Topic: [ANN][COVAL] Circuits Of Value - Emblem Vault - page 5. (Read 94191 times)
Looks like another one learned the lesson. 
Info about the swap has been all over twitter and telegram channel for over a year. You should analyze this situation to not repeat your mistakes in the future instead of blaming everyone else. 99% of people swapped so don't you think that maybe the problem is with you?
I swapped in 15 minutes after the swap tool was released. If I'm correct, swap tool used some of the emblem vault features and it worked like a charm. Can't wait for the release of emblem vault. I'm sure it will be a smooth UI experience just like swap tool was.
Info about the swap has been all over twitter and telegram channel for over a year. You should analyze this situation to not repeat your mistakes in the future instead of blaming everyone else. 99% of people swapped so don't you think that maybe the problem is with you?I swapped in 15 minutes after the swap tool was released. If I'm correct, swap tool used some of the emblem vault features and it worked like a charm. Can't wait for the release of emblem vault. I'm sure it will be a smooth UI experience just like swap tool was.
Clearly the swap deadline was not communicated well. A single answer to an AMA question hidden among hundreds of other question/answers, plus a single random tweet, is not an appropriate announcement for a swap. Swap is a major event; I have seen other coin managers announcing swap many months (sometimes more than a year) before the deadline, reminding about the swap deadline every month (every week, then every day close to the deadline), putting a countdown timer on the main page on the website, for the visitor to see it first thing when he enters the website.
All this is done because coin managers realize the cryptocurrency is supposed to be a form of money, and it is illegal to deprive people of their holdings, without provably giving them a fair chance to swap. Basically it is similar to a government accepting old banknotes for years (decades) after a new banknotes are issued.
This behaviour from the devs (throwing a dart to find a date?, deciding just because one single user said something?, who told the swap end was a community request and there was consensus in community about that?), just shows devs are either not very serious about their project, or have little understanding of legal issues, or have little interest in belongings of community members.
Bottomline, while I don't really support the behavior of this complaining user (as you can see from my older replied to his previous series of complaints), I believe he brought up a valid point. We all know crypto is a wild west, but the way swap is done, speaks tons about the legitimacy of a project. The rule of the thumb is - the more solid a project is, the longer swap period does it provide. I would suggest to review the prior decision (agree, probably it should have been suggested sooner, but anyway).
P.S. This is just to avoid unnecessary speculation: I personally have swapped all my Coval coins long time ago, so I have no financial interest in supporting 'late swapper's. I just think this issue could have been handled much better, and maybe still can.
All this is done because coin managers realize the cryptocurrency is supposed to be a form of money, and it is illegal to deprive people of their holdings, without provably giving them a fair chance to swap. Basically it is similar to a government accepting old banknotes for years (decades) after a new banknotes are issued.
This behaviour from the devs (throwing a dart to find a date?, deciding just because one single user said something?, who told the swap end was a community request and there was consensus in community about that?), just shows devs are either not very serious about their project, or have little understanding of legal issues, or have little interest in belongings of community members.
Bottomline, while I don't really support the behavior of this complaining user (as you can see from my older replied to his previous series of complaints), I believe he brought up a valid point. We all know crypto is a wild west, but the way swap is done, speaks tons about the legitimacy of a project. The rule of the thumb is - the more solid a project is, the longer swap period does it provide. I would suggest to review the prior decision (agree, probably it should have been suggested sooner, but anyway).
P.S. This is just to avoid unnecessary speculation: I personally have swapped all my Coval coins long time ago, so I have no financial interest in supporting 'late swapper's. I just think this issue could have been handled much better, and maybe still can.
Couldn't agree more with what you are saying its a real shame the project is abandoning a part of its early investors for not being up to date with some answers in an random ama that was given. Its unreasonable to have such a punishment for something that should have been communicated in a much better way.
All people screaming, you have had enough time and lessons learned, are just egocentric people that are happy supply is decreased for their own bag. At the cost of others.
really sad and unfair this.
Can anyone give a recommendation on a local ETH wallet that supports COVAL? I was previously using the Mist wallet, but it looks like it's no longer supported. I tried the MyCrypto wallet, but I'm struggling to find a way to track the fuel and COVAL tokens in the wallet.
If someone could point me in the right direction, that would be awesome.
Thanks!
-Fuse
If someone could point me in the right direction, that would be awesome.
Thanks!
-Fuse
It's finally coming folks
Get ready
Get ready
Yet you are crying that you haven't swapped and you have no covals...
