in on a "merger". That's less fair than corporatist crookery.

You appear to misunderstand the difference between holding a share, which is an asset, and buying some digital currency, which is not.

I find it hard to understand how you think you have put a lot of time into this coin project when neither I, nor the devs, recall seeing you anywhere near the work that has been ongoing consistently throughout the lifetime of this open-source project.

[kb4scv]

Why wasn't this announced on Poloniex which was the main exchange for BITS for over 2 years ?

It is unfair to many holders including myself who put up alot of time/investment into BITS.

Had you been an active member of the BITS community you would be more than aware of both the fact that Bittrex has been, bar far, the most active exchange for Bitstarcoin over the past two years and, what is more, that this experimental coin project and burn process was announced quite some time ago in this thread.

I am over 1% shareholder in BITS and had no way of getting in on a "merger". That's less fair than corporatist crookery.

You appear to misunderstand the difference between holding a share, which is an asset, and buying some digital currency, which is not.

I find it hard to understand how you think you have put a lot of time into this coin project when neither I, nor the devs, recall seeing you anywhere near the work that has been ongoing consistently throughout the lifetime of this open-source project.

Since you have no obligation to the holders of Bits, not sure why you take it upon yourself to answer these type of questions.  Like it or not, ppl are entitled to post opinions. 

Take it for what it is, either complete BS or constructive criticism.  If it is hard to tell which one it is, leave it alone.

[tranzactionezlive]

Why wasn't this announced on Poloniex which was the main exchange for BITS for over 2 years ?

It is unfair to many holders including myself who put up alot of time/investment into BITS.

Had you been an active member of the BITS community you would be more than aware of both the fact that Bittrex has been, bar far, the most active exchange for Bitstarcoin over the past two years and, what is more, that this experimental coin project and burn process was announced quite some time ago in this thread.

I am over 1% shareholder in BITS and had no way of getting in on a "merger". That's less fair than corporatist crookery.

You appear to misunderstand the difference between holding a share, which is an asset, and buying some digital currency, which is not.

I find it hard to understand how you think you have put a lot of time into this coin project when neither I, nor the devs, recall seeing you anywhere near the work that has been ongoing consistently throughout the lifetime of this open-source project.

You felt my money didn't you ?

[kb4scv]

Many people seem to forget that much of the premise behind these coins right now is getting people to spend money on them so they are viable to work with.

I think some need to step back and realize that other people's money is being risked.  Regardless of what you think the risk-reward is for any project being attempted, everyone who is willing to spend some money for a coin is entitles to research, prod, poke, ask, demand, examines, etc, as much as they feel is necessary to make the decision to risk some of their money.

When people decide to put some risk into your particular project, you should feel honored that they felt you were worth it. 

[T3CLtd]

Since you have no obligation to the holders of Bits, not sure why you take it upon yourself to answer these type of questions.  Like it or not, ppl are entitled to post opinions. 

Take it for what it is, either complete BS or constructive criticism.  If it is hard to tell which one it is, leave it alone.

I am countering the BS with facts, which are to point out that this whining about some sort of perceived loss due to how the buy/burn process was conducted, which I helped co-ordinate, is utterly false. While I have no obligation to you or 'tranzactionezlive' this does not mean I should remain silent when you choose to both start posting complaints about the process not having been fair.

You felt my money didn't you ?

I don't know, did you 'feel' mine? What an odd thing to say.

BTW, it seems you were aware from the outset that this experimental coin was going to be issued:

Still waiting on this, glad i looked at the thread it would've sucked to see in a month that i lost my 150k.


Last time i tried to sync 3 days didn't do it, and i just called it quits. Must....find.....file.

That post, plus more that followed, indicate that you had more than enough time to understand what was going to take place and that it would be announced in this thread closer to the time, which it was.

[kb4scv]

I have my opinion about it, yes.  I do not see it the way you do, which is both fair and just as right as any opinion you have.  The very fact that you helped coordinate it makes you biased right off the bat.

