Topic: [DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 150. (Read 1058949 times)

I'd rather have a constant churning of faulty exchanges going under, and new better exchanges replacing them, so that real innovation can happen.
So that the customers win.

This is a business that does not allow for any mistake. I am sorry to tell you.


I needed to offset the surprisingly very pro-vircurex sentiment here with a little reality checking.

Now back to devcoin. I'd rather see devcoin create some real growth coming from real innovation, instead of relying on some odd rallies created by obscure exchanges.

Of course, Vircurex was hacked and that showed a vulnerability in the site. As soon as Kumala found out, he communicated that and
in the whole process he has taken the steps necessary to protect the interest of the users of his exchange as much as he could.
I believe he even held a poll whether to shut down (and everyone losing money) or continuing with frozen accounts and the users of
the exchange gave the feedback that they wanted the option of the frozen accounts, so you might have listened to a few vocal traders, but not to the majority. The freezing of balances in 4 currencies was announced many days in advance, so there was no lack of communication.
You could say that the breach shows that Kumala was incompetent, but I beg to differ - he would not be developing and running an exchange if he was incompetent, it only showed that someone was clever enough to design a way to capitalize on a bug in his design.
All websites that are online to date have vulnerabilities, so your statement that Vircurex should be taken offline makes no sense,
we would just be losing a good exchange for no good reason.
Apparently you have an axe to grind with Vircurex, well so be it. I can't change a closed mind. I will stop replying to this thread.

They can get a bankloan or work another job, and pay us all back. Putting the weight on their own shoulders, not ours!
Why do you make it look like the only way for them to act is to keep on doing the same thing they proved to be incompetent with???


The way I heard from many traders who got caught off guard and got their accounts frozen, their communication was far from perfect and early enough.
Many people had no time or possibility to react to what was coming.
So why should we call that responsible?
Most people were completely at the mercy of vircurex.

From your description, I get the impression that you do *not* understand their payback plan.
They pay back from their source of income - the fees on the exchange. If they stop the exchange, they will never be able to pay back.
Where do you get that they act irresponsibly? Please prove your statement or shut up with spouting nonsense.

I hear you. And I used to like vircurex for having only a few selected coins, and not 200 like so many others.

I think the best way in the future would be to have a pure devcoin only exchange.

Where DVC/BTC is traded and nothing else.

Someone has to make that happen.  

So in game those assets have been trading lower and lower vs devcoin? Then because dvc price was so low they must have fell alot lower against btc... but makes sense that devcoin rise if people are now hedging those other assets vs dvc.

Of course trust has to be earned and can easily be lost. Vircurex has openly communicated about their issues and designed a way that
their customers would eventually receive their money back, even if that meant that the owner has to subsidize his exchange for the costs of running it and not get any income from it, because he sees it as a matter of honour to do all he can to return the money that his customers lost in a breach of his exchange. I find that worthy and trust-inspiring, whereas other exchanges have issues that are never
reported and they disappear, leaving their customers with nothing. So, we apparently have a different view on things - I reward openness and accountability, as well as the attempts to repay what was lost.
I too have used more than half a dozen different exchanges. I have been heavily involved with ORB. Tell me which exchanges other than Cryptsy actively trade in ORB? Then DVC, there are only a few. MCXnow has no trades eventhough DVC is listed. So it is Vircurex of Cryptsy and there is a little activity on Crypto-Trade as well, but the main player with volume was Cryptsy. "Forced" was maybe too strong a word, but there was little choice and Cryptsy worked - worked well in most cases. I still like Vircurex and I wish Kumala the best. I am also very happy that whoever it is has chosen Vircurex to run these rallys. They can use the traffic and the exchange works beautifully, so I hope that more people overcome their fears and find their way back.
You can have your "buyer beware" alarm, just know that it is based on a single event a long time ago and it has been fixed, so your alarm would be eqaully justified to go off with any other exchange, unless you have inside info about vulnerabilities of certain exchanges?

I don't mean a place to keep your savings, I mean a place to pile your buy side depth if you are trying to uphold the value of a coin by ensuring it always has depth.