I hope you do not believe that I would hold them any longer. A project with such behavior is unsustainable.
Yet you are crying that you haven't swapped and you have no covals...
Aside of this, I am not sure how the swap could slow down the development? I don't see a connection there, development should have nothing common with the swap process.
It's common sense. If Shannon has to devote his time to manually swap coins and provide support for the swapping process it is slowing down the development. He could have been coding instead of swapping coins and answering emails.
Well, what is more worse: If the one and only coder from the project is not able to code an automatic swap tool or he is not able to delegate a primitive manual swap task to someone else? Throws a dart...
Aside of this, I am not sure how the swap could slow down the development? I don't see a connection there, development should have nothing common with the swap process.
It's common sense. If Shannon has to devote his time to manually swap coins and provide support for the swapping process it is slowing down the development. He could have been coding instead of swapping coins and answering emails.
People who haven't swapped can only blame themselves. Swap should have ended long time ago because it was only slowing down the development. If I remember correctly 90% of people swapped in a month or two after the swap started. This info has been posted all over telegram channel and all the twitter channels. If in the last 12 months someone didn't find time to swap his coins then who should be blamed?
The truth is that people are stupid and careless. They see a big green candle and they start panicking but they didn't care to swap when it was worth 3 sat. Even if the swap period was extended to five years I bet it wouldn't change anything. 5 years + 1 day later someone would show up angry because he didn't swap. Those idiots should pay for their mistakes and laziness.
The truth is that people are stupid and careless. They see a big green candle and they start panicking but they didn't care to swap when it was worth 3 sat. Even if the swap period was extended to five years I bet it wouldn't change anything. 5 years + 1 day later someone would show up angry because he didn't swap. Those idiots should pay for their mistakes and laziness.
Why are you ignoring the transaction fee argument? If you own 20,000 Covals and the transaction cost 10,000 Covals... you take extremly care of your Covals when you are not swapping by then. Btw, 3 sat equals 16,666 Covals (= 0.0005 Btc transaction fee). Your whole perspective compares apples and oranges when you think it was laziness. And so your insult just reveal what you think about the idea of decentralization.
Coval has not built its own chain. It has used the XCP-chain (like it is still displayed on coinmarketcap) and afterwards it becomes an ERC20 token. Congratulations. Any developments yet, besides a lot of websites?
From the general point of view the transaction cost argument doesn't matter at all. It is what it is. Swap must have been done to keep this coin alive. Right now you will pay the same exact fee in $. When I want to buy more coval now, should I start whining that I have to pay btc fees, trading fees and all the other fees? No one cares, because that's how it is.
If I were you I would start saving 50 cents every month during the swap period and rebought or swapped those coins. You would have saved way more than 5$. Your time, which you already wasted by complaining in this thread, is probably worth more than those 5$ fees. It just shows how ridiculous your argument is.
You try and get CMC to change it, Ive been trying for the past year.
People who haven't swapped can only blame themselves. Swap should have ended long time ago because it was only slowing down the development. If I remember correctly 90% of people swapped in a month or two after the swap started. This info has been posted all over telegram channel and all the twitter channels. If in the last 12 months someone didn't find time to swap his coins then who should be blamed?
The truth is that people are stupid and careless. They see a big green candle and they start panicking but they didn't care to swap when it was worth 3 sat. Even if the swap period was extended to five years I bet it wouldn't change anything. 5 years + 1 day later someone would show up angry because he didn't swap. Those idiots should pay for their mistakes and laziness.
The truth is that people are stupid and careless. They see a big green candle and they start panicking but they didn't care to swap when it was worth 3 sat. Even if the swap period was extended to five years I bet it wouldn't change anything. 5 years + 1 day later someone would show up angry because he didn't swap. Those idiots should pay for their mistakes and laziness.
Why are you ignoring the transaction fee argument? If you own 20,000 Covals and the transaction cost 10,000 Covals... you take extremly care of your Covals when you are not swapping by then. Btw, 3 sat equals 16,666 Covals (= 0.0005 Btc transaction fee). Your whole perspective compares apples and oranges when you think it was laziness. And so your insult just reveal what you think about the idea of decentralization.
Coval has not built its own chain. It has used the XCP-chain (like it is still displayed on coinmarketcap) and afterwards it becomes an ERC20 token. Congratulations. Any developments yet, besides a lot of websites?
Well, obviously opinions differ. The dominant opinion in the community is not clear, as no poll was even done. I guess, developers will decide what they think is appropriate (i.g. is convenient for them), and in any case there will be people screaming they do not agree. That is the way democracy is implemented in wonderful world of altcoins.