I am not saying what you guys did was right or wrong.  You have your reasons for what you did and hopefully it works out for you.  However, looking at what you did, from my point of view it was a lot of "trust me" about using Bits for another project.  Those that did and wanted to spend the coin, went for it.  Others did not.

There are going to be posts for and against it either way.  If you say that the guys post was BS, I am just saying there is no need to attack people talking nonsense.

If anyone wants to post a criticism, I would suggest taking it under advisement and maybe somewhere down the road it helps.

That is all.  I am supporting Bits.  I did not go for the "experiment" for my own reasons, but I am not attacking you or devs for doing whatever you feel helps you down the road, and I do understand people are going to be emotional, and/or, play games with it.  That is just part of the process with these projects.  Don't be so defensive.

[tranzactionezlive]

I have my opinion about it, yes.  I do not see it the way you do, which is both fair and just as right as any opinion you have.  The very fact that you helped coordinate it makes you biased right off the bat.

I am not saying what you guys did was right or wrong.  You have your reasons for what you did and hopefully it works out for you.  However, looking at what you did, from my point of view it was a lot of "trust me" about using Bits for another project.  Those that did and wanted to spend the coin, went for it.  Others did not.

There are going to be posts for and against it either way.  If you say that the guys post was BS, I am just saying there is no need to attack people talking nonsense.

If anyone wants to post a criticism, I would suggest taking it under advisement and maybe somewhere down the road it helps.

That is all.  I am supporting Bits.  I did not go for the "experiment" for my own reasons, but I am not attacking you or devs for doing whatever you feel helps you down the road, and I do understand people are going to be emotional, and/or, play games with it.  That is just part of the process with these projects.  Don't be so defensive.

Of course he's defensive, he made the exchange window as short as it was for obvious reasons. While not announcing in time when this is going to be, like people who invested BTC in BITS need to follow him. Why weren't exact dates posted in the OP ? Because he expected and hoped to be one of the few to exchange, stealing legitimacy from BITS to his project for the future pumpendump. I bet most of the coins exchanged belong to the same party.


Now we need to wait until he gets someone to close this thread because of negative(factual) exposure.

[Mark81]

There are ways to keep up on what is posted to this forum.

[T3CLtd]

Why weren't exact dates posted in the OP ?

Because the development of the new coin wallet was being done by independent coders who have RL jobs and responsibilities and were not being held to a commercial delivery timeline as they do not work for my company.

Because he expected and hoped to be one of the few to exchange, stealing legitimacy from BITS to his project for the future pumpendump.

I fail to see how a speculative project, which offered no guarantees or promises and was not funded by the new coin's distribution process, could be accused of being a 'pump and dump'.

I bet most of the coins exchanged belong to the same party.

It would be extremely suspicious if a substantial portion of our own BITS holdings were not used to establish a viable stake in the new coin considering the commercial app project we are working on incorporates it, would it not? In fact, were we not to have sought to acquire the new coin during this distribution stage it could just have indicated we were solely seeking to gain financially from the subsequent reduction in Bitstar coin supply. So which would have been 'better' for you in this instance, that we didn't exchange some of our BITS holdings for the new coin, or that we did?

Now we need to wait until he gets someone to close this thread because of negative(factual) exposure.

Sure, let me know when you find some.

[kb4scv]

Well,  I do not really think the new coin was made for a money scheme at all.  Too many coins created as it turned out and indeed, much too limited of a rollout for any type of money scheme.  I take it for what they said it was, an experiment in getting people to buy into supporting a network and giving them a coin to basically play with for whatever ends they are looking for.  Although, whatever their plans are, I do believe that if the new coin goes nowhere on the markets, people will quickly lose interest.  This is, above all, an attempt for most to make some money.

The better side of this deal was indeed the reduction of Bits supply.  I did not go for new coin precisely because it was pure gamble and less Bits seemed to be a better bet in the long run.  I am about equally divided between making money in coins and seeing the new tech develop.  So far, Bits has to be a tech interest as there is nothing in the short term that would seem to make it a big money maker.

