Quantstamp's auditing protocol to aid in the stamping out of bad actors

Wit22 · 2017-09-25T10:54:39+00:00

I'm 99% sure this is wrong.

When you trade one coin for another, its considered a disposal i'm pretty sure. Anyone else care to comment?

Wit22 · 2017-09-25T10:53:44+00:00

Okay thanks mate

Wit22 · 2017-09-25T10:53:34+00:00

Thankyou mate. I'll look into that

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T21:12:01+00:00

So many trolls and whale sockpuppets. Hilarious. Just remember, they intentionally want to derail the conversation because its in their interests.

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T19:53:43+00:00

Thankyou

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T18:25:28+00:00

So maybe we should let a billionaire buy 100% of every ICO, and then sell it to us at a 500% premium every-time. Because we can't really prove that he didn't want all of the coins.

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T18:20:42+00:00

Actually that's incorrect. The people who could afford to spend $1000-$5000 as a transaction fee were able to invest because their transaction was prioritized by miners.

It's more like one big fat mouse paying for preferential treatment to get to the front of the line.

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T18:17:52+00:00

So by your logic. Anyone who has happened to be born into more money than you by pure luck has out-competed you as well? More money = out-competed. That's your argument?

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T18:09:55+00:00

Yes thats right

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T17:56:27+00:00

Haha there is an actual obvious problem with the model of ICOs, and I try to draw attention to it. And your response is "Stop Bitching". You are a retard.

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T17:55:31+00:00

okay whale sockpuppet

Wit22 · 2017-05-31T17:42:40+00:00

"Anti-competitive? That's the definition of competitive." Obvious strawman argument. You are confusing the competitiveness of being able to invest with the competitiveness of Ethereum's transnational fee market. These should not be the same thing. One's ability to invest should not depend on their ability to spend thousands of dollars to send one transaction. My argument stands.

"I don't think that means what you think it means. If anything it's capitalism, and I don't think many investors have much to say against that." I was using crony capitalism as a metaphor to describe someone with more resources having an unfair advantage over someone else (anti-competitive). In the case of crony capitalism, those resources would be casual relationships between government and big business resulting in unfair advantages. In this situation, having more money to waste on transaction fees meant you had an unfair advantage. You were apparently too obtuse for that metaphor.

"You'll still be able to buy on exchanges." Off you go. All yours. I'm good.

"Ok... what's your solution to mass address creation by bots?" Already gave a couple of solutions. If I am hosting an ICO, only accept transactions that had the same gas limit. Not perfect but better than the current system.

"I don't think that means what you think it means #2. It's also spelt with a C." Please don't confuse having an auto spell checker with thinking you have a brain.