Topic: ◣XBB◥ Boolberry - attempt at grassroots development movement [Bittrex] - page 5. (Read 418985 times)
May 05, 2017, 03:19:24 PM
For how long it was listed on Poloniex?
May 05, 2017, 02:40:05 PM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa
Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing
A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds
Nobody said they didnt want you around. They simply thought that although you talked up a good amount of interest and were a good frontman that you had no chance of talking on such a beast as boolberry and developing the code. There are probably only a handful of devs that could take BBR and make the improvements we all want. So no shame in that. I think people just realised only CZ was going to be able to really inspire techwise investors back.
I think you kind of shocked everyone with your announcement that didn't only say that you were dropping bbr that you were going to shift you investment and time to other projects that could be seen as direct competition. That was not a cool annoucement to the community here who were just as upset at the delisting as yourself.
CZ is worrying to me because although an obviously genius level developer he is not like for example evan duff who although has way less talent is a smart guy in that he knows you can make more than a few BTC in donations it you hoard supply of your own token and then work to make your project very very valuable. Of course the hoarding should be done in a fair way. CZ seems to think about getting a few btc now and not jumping on our suggestion to create a dev fund much larger than the one he has now if he will bring back a lot of his development skills to this project.
I would have liked to prove people wrong about my own personal development prowess, the opportunity cost in Boolberry unfortunately is too high, especially without being able to effectively manage a position. Boolberry would benefit from a different client written in a different programming language (or even more cleanly in C++) that conformed to the existing Boolberry protocol. Several additional devs spent a lot of time working on the code and getting stuck on the same issues.
The last 8 months spent on Boolberry did prove to be at the expense of a larger altcoin rally. I typically avoid talking about other cryptocurrencies here, but I view these as separate viable assets, and there is no room for maximalism in this approach. Cryptonote as a concept is still an underdog both in terms of recognition and in development progress, they all inherit a convoluted codebase, and the communities should work together.
There were several unexpected setbacks, such as the seed node issue, and cross platform compatibility. But the LMDB necessity eclipses all of those, and if it really needs to be addressed.
The communities' desire for legitimacy from CZ stunted collaboration. So now they get CZ exclusively.
Fair enough. If that is how you see it then you must of course act in a way that is best for you. We all do the same at the end of the day.
Overall you did bring a lot of interest back to Boolberry so nobody can deny that. Good luck and perhaps you will change your mind about boolberry in the future. I still hold out some hope that someone will tackle this beast and bring it to a level it could be at.
May 05, 2017, 02:26:19 PM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa
Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing
A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds
Nobody said they didnt want you around. They simply thought that although you talked up a good amount of interest and were a good frontman that you had no chance of talking on such a beast as boolberry and developing the code. There are probably only a handful of devs that could take BBR and make the improvements we all want. So no shame in that. I think people just realised only CZ was going to be able to really inspire techwise investors back.
I think you kind of shocked everyone with your announcement that didn't only say that you were dropping bbr that you were going to shift you investment and time to other projects that could be seen as direct competition. That was not a cool annoucement to the community here who were just as upset at the delisting as yourself.
CZ is worrying to me because although an obviously genius level developer he is not like for example evan duff who although has way less talent is a smart guy in that he knows you can make more than a few BTC in donations it you hoard supply of your own token and then work to make your project very very valuable. Of course the hoarding should be done in a fair way. CZ seems to think about getting a few btc now and not jumping on our suggestion to create a dev fund much larger than the one he has now if he will bring back a lot of his development skills to this project.
I would have liked to prove people wrong about my own personal development prowess, the opportunity cost in Boolberry unfortunately is too high, especially without being able to effectively manage a position. Boolberry would benefit from a different client written in a different programming language (or even more cleanly in C++) that conformed to the existing Boolberry protocol. Several additional devs spent a lot of time working on the code and getting stuck on the same issues.
The last 8 months spent on Boolberry did prove to be at the expense of a larger altcoin rally. I typically avoid talking about other cryptocurrencies here, but I view these as separate viable assets, and there is no room for maximalism in this approach. Cryptonote as a concept is still an underdog both in terms of recognition and in development progress, they all inherit a convoluted codebase, and the communities should work together.
There were several unexpected setbacks, such as the seed node issue, and cross platform compatibility. But the LMDB necessity eclipses all of those, and if it really needs to be addressed.
The communities' desire for legitimacy from CZ stunted collaboration. So now they get CZ exclusively.
May 05, 2017, 01:39:09 PM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa
Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing
A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds
Nobody said they didnt want you around. They simply thought that although you talked up a good amount of interest and were a good frontman that you had no chance of talking on such a beast as boolberry and developing the code. There are probably only a handful of devs that could take BBR and make the improvements we all want. So no shame in that. I think people just realised only CZ was going to be able to really inspire techwise investors back.
I think you kind of shocked everyone with your announcement that didn't only say that you were dropping bbr that you were going to shift you investment and time to other projects that could be seen as direct competition. That was not a cool annoucement to the community here who were just as upset at the delisting as yourself.
