Quote from: ?chooseusername on March 25, 2016, 07:18:35 PM

Few questions:

What makes B&C better than OpenLedger?
What are the differences between BKS shareholders and signers in terms of voting power?
How are you planning to take into consideration and defend the B&C user interests Vs BKS shareholders & signers?

I see your voting system a bit too static and away from what decentralization means...You are giving zero power to your users which are the most important part of your project. You might have achieved a decentralized platform but its governance model defeats the whole idea that your are trying to sell. Why don't you make it a decentralized autonomous exchange (DAE) far from human conflict of interest. The running costs including developers would come out of the fees and donations and if there was a surplus the whole community could vote what to do with it via a smart voting system that takes into account the users voice, the developers voice and the infrastructure people voice. Perhaps this is the next thing after "Decentralized" exchanges...

Cheers

Simply put, democracy is a fallacy. In practice it doesn't work because human beings are not equal. In fact, they are very different and it's damn easy to inflate population with low value individuals. Everyone can make children, you don't even need a degree for that. But to educate one so that they would become a valuable member to the society is a whole different thing. What we see in Europe shows that politicians only care about votes and they aim to get the votes from migrants and other socialist parasites. As a result, foul laws are being passed and Europe moves through the spiral of self-destruction. That said, I wouldn't push that "users first" agenda so much. An exchange is a business, apply the rules of (anarcho) capitalism and you will see that B&C Exchange is perfect just the way it was designed.