Topic: Damages dumping creates - page 7. (Read 16496 times)

The main point is about exchange site because those investors are betting on the exchange site itself. as you can see if coin didn't meet the exchange site that they have expected before and they will feel bad for that. this speculators are betting in the short term run. major exchange needs millions of dollars and a lot of audit

An shitty "shower idea" but:

To mine you must send coins to place X and the coins that are there at this place since 1 month ago are the stake (so coins must stay there 1 month to become stake). But unlike proof of burn, you receive your coins back after 3 months (ps: your coins there, are the stake so your stake will be reduced) .

At the first 4 months ALL coins are mined by normal proof of stake (or maybe there is some sort of IPO or proof of burn IPO to distribute ALL the coins and some% of those coisn go to the place X and stay there 3 months as stake before going back to your wallet).

At the start of month 5, the system calculate the amount of coins that are at place X of all wallets since at least 1 month ago, and then discover that those Y coins are Z% of all coins.

Now the system has this info: Y coins are Z% of all coins. So all the coins at place X of all wallet at least since 1 month ago are Z% of all coins.

At the start of of next month, it finds what  the amount of coins at place X of all walled since at least 1 month ago are W, and it does the question, how much I need to increase the market cap to those W coins represent Z% of all coins. After this math its made it finds how much the market cap needs to be increased (all those extra coins will be given gradually during the next month) or how much the market cap need to be decreased (a% of transaction fees will be destroyed until the market cap is reduced to the needed amount or the month ends).

The same math is made at the start to every month, trying to make the coins at place X of people wallets since at least 1 month ago, be always Z% of all coins.


The system self correct the amount of coins based at the amount of coins being used as stake. If someone dump the coins, the amount of coins will decrease because the guy will need to sent them to place X and will take at least one month of them being there to make those coins being used at the math that decide how the max amount of coins need to be. This means the max amount of coins will decrease and with less supply the price of each coin will increase.

Dumping will be prevented if the coin has really worth in it. If the developers create a valuable token to start with, why would dumpers sell their coins or tokens at a very cheap price? Devs should make their coin worth it before releasing to exchanges, in that way, they can at least sustain their ICO price.

the fact is that not everyone can wait especially for investors and bounty hunters who don't have a lot of money so sometimes they are willing to release their coins at cheap prices when they are hit by economic problems, and the second problem is even though they put high expectations on the coin not all coins can realize that great hope and therefore sometimes there are people who are desperate and thinking of selling it while the price is still there

They can't handle the situation in the market or every exchange because it's depending in the demand in the market. Well if the every team in every project will have one person to focus about marketing I think it will avoid dumping. But we all know that dumping in every coin is normal.

Perhaps new projects should think about their reputation and allocate funds so that a low charge will automatically be bought and sold at a high price on this exchange.

I don't understand the meaning of this post? People do not want to sell at a loss, but if the coins or tokens of this project cost so little, then the reason is not in the people selling.

And is that a solution? Is that a free choice? If there will be fixed price on exchanges people will not buy there but they will use OTC market. 

Exchanges cannot help salvage the situation, if you own coins you should be allowed to do whatsoever you wish with it and it ought to be that way.
The correct thing to do, is for such projects to be proactive and come up with salient ideas and methods to combat excessive dumping and keep their coin afloat.
If you notice dumping hardly affects good projects, it may for a little while, but after some time, it'll bounce back and keep going up

The idea is not bad, but it should be worked out. It would be desirable, of course, that the tokens cost no less than a certain price, but the implementation of such an idea is not currently possible. There are many reasons why there will be no such maneuvers.

Dumping is one of the factors influencing the fall of cryptocurrency rates, but it does not solve the whole problem, even if there are no guarantees that dumping will not occur in the future.

I think one way to avoid a dump is to pay the worker's results from the bounty every week. And the coin must have a market first. So that in this way the sale of tokens is not done at once. While investors may not sell tokens below the ICO price. But for bonuses bought as long as the ICO is paid at the end of the ICO.

There is no way you can stop people from dumping their coin because that's what they choose to do. The last time I checked, this is a free market and any one is free to do whatever they like in this market without having to go through any approval of any kind, so there is no way we can stop the dumping, but we can try to curtail the way people dump coins on exchange by showing them what dumping coins cause to the market and why it is not a good idea to dump your coin at a cheap rate maybe because of FUD news.

Many good projects "died" because of the wrong approach to the distribution of tokens. Airdrops, huge bonuses for investors (up to 70%), etc.

In addition to your valid suggestion some ICOs mostly exchanges tokens had device another means by locking half of the hunters rewards to forestall any case of dumping while releasing the other half later in that case this would absolutely minimize the aftermath in the drop of the price of token after listing, although I may not blame some of the dumpers because we have full time hunters who needed money for their various needs.

If the asset is worth it, then the bounty hunters change the price of the asset a little. Now the most altcoins after listing did not show a single recovery. Some alts hold on even better than the market. It means something.

I think this is stupid. Manual price adjustment will never lead you to anything good. Only the creation of a good and sought-after project can prevent a sharp drop in prices and can make it grow.
If the project does not represent anything promising, then how would you not hold the price by hand, it will fall anyway.

Initial dumps are due to bounty hunters, they tend to sell at any price,  ut as soon as the sell out finish the coins gets traction if they are worth of it.

In fact, with a few simple measures can be prevented dumping at prices. For example, if you do not distribute too many tokens in the bounty process, and if you choose various methods such as not paying all costs with token, it will certainly be beneficial for the price because the individuals who get token free of charge, rather than investors and large whales, cause prices to regress. On the other hand, if each project sells with a certain limit for each individual investor in accordance with certain rules, it will prevent the price decline. Why would the price go down when the investor wants to make money? You should look at the root of the event and all projects with a restricted audience. In addition, investors who have the power to influence the market must also have a certain investment limit. In other words, both the investor is guilty and the project team is guilty and free token can reach the conclusion of the offender.

If the coin is not good, it is easy to dump and its price is difficult to increase, it depends on each project, especially ICO projects, it is easy to dump.