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

What makes B&C better than OpenLedger?

B&C Exchange exclusively uses native blockchain assets, whereas OpenLedger uses proxy assets that bring with them high counterparty risk. When Bitcoin is traded on B&C Exchange, it is real blockchain BTC that never leaves the Bitcoin blockchain. When "Bitcoin" is traded on OpenLedger, it is actually a user issued asset on the Bitshares blockchain. It has nothing in common with Bitcoin except that it is supposed to maintain the value of Bitcoin, which it may in fact not maintain due to counterparty risk from the asset issuer.

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

What are the differences between BKS shareholders and signers in terms of voting power?

Signers don't have any voting power at all, while shareholders collectively hold all the voting power.

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

How are you planning to take into consideration and defend the B&C user interests Vs BKS shareholders & signers?

Just like any business that has shareholders, B&C Exchange shareholders will lose money if they don't please users. The question has the same answer as the question "How do Delta Airlines shareholders defend the interests of Delta Airline passengers?".

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

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.

I don't believe users want power. With power comes responsibility, and that can be an unwanted hassle. Users want to trade one asset for another quickly, easily and at a good price without the counterparty risk present at most cryptoasset exchanges. If there are individual users who do want power, they should become shareholders. If I wanted to become a passenger on Delta Airlines, I wouldn't want any power within Delta Airlines. I would only want an inexpensive and hassle free trip to my destination.

Our governance model is absolutely superb. The governance model of Peershares (B&C Exchange is a Peershare) is better than all other blockchain governance models. All shareholders are true peers and there is no authority in our system other than the collective will of shareholders. Shareholders can choose to compensate developers or any one else with grants of BlockShares or BlockCredits in any amount. Shareholders can pass motions that set various rules of operation. For example, a completely decentralised vote to halt BlockShare sales was passed by shareholders some time ago. B&C Exchange's governance is decentralised, flexible and powerful.

Peershares such as NuBits and B&C Exchange are the most advanced form of decentralised blockchain governance to date. The work I have already done establishes me as the leading innovator in decentralised blockchain governance.