CZ is worrying to me because although an obviously genius level developer he is not like for example evan duff who although has way less talent is a smart guy in that he knows you can make more than a few BTC in donations it you hoard supply of your own token and then work to make your project very very valuable. Of course the hoarding should be done in a fair way. CZ seems to think about getting a few btc now and not jumping on our suggestion to create a dev fund much larger than the one he has now if he will bring back a lot of his development skills to this project.
May 05, 2017, 01:28:07 PM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa
Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing
A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds
BBR HODLER REACTS:
https://youtu.be/VYrFnW8jpWA
May 04, 2017, 11:57:00 PM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa
Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing
A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds
May 04, 2017, 11:09:12 AM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Well no more development anyway, he needed polo to have liquidity to buy alot of it!
(Lol yeah right) May 04, 2017, 10:52:14 AM
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
May 03, 2017, 08:32:07 PM
Dear all!
I like this coin, i hope this coin may be longer Dev !
Thanks
I like this coin, i hope this coin may be longer Dev !
Thanks
May 03, 2017, 09:51:56 AM
The currency depreciated after being deleted on the trading floor! Someone help XBB coin
May 01, 2017, 09:42:14 PM
Lokks like some controversy is afoot 
I just don't understand, 98% of the coins out there aren't listed on polo, i even know coins that were in development for years and were on shitty exchange with mostly no volume at all. And they were still working on it.
At some point i can understand that he needs to dump coins on the market to pay for his expanse somehow. But telling us that he can't continue to work on the coin since he can't buy alot of it anymore to take us for stupids...
So are you talking about buying or dumping? you seem to be using those terms interchangeably but they are different things
Ok well, im tired of your word play, this is getting nowhere...
May 01, 2017, 09:33:10 PM
Lokks like some controversy is afoot
I just don't understand, 98% of the coins out there aren't listed on polo, i even know coins that were in development for years and were on shitty exchange with mostly no volume at all. And they were still working on it.
At some point i can understand that he needs to dump coins on the market to pay for his expanse somehow. But telling us that he can't continue to work on the coin since he can't buy alot of it anymore to take us for stupids...
So are you talking about buying or dumping? you seem to be using those terms interchangeably but they are different things
May 01, 2017, 08:27:34 PM
May 01, 2017, 07:51:30 PM
Lokks like some controversy is afoot
I just don't understand, 98% of the coins out there aren't listed on polo, i even know coins that were in development for years and were on shitty exchange with mostly no volume at all. And they were still working on it.
At some point i can understand that he needs to dump coins on the market to pay for his expanse somehow. But telling us that he can't continue to work on the coin since he can't buy alot of it anymore to take us for stupids...
May 01, 2017, 07:48:18 PM
Lokks like some controversy is afoot
May 01, 2017, 07:44:37 PM
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post:
Quote
As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us.
We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen.the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement.
I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying.
A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market.
Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are.
So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin.
No, you're grasping at straws with that comment
Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates?
The majority of the donations came in the form of bitcoin and monero. So those weren't dumped on the Boolberry market to do business. Does that answer the question or was there another connotation I missed?
Any Boolberry positions I controlled weren't used to cover costs, so they wouldn't be dumped to help my business operate
Then why do you need a BBR/XBB market at all in order to develop the coin?
I added more ^
And not being able to buy ALOT prevents you from developping the coin? I still don't follow you, can you elaborate more of how not being able to buy more coins prevent you from developing it?
May 01, 2017, 07:42:04 PM
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post:
Quote
As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us.
We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen.the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement.
I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying.
A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market.
Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are.
So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin.
No, you're grasping at straws with that comment
Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates?
The majority of the donations came in the form of bitcoin and monero. So those weren't dumped on the Boolberry market to do business. Does that answer the question or was there another connotation I missed?
Any Boolberry positions I controlled weren't used to cover costs, so they wouldn't be dumped to help my business operate
Then why do you need a BBR/XBB market at all in order to develop the coin?
I added more ^
May 01, 2017, 07:41:22 PM
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post:
Quote
As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us.
We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen.the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement.
I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying.
A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market.
Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are.
So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin.
No, you're grasping at straws with that comment
Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates?
The majority of the donations came in the form of bitcoin and monero. So those weren't dumped on the Boolberry market to do business. Does that answer the question or was there another connotation I missed?
Any Boolberry positions I controlled weren't used to cover costs, so they wouldn't be dumped to help my business operate
Then why do you need a BBR/XBB market at all in order to develop the coin?
May 01, 2017, 07:40:23 PM
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post:
Quote
As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us.
We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen.the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement.
I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying.
A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market.
Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are.
So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin.
No, you're grasping at straws with that comment
Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates?
The majority of the donations came in the form of bitcoin and monero. So those weren't dumped on the Boolberry market to do business. Does that answer the question or was there another connotation I missed?
Any Boolberry positions I controlled weren't used to cover costs, so they wouldn't be dumped to help my business operate
Many people outside the crypto community were watching the Boolberry markets, and since now you can't even buy $5,000 worth without moving the market on bittrex 300%, its too illiquid for my constituents to consider it.
May 01, 2017, 07:10:28 PM
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post:
Quote
As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us.
We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen.the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement.
I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying.
A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market.
Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are.
So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin.
No, you're grasping at straws with that comment
Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates?
Jump to: