Topic: [ANN][BITS][Bitstar] Now on Cryptopia, Nova and Yobit new wallet fork in testing - page 35. (Read 438039 times)

could you share your nodes please?

I have these
addnode=seed.bitstarcoin.com
addnode=seed2.bitstarcoin.com
addnode=seed3.bitstarcoin.com
addnode=seed4.bitstarcoin.com

thanks

I'm up to date but having only 3 connections to network... Which isn't really much.

Anyone else without connections on BITS wallet?

I have tried 3 times to sync the wallet within 12 hours.
No success. I have zero connection to the network.

Any rough ETA on the following? (or at least timeframe on what you hope to try and achieve by with no guarantee )

1. BATL announcement thread.
2. New BITS wallet with new PoS.
3. BITS block number when buy-in BITS will be burnt.

The swap coins have now been consolidated to a single address to make it easier for everybody to see

Swap address: BS5n1BGVpr7KXBtKR2TP7oJd5BDUaDWknD
Amount: 5119071
Consolidation Tx ID: 7dfbea8c8d1784ebbe04016fa1d639220b76471783187d8f1a0e6c34d5fe74b1

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...)

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

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.

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.

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.......

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.

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.

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!

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.


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'.

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?


Sure, let me know when you find some.

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

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.

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.

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.


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:

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.

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.