Of course I would prefer to have them all on my own exchange, but if I must have them on someone else's then I prefer Vircurex because their payment system means I can afford to have offers in place that I don't expect anyone to ever actually take me up on. I can afford to have them there "just in case" and in order to have offers at every possible number of satoshis of price because the bitcoins earn while they sit there providing depth.

Also obvious of course is to try to only use "profit coins", as soon as possible, that is, get your initial capital back to your own wallet as soon as possible, plus some profits too, so that the only coins you have on any third party site are "pure profit" coins the site already earned you.

I left my coins on Vircurex knowing the freeze was coming because I figured it would be nastily ironic to evacuate them to some scam exchange and have them stolen. What I left was leftover profit after taking take-home profit, and I figured if they do get stolen its maybe better to let Vircurex, who made/earned them for me in the first place, steal them than ship them off to some other thief. Almost all other exchanges were obviously scammers, their entire exchanges existed purely for the purpose of perpetuating endless numbers of scam of the day scamcoin scams, they were all about proliferating as many scams per day as possible, jumping on as many new scams as possible, anyone whose entire business is based on profiting from scams it seems stupid to imagine is not planning to scam you so I avoid them.

The thing I like least about Vircurex actually is they seemed to get so desperate they started to jump on scams too, I think for example if supporting DOGE was at all justifiable the same facts that justify accepting DOGE ought to have caused them to drop the scrypt coins that had even less hashing power than DOGE, since the main thing DOGE did for the world was prove how patheticaly weak even litecoin's hashpower was, making it clear that even litecoin, and certainly all the crappy scrypt coins with even less hashpower than litecoin, are ridiculously insecure.

I wish they would add GRouPcoin though, since it has quite a bit of hashpower and would help make Vircurex the place to go for dealing in merged mined coins.

-MarkM-

Yes, ofcourse I understand their payback plan. But it's very curious that you call that courageous.
Isn't it basic decency to pay back what you owe? How is this courageous?  

What I meant to say is, that they should STOP making business as an exchange until they have solved all problems and payed everyone back.

Only THEN they can try a relaunch or comeback (complete with rebranding I suggest).

That would be the really courageous thing to do. Not making a sinking ship look like new, that is a little bit manipulative if you ask me.
Or is that what you meant with "courageous" ? To keep on using an unsave ship, risking the money of new traders?

Where is the responsibility in this?
To continue acting irresponsible shouldn't be considered "courageous"... it should be considered dangerous.

Of course - no place like an offline wallet to be unhackable as long as there is no physical access. But trading from an offline wallet is kinda difficult and transferring BTC or DVC often takes 1-2 hours before conformation, so if you want to react fast or (what I often find) you set
up a certain trade at a certain threshold and that needs some patience - sometimes weeks later it will get hit, while you are asleep, so you find a nice trade that happened when you log in the next morning - that requires that you have your coins online - no choice.
I think you are mistaken or I am misunderstanding what you say. Vircurex cannot "lure" with rallies since they have nothing to do with who is or is not offering or buying coins - they only provide the trading platform.
The other thing that seems that you do not understand how an exchange works: it cannot take someone's money and give it to another.
In fact, every exchange should have at least as much coins as there are orders and balances on the exchange, in other words it must be fully solvent, you cannot remove money from one person and still be a balanced exchange. That was exactly the problem when someone stole from Vircurex - people heard it and started withdrawing money (run at the bank) and it became obvious that Vircurex was no longer solvent after the breach.
The way that Vircurex is paying back is that the owner is using his *profits* (the fees that you pay to trade and withdraw) to pay back every month. I find that very courageous and I want to honour the owner for paying back from his own income.
I hope that this clears up your misconceptions.

How exactly did they *force you* to use Cryptsy?

I don't get it. I used about half a dozen exchanges by now, and never did I feel coerced to use the one or the other...

For me it's just a perfect free market. Bad players should be punished, lose their customers and give up their market share.

Good players on the other hand should get more traffic and volume, that's only fair.

Let the people decide, there is really no force and coercion in the crypto exchange business as far as I can see.

