Matthew,
The goal is to give the public notice that we are trying to narrow down the coins we see as successful and maintain a tighter library of altcoins on our exchange.
Many companies employ staff to effect public relations on their behalf - for exactly the commercial reasons you reference above. It's generous of you to share your information with the community but I think we should be quite clear that it is Bittrex who is the primary beneficiary of this activity, not “the public”.
Legitimate is defined as "real, accepted, or official".
That's very much a step in the wrong direction, we've now got
three more nebulous concepts to disagree about.
I wasn't clear enough in the first place - my point is that you don't have an
operational definition of legitimacy which would give you reliable, consistent and objective criteria to apply. Without reliability, consistency and objectivity, all you can do is argue for things the way you see them personally, subjectively and arbitrarily. If you can't state in advance who will get a visit and who won't, how can a coin dev team arrange matters so that Bittrex standards are met? The $64k question is
will Bittrex be publishing the details of its standards? (I can't seem to find any information on the website about the current process, so any movement at all there would be welcome.)
We aim to make sure the altcoin does its job as advertised and not just smoke and mirrors.
As a candidate standard: “its job as advertised” is fatally flawed, infeasible to operationalise. You'll need to re-think that one. Advertised where and by whom? What counts as a statement of fact vs a statement of belief? Does your definition of “advertising” include individuals' posts on Bitcointalk? Cryptocointalk? Reddit? FB? HN? In a medium where pseudonyms are the rule rather than the exception, how do you intend to be able to canonically distinguish between a party who has authority to make promissory or factual assertions about the coin and one who has not? Is Bittrex now going to insist that in order for a coin to be listed on their exchange, the devs/dev teams must be personally and individually identifiable to Bittrex staff?
I am sorry you felt as if I was trying to be a all powerful authority figure.
I simply went by what you wrote:
“I am the guy to come to if you want to confirm legitimacy of an altcoin ... I will be investigating among the alt-coin community”. If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, etc. But, I acknowledge that I made no allowance for you being a Texan and sounding like a newly-appointed sheriff might just be a cultural thing. I'd have preferred to have read something along the lines of “We want to help community members make more informed assessments of the risks so I intend to provide more detailed and more extensive information, including information gained from our own efforts after diligence.”
You must know Bittrex has no intention to be extremists in any fashion.
wat? Where'd you get
that from? I'm trying to alert you to the fact that you've got the job of cleaning the Augean stables and all you've got by way of equipment is one of those little packs of face wipes. Without a sharp tool, you'll struggle to make any sort of an impact.
This is just the beginning of BCT I assume.
Just another manifestation of the free market. I am trying to be constructive but I've found that if I don't make my points forcefully, they get drowned in the noise and I end up wasting my efforts.
Cheers
Graham