Aside of this, I am not sure how the swap could slow down the development? I don't see a connection there, development should have nothing common with the swap process.
Aside of this, I am not sure how the swap could slow down the development? I don't see a connection there, development should have nothing common with the swap process.
People who haven't swapped can only blame themselves. Swap should have ended long time ago because it was only slowing down the development. If I remember correctly 90% of people swapped in a month or two after the swap started. This info has been posted all over telegram channel and all the twitter channels. If in the last 12 months someone didn't find time to swap his coins then who should be blamed?
The truth is that people are stupid and careless. They see a big green candle and they start panicking but they didn't care to swap when it was worth 3 sat. Even if the swap period was extended to five years I bet it wouldn't change anything. 5 years + 1 day later someone would show up angry because he didn't swap. Those idiots should pay for their mistakes and laziness.
The truth is that people are stupid and careless. They see a big green candle and they start panicking but they didn't care to swap when it was worth 3 sat. Even if the swap period was extended to five years I bet it wouldn't change anything. 5 years + 1 day later someone would show up angry because he didn't swap. Those idiots should pay for their mistakes and laziness.
Clearly the swap deadline was not communicated well. A single answer to an AMA question hidden among hundreds of other question/answers, plus a single random tweet, is not an appropriate announcement for a swap. Swap is a major event; I have seen other coin managers announcing swap many months (sometimes more than a year) before the deadline, reminding about the swap deadline every month (every week, then every day close to the deadline), putting a countdown timer on the main page on the website, for the visitor to see it first thing when he enters the website.
All this is done because coin managers realize the cryptocurrency is supposed to be a form of money, and it is illegal to deprive people of their holdings, without provably giving them a fair chance to swap. Basically it is similar to a government accepting old banknotes for years (decades) after a new banknotes are issued.
This behaviour from the devs (throwing a dart to find a date?, deciding just because one single user said something?, who told the swap end was a community request and there was consensus in community about that?), just shows devs are either not very serious about their project, or have little understanding of legal issues, or have little interest in belongings of community members.
Bottomline, while I don't really support the behavior of this complaining user (as you can see from my older replied to his previous series of complaints), I believe he brought up a valid point. We all know crypto is a wild west, but the way swap is done, speaks tons about the legitimacy of a project. The rule of the thumb is - the more solid a project is, the longer swap period does it provide. I would suggest to review the prior decision (agree, probably it should have been suggested sooner, but anyway).
P.S. This is just to avoid unnecessary speculation: I personally have swapped all my Coval coins long time ago, so I have no financial interest in supporting 'late swapper's. I just think this issue could have been handled much better, and maybe still can.
All this is done because coin managers realize the cryptocurrency is supposed to be a form of money, and it is illegal to deprive people of their holdings, without provably giving them a fair chance to swap. Basically it is similar to a government accepting old banknotes for years (decades) after a new banknotes are issued.
This behaviour from the devs (throwing a dart to find a date?, deciding just because one single user said something?, who told the swap end was a community request and there was consensus in community about that?), just shows devs are either not very serious about their project, or have little understanding of legal issues, or have little interest in belongings of community members.
Bottomline, while I don't really support the behavior of this complaining user (as you can see from my older replied to his previous series of complaints), I believe he brought up a valid point. We all know crypto is a wild west, but the way swap is done, speaks tons about the legitimacy of a project. The rule of the thumb is - the more solid a project is, the longer swap period does it provide. I would suggest to review the prior decision (agree, probably it should have been suggested sooner, but anyway).
P.S. This is just to avoid unnecessary speculation: I personally have swapped all my Coval coins long time ago, so I have no financial interest in supporting 'late swapper's. I just think this issue could have been handled much better, and maybe still can.
well you had the information, you were advised what to do and you did not follow it.
Basically your loss.
Basically your loss.
The information I needed to do a swap was price action. Do you think, any hodler in the world checks Covals AMA or twitter for new information once a week?! After June 10th there was no tweed from Coval for six! weeks. There was no deadline = this was a valid information for months. When price gone up, I checked why. This was on Sep 15th. (Btw I read the first part of the AMA, but I lost interst, as it becomes clear how the way of thinking of the team is.)
There was no community majority asking for a deadline. I can not find a vote.
Why to expropriate old Coval holders?
"56. [...] Reason for question: Existing holders will think that if the deadline does not come indefinitely, no listing on new exchanges or an increase in new holders will take place. From an external perspective, there is a bad image that development is slow if the deadline is too long. I think it is necessary to decide a good expiration date and burn a certain number of burns."