Long term, since these guys keep at it I like the prospects, especially when you add the BTCD into the mix.  Pretty sure this is one of the cheapest ways to get into that whole deal down the road if I understand what they are doing properly.

It really still all boils down to you either believe in this team or not.

Best of luck!

[jakiman]

Why wasn't this announced on Poloniex which was the main exchange for BITS for over 2 years ?

It is unfair to many holders including myself who put up alot of time/investment into BITS.

It was given ample notice here (months) and i have posted it on twitter constantly about it before, during and after about the BATL buy in.
Like with any updates about any coin, you need to follow it on its forum thread or Twitter. That is expected from its interested holders.
I fail to see anything unfair whatsoever about how the devs conducted the buyin process.

Edit: In saying that, I also think it wasn't anywhere near the best method. Official announcement thread with details about BATL and buy in process should have been posted for everyone to see instead of discretely announcing it only in this thread that monitor it. Devs also knew everything about the coin to make a more educated investment of their BITS while we were told hardly anything about it. So it was mostly based on our trust of the devs only. The way the IPO was conducted, obviously wasn't intended for non-BITS owners to really know about it leading to a smaller initial user base. But this did intrigue me somewhat as it also meant that they weren't interested in a mass pump or hype.

[MadCow]

Well,  I do not really think the new coin was made for a money scheme at all.  Too many coins created as it turned out and indeed, much too limited of a rollout for any type of money scheme.  I take it for what they said it was, an experiment in getting people to buy into supporting a network and giving them a coin to basically play with for whatever ends they are looking for.  Although, whatever their plans are, I do believe that if the new coin goes nowhere on the markets, people will quickly lose interest.  This is, above all, an attempt for most to make some money.

The better side of this deal was indeed the reduction of Bits supply.  I did not go for new coin precisely because it was pure gamble and less Bits seemed to be a better bet in the long run.  I am about equally divided between making money in coins and seeing the new tech develop.  So far, Bits has to be a tech interest as there is nothing in the short term that would seem to make it a big money maker.

Long term, since these guys keep at it I like the prospects, especially when you add the BTCD into the mix.  Pretty sure this is one of the cheapest ways to get into that whole deal down the road if I understand what they are doing properly.

It really still all boils down to you either believe in this team or not.

Best of luck!

This is my attitude also. The new BATL coin is a long shot, so will probably tank. I sent in about 50% of my BITS because the burn process gave me confidence it wasn't a scam, but I'm not confident on making much $$, but then again that's how I feel about all alts. Crypto is supremely risky

As for the communication (or lack of) I think there was ample time to consider things if you followed this thread in the last 4-5 weeks. It was low key in keeping with the 'experimental' nature of the project. Sig campaigns and tweets weren't appropriate I guess for a geeky experiment. For me BATL was a coin toss, I'm totally undecided now if it was a good move or not to burn, but that's part of the fun in crypto for small amounts ... the unknown.

[kb4scv]

You could also look at it in this way, at least a team that has been around for a long time is still desiring to test and experiment.  Better to have people wanting to try new ideas than to sit around and let old ones just fade away.......

[Mark81]

When will be second wallet distributed for Batl? How are things progressing? Currently Batl network is working very well and block times are blazing fast.

[MadCow]

When will be second wallet distributed for Batl? How are things progressing? Currently Batl network is working very well and block times are blazing fast.

Staking works well so far. Is there a way to recombine small blocks? It looks like blocks split in two and get smaller and smaller over time. I prefer to have a minimum block size, or ability to recombine automatically if possible.

[Bitstar_coin]

Block splitting is standard on POS coins, its how enough blocks are available for staking to keep the network secure

[boacw]

Block splitting is standard on POS coins, its how enough blocks are available for staking to keep the network secure

I understood it was only POW for now, with this very wallet???
If it is POS, I understand better why I stake "so much"... I was wondering how I could mine "so much" with so few transactions (I think ppl having baught during the burning period don't sell yet...)