Welcome back
I believe MINERALS should expand the betting to beyond Starcraft, but also to increase the Starcraft events and visibilty!
If people start betting MINERALS on
everything, it would be pretty sweet.
Yes, but the problem is that Devs shifted resources to pay for anon developement and it is not doing well. As i told from the very beginning anon was clearly bad idea, but other guys decided against my opinion.
you are right..
focusing on ANON right now is not the best idea :/
MINERALS doesn't really have to be anon, we are not buying drugs with MINERALS, just having fun making bets on e-sports etc
also, the results of the POLL suggest that the betting is what people want to see the most:
Question: Minerals development - top priority
E-sports Betting services + wallet betting features - 233 (49.6%)
Anonymity development - 125 (26.6%)
Multipool further development - 24 (5.1%)
SC2 tournaments - 51 (10.9%)
Wallet improvements (chat, price, better design) - 37 (7.9%)
Total Voters: 470
look at all anon fails lately.. i say wait till someone solves anon and build on it from there,
in the meantime, make this coin unique!
Agreed that Minerals do not need anon per se for betting. However, the argument for anon is to create a demand other than betting which will include the market outside of betting. This will cause a natural demand and volume for the coin to trade at higher levels which will mitigate a lot of risks that coins face that trade at <1000 sats.
If you drop anon then make sure there are other ways to keep it alive, like artificial trading and paying the market listing fees or whatever for a period of at least 6-12 months. Also, at these low levels do not be surprised if the portfolios tilt from more people holding less to fewer people stocking up huge bags of Min and then dump on everyones a$$es later when the price increases. Lower prices work against wider distribution as it enables a few people to gather up huge bags. With only betting there will be no demand in the short term to cause a breakout over 1000 sats.
So the decision is between anon, trading between 10-20k with less artificial measures to leep it alive during betting development, or no anon trading <1000 sats for some months to come. I guess it is a tradeoff between the risks going either route as each has its pros and cons. Looking at the market it might be that Min missed the wave on anon due to the delays and it could be too late, although there will always be a human nature demand for something anon like to keep what they are doing to themselves.
I have since reduced my Min holding significantly so I do not care as much as previously about how the coin is managed. I am just stating the principles as some people think that the argument for anon is because the coin needs it for betting which is not the case. However, having said that anon betting would be a killer combination.
I am saying it again, the principle of Min is sound, some of the best I have seen. It is just how you get to the end result that needs to be determined. If the devs struggle with anon then drop it. Just have a plan B of how to get to the end result. An example of a plan B would be for the devs or community to buy and sell into their own orders come Oct/Nov to make sure an avg trading volume of 0.1 BTC is maintained, while natural demand is slowly grown outside of the existing holders through awareness, marketing, tournaments and expanding the portfolio. To support such a plan B, the community can raise 1 BTC or so with the purpose to every 23 hours assess the BTC trading volume and if it is <0.1BTC do a few trades into itself until the volume is over the threshold. The fund then becomes a market fee fund. This way time can be bought while betting services are being developed and marketed.