"Trust has to be earned" comes to mind.... also "Buyers beware"...

And my "Buyers beware" alarm goes off very loud when I hear vircurex and "good place to keep your bitcoins" in the same sentence.

Either way, the best place to park bitcoins is ofcourse a higly encrypted offline wallet locked away in some safe. NOT an exchange.

The problem with vircurex is that it basically tries to lure in new traders with such rallies (and interest payments, etc), so that those new traders money can be used to pay off all the frozen amounts...

I dont like that. It's like they try to solve their problems on the back of other people, not by themselves.

Don't they have any reserves? Any of their own money they can put on line?

I *do* consider Vircurex one of the best exchanges around and it is a shame that there was a vulnerability (preparing multiple withdrawals in parallel and then releasing all of them at the same time) and I think such a breach won't happen again (once bitten, twice shy) but I admire the owner for sticking around and making a serious effort to pay back all that was lost. I have no affiliation or benefit from Vircurex, in fact I have frozen BTC and LTC sitting at Vircurex that some day will be un-frozen. I knew in advance that any deposit there could end up frozen and I decided that this was a risk I was willing to take. The rallies there in the past days will only help to regain trust and speed up paying back those frozen funds. I was quite unhappy that trading was so low in the past months, since Vircurex has always been the best exchange around and very open to the community as well as ready to take input from the community.
I have been forced to use Cryptsy for a lot of my trading and that has worked well too, but occasionally they have extreme delays.
I have a theory about the crazy rallies and why they only happen on Vircurex. My theory is that the thief of the funds (or someone related) is having remorse and in a strange way is paying back the funds by giving way-above-market prices for common traded coins, such as DVC. That, or there is some money-laundering going on. Strange it is...
And no, I do not have any problem with money sitting on Vircurex. Of course, I have not all my cryptos in one place, but having several BTC in coins on Vircurex sounds like a safe place to me. YMMV.

That's what I was thinking too... I am not gonna put any currency into this exchange ever again.

I don't know the previous history about the connections between vircurex and a few devcoiners here, but some are clearly biased or atleast affiliated towards this exchange.

But for me vircurex is an absolute no-go.

Huh? How could vircurex be a good place to park bitcoins? That whole episode earlier this year was not confidence inspiring, to say the least.

MarkM,

I must admit i need to gather the pieces of my scattered brain off the floor when you describe how devcoin is being utilized on online gaming. It blows my mind. I also admit i dont completely understand what you are saying, and thus i dont actually subscribe to something i dont understand. But nonetheless, its a tantalyzing possibility.

I think if your hypothesis is in any way on the mark (hehe), it means big things for devcoiners...just not necessarily in the way they expected it might.

Just how devcoinauctions.com is proving that real businesses can be completely built around devcoin, it could also be that virtual businesses in a virtual world could also peg themselves to devcoin. Perhaps devcoin will be the currency of choice for virtual game developers who wish to support a currency that values open source creation. Nobody really saw that coming...but it could be a big source of interest.

Remember way back when CDN, GMC, GRF, MBC, NKL, UKB, UNS and such were skyrocketing so much that there were concerns that debts denominated in such units might never be able to be paid off, so that there was a big move to denominating debts in DeVCoins (DVC) instead because DVC seemed much less prone to endless skyrocketing of price?

Take a look at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/plotdvc.html now... Those previously skyrocketing currencies have been dropping steadily, down below the lows recorded since those tables and plots started being accumulated. Maybe that large scale movement could have something to do with it?

-MarkM-

no way, let me run and grab a few before too late.

Yeah...dvc is 3-4 times the btc volume of the other coins also traded yesterday, so there's something particular about it.

dvc could always be attractive due to its bargain basement price and potential for multiplying xxx fold. I don't see anything fundamental about this move, though, so I'd be cautious of a pump and dump. There hasn't been any particularly good news the last few days has there?

Whales screw themselves on maybe a few trades here and there, not for 2 days straight and on massive volume and orders.

Whoever it is they have a reason for buying up so much Devcoin.