I guess, it was your own suggestive question to set a deadline, the reasons you mention are ridiculous. The only reason is, it is ongoing work to swap manually and with a deadline you are able to burn some coins. These are not your coins, so it does not matter to you. This is called centralization and censorship. And theft.
Theft lol. Because you didn't have the sense to convert your tokens immediately once they changed to ERC20. You are in crypto but clearly are unable to take responsibility for your own action (inaction).
To late to start screaming theft. Every swap I have seen on tokens no matter how much time people have you always get those that it's never enough. You were looking to vote lol. Well next time you hold a token that changes chain I guess you will have the sense to seek out how to swap and do so immediately. Lesson learned.
well you had the information, you were advised what to do and you did not follow it.
Basically your loss.
Basically your loss.
The information I needed to do a swap was price action. Do you think, any hodler in the world checks Covals AMA or twitter for new information once a week?! After June 10th there was no tweed from Coval for six! weeks. There was no deadline = this was a valid information for months. When price gone up, I checked why. This was on Sep 15th. (Btw I read the first part of the AMA, but I lost interst, as it becomes clear how the way of thinking of the team is.)
There was no community majority asking for a deadline. I can not find a vote.
Why to expropriate old Coval holders?
"56. [...] Reason for question: Existing holders will think that if the deadline does not come indefinitely, no listing on new exchanges or an increase in new holders will take place. From an external perspective, there is a bad image that development is slow if the deadline is too long. I think it is necessary to decide a good expiration date and burn a certain number of burns."
I guess, it was your own suggestive question to set a deadline, the reasons you mention are ridiculous. The only reason is, it is ongoing work to swap manually and with a deadline you are able to burn some coins. These are not your coins, so it does not matter to you. This is called centralization and censorship. And theft.
well you had the information, you were advised what to do and you did not follow it.
Basically your loss.
Basically your loss.
Is this a joke?!
You put the information of the swapping deadline (Sep 14th) on twitter on Aug 30th? And you argue that people could do the swap since one year? This is your argument for dispossession? And now you think this is law, as you have decided it?
You put the information of the swapping deadline (Sep 14th) on twitter on Aug 30th? And you argue that people could do the swap since one year? This is your argument for dispossession? And now you think this is law, as you have decided it?
Im a little lost you knew about it last year https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52075886
The deadline came off the AMA - a date was decided upon (and gave sufficient notice).
It was mentioned on multiple forums, Counterparty/Twitter/ANN/Telegram.
Kinda curious that those complaining are 1 day late.
Why are you lost? I transfered Coval from Bittrex to a Couterparty wallet, as recommended from the Coval team. We had to wait for a swapping tool. Then it was expected that Coval holders pay the transaction costs of 0.0005 BTC. I criticized this - why? Because in retrospect it was not necessary to transfer Coval from Bittrex to a counterparty wallet. People who did not read all the news had the advantage to transfer Coval from Bittrex directly to the swapping tool. DesktopCommando, I am community as well. I invested in Coval as I loved the idea. But a dispossession now is just a centralized decision.
A professional deadline is set two or three months in advance with multiple reminders to the community. People are on holidays or sick for two or four weeks. And after a deadline, usually automatic swap tools are shut down only, as manually swaps are still possible. Why? Because people bought a legit Coval coin. Dispossession is never an option, as long as the swap wasn't costless. 0.0005 BTC are $5 - and there are countries where $5 pays your meal for some days. You can't expect that people do the swap while Coval is worth 0.00000004 Btc (trend negative). That are >10.000 Coval in fees (0.0005 Btc) for the swap. This is inappropriate.
(Besides your comments to the delist topic, there was this post from Shannon: https://medium.com/@shannonNullCode/dont-look-back-we-re-not-going-that-way-c4c5aa7fe2e3
It clearly stated to transfer Coval to a couterparty wallet. And so the later swap got disproportionate high transaction fees. Even now the fees would be >1000 Coval. The bittrex delisting was not the fault of Coval holders - but it requires additional money from holders. So the AMA answer should have been that no determination is legally possible and it was reasonable that holders of small amounts of Coval are still waiting to swap, because transaction fees should be at least <500 Coval.
In January 2018 I 'swapped' 0.04 Btc to Coval. After delisting value dropped 95%. Relatively, you expect me to invest 25-50% of my Coval holdings for the swap to the ERC20 Coval token. This is not fair.)
Jump to: