Messages

Can we keep both PoBH and POG ? To me, more mining options is better.

One more update about BBP sanctuaries hosted on GIN platform. To those who considered GIN hosting price way too high there is new cheap cloud node possibility to host BBP sanctuary for $4.5 per MN/month (select Cloud node for this price).  It's no-brainer now for this price IMHO. Check - https://p.gincoin.io/ .

I have good news - BiblePay was just listed on Gin platform so we can save some listing budget here.
Feel free to host BiblePay Sanctuaries on GIN if you like - https://p.gincoin.io/#!/

Sure I agree what you write, it is as valid view as any other.

I can give you one one example where MCT+ might be handy right now. In current market situation we could use MCT+ to perform secure private Sanctuary sales to some investors without collapsing the market on usual exchanges (where market is already in a pretty bad shape). That's just one case where MCT+ might be very helpful imho. In the past I was doing some p2p trades and it was always pretty poor ad risky experience.  I would be super happy to have MCT+ available at that time.

Second common use case is diversification between various MN holders. MN generates some coin and you often want some other MN to diversify portfolio. Of course you can buy it on usual exchange, but why to trade it through BTC when you don't want BTC but some target coin for another masternode. In this case p2p alt platform is perfect place.

Related to GIN, the day one BBP is supported there I will migrate my sanctuaries there and even acquire some more. Before that I'm not planning to get more sanctuaries and in terms of other MN projects as long as these projects are not support on GIN platform they are like non-existing form me as an investor (entirely due to  practical reasons even though I'm a technical guy and have no problem with VPS administration and things like that in general).

I support everything that could bring new people aboard  and so I have no problem to vote for this proposal. However I have hardship how this proposal could have any significant impact. From my point of view it will have just a minor tweak, which is ok except BBP is on the brink of edge not being able to support current orphans anymore. Brief look on the order books on exchanges shows that there were less than 1BTC total on the buyers side (on all exchanges) total when I looked last time. Price around 10 sat is also not a good signal. BBP market is dry, selling 2 sanctuaries will send market below 10 sat and selling 10 sanctuaries will send market to zero.

Low demand is main problem for BBP. We need to come with something that will make BBP desirable. To answer the main question - why to hold BBP? BiblePay started when market was booming, it was relatively easy to keep the price. Now, during this bear phase, market is also flooded with new small MN projects every day (some of them are also charity focused). Maybe you say this charity is the key  feature but frankly people can support orphans effectively without BBP as well and in more sound way (in terms of taxes, etc).  I know that BiblePay is also working in this direction and that's good.

I really wish to see BiblePay supporting 1M orphans one day. But from investment and economical PoV BBP doesn't make any sense. Inflation (even though it's declining in time) is drastic and 10% sell-off of newly created BBP will always undermine the price, ie. also demand. And not the forget other expenses that are doing the same. I believe we need to start with more sound economical model here. Sound economy brings sound investors. In Bible, tithes are 10% of real profit, not value of 10% of newly created coins even during a loss period. I believe BBP should give 10% of profits to orphans - I mean real profits and at the same time to generate reserves for time of bear market (Joseph's approach). We need to calculate our BBP profits based on BBP/USD performance, not based no how much new BBP are generated.

Difficult thing is that BBP already supports 300 orphans although size and performance of the projects is way to small for this size of support. Now a miracle (strong philanthropist investor or strong crypto bull market) is needed to keep them supported.

I believe there are two ways. Either some miracle happens and I'm all for that or/and we must rethink our economy model to make it more sustainable (ie. spend newly generated BBP only when price grows enough and create reserves for worse times) and to bring some killer feature kicking up demand in general that would bring the project into TOP100 crypto projects. Although adjusting economy model is relatively easy tasks, to bring some excellent feature is not. On the other hand, sound economical model is valuable feature as well imho.

That's my two cents. I believe God is backing up this project and Lord Jesus will not let it fall but I also believe that economical side of the project needs to be properly adjusted and sound from broader perspective. And sorry I went little bit further from the main topic here.

I'm not disagreeing, I'm just saying there was no budget for it this month.
Hopefully the market can recover soon and things like this can be moved forward

Although I agree with that, investment into project and ecosystem so project can grow is necessary, though. Without that, resources for charity might dry to zero in no time as well.

I understand that BBP price and budget is tight but BBP needs to be expanding and be visible to various platforms to keep pace. To be on GIN is imho more significant than be listed on CoinExchange.IO which is just another (not very significant) exchange. BBP doesn't need to be on more small exchanges but there should be complete ecosystem around BBP in terms of various services and uses cases. It means:

1) small exchanges(5) : SouthXchange, C-CEX, CryptoBridge, CoinExchange, QIEX
- DONE (not one of them is in TOP100 exchanges), no need to invest in this area even single BBP in the future imho
2) MN hosting platforms(0): this is where GIN goes (and you can already vote for it)
3) Alt P2P / escrow platforms(0): this is where MCT+ goes (you can also already vote for it)
4) payment processor(0): like bitpay, coinbase, etc. (beyond BBP size budget right now)
5) big exchanges(0): like bitfinex, binance (TOP10 exchanges - that's beyond BBP size and budget right now)

You see, BBP has 5 small exchanges but nothing else from this list. That's why I believe we need to leave any effort to list another small exchanges but to focus on other types of platforms where BBP is yet missing. Big exchanges and payment processors are currently beyond BBP budget. What we can do now is to make BBP present on MN hosting platform (like GIN) and P2P escrow trading alt platform (like MCT+) for decent money. That would mean to have 3 of 5 ecosystem groups covered plus bringing additional exposure and PR to BBP.

Whoever wants to build special BBP hosting platform, feel free to do it but it imho doesn't substitute being listed on GIN. It would be similar effort like to build your own exchange and thinking that is the same like to be listed on Binance. It's not.

VPS for 1$ sounds almost unbelievable. If the spec if enough for MN then it's really something to think about.

GIN have of experienced developers just for this service maintenance, support and future development and platform is  already working very well. It supports about 70 MN projects already and growing. Also bringing shared masternodes feature soon. It would be very difficult to compete, definitely for 14 USD/month. Maybe for half price if you can bring low-cost usable platform. Moreover there are some other services similar to GIN (not as good) so it's quite competitive environment already meaning that it's harder to succeed. In summary this is imho not a good way to go for BBP. Listing on GIN platform makes much more sense to me and will help BBP in multiple directions. 

Thanks to Rob, I was able to create the proposal again, successfully this time. All sanctuary owners are free to vote.

Thanks to Rob, I was able to create the proposal again, successfully this time. All sanctuary owners are free to vote.

A trading bot does only what it is programmed to do. They can add some volume and "life" into market and that's one thing that is currently missing on BBP market. It can also lower volatility a bit. Both would help BBP and I believe it would be good for BBP to have some small bot with some small monthly budget for this purpose.  It's not fake volume because bot must pay trading fees as well. Fake volume it is only when exchange fees are zero or if bot belongs to the exchange owner.  You are right that many people blame bots for manipulating markets but it is a little bit artificial blame. Of course people create bots to perform more efficient trading strategies and so yeah, bots might be even pretty aggressive traders.

Market is down, correct. But why?
1) Downtrend phase - only temporary
2) No demand - main problem, no real crypto use case that would bring more demand. BBP has use case, but direction is only outflow : BBP are sold for fiat -> stable decrease in price. That's major problem here. Together with quite huge new coin emission it's difficult to keep the price without some stronger investor who will hold it or without significantly growing user base.
3) People are still mostly fiat oriented - that means they are still using crypto mainly for fast speculations (P&D) and storing wealth in fiat (or fiat-related products). BBP is not influenced by this that much so far.

Best thing would be to form some partnership between sponsored organizations and suppliers who would start accept BBP for gods without exchanging it to fiat. Once this network is formed it can grow and soon people might not be willing to go back to fiat. But it's very difficult to find several brave organizations that would form such a network and taking the initial risk. Even the biggest crypto projects were not able to accomplish this yet.

First off, thanks for the proposals.  The more voices we hear the better we become.

I'm still of the opinion we don't need another exchange unless it were a top 20 or so one.  Having too many exchanges weakens our market and can lead to de-listing for insufficient volumes.  I do think P2P exchanges (i.e., decentralized exchanges) are harder to grasp than centralized ones.  This one is still in beta and so while a very very good price, it's going to be hard for it to gain ground in my mind.  Additionally having an exchange that is hard to use (or offline) ends up reflecting poorly on the coin to some extent.  The fact the underlying coin (MCT+) is not listed on CoinMarketCap is not a good sign.

I would think even though the price is low now, we'd be better off paying a higher price later IF the exchange can deliver on it's goals and we have the volume to support it.

I can see your point. Volume problem you describe will not be solved neither by MCT+ nor by a big exchange listing. MCT+ could rather add some more BBP visibility and safe p2p trading platform. Current exchanges where BBP is listed have quite decent volume for many other coins but BBP is still lacking there. It means BBP is not attractive to traders from one reason or another. It needs to be addressed.  Imagine BBP is miraculously listed on Binance, what would happen? Spike first day, then hard drop, then volume declining close to zero in no time a and soon BBP would be delisted. We need to think about why volume is so low on CURRENT exchanges. What needs to be done  to reverse it. I have some ideas and right now I think BBP trading bot would be the best way to address this right now. Also BBP needs to be visible on as many emerging platforms as possible mainly (also for PR reasons at this time). I have no doubts about MCT+ platform. These guys are doing great having clear roadmap that is implemented in time. Of course as everything in crypto space, there are no 100% assurances. MCT+ listing on CMC is delayed (probably because of duplicate symbol usage) but in progress, that's not an issue.

I created the proposal, paid 2500, txn is confirmed but unfortunately it doesn't show in proposal list so it seems there might be a bug and proposal is somehow broken  (txn: e63fadf9e094b09bca2576f8b7f703b3b2bd6889e681c647c2881970ea7a8550 ). So if anyone of you can create valid proposal, feel free to do so.

I created the proposal, paid 2500, txn is confirmed but unfortunately it doesn't show in proposal list so it seems there might be a bug and proposal is somehow broken  (txn: 20f0dbcdef42f50eaac0ef3b878865d7fffd5828024e3da88dbb7f16b8a802c7 ). So if anyone of you can create valid proposal, feel free to do so.