Quote from: boomboom on August 04, 2017, 01:10:31 AM

Quote from: generalizethis on August 04, 2017, 12:45:47 AM

Quote from: boomboom on August 04, 2017, 12:41:42 AM

Quote from: generalizethis on August 04, 2017, 12:06:15 AM

Quote from: boomboom on August 04, 2017, 12:00:39 AM

Quote from: generalizethis on August 03, 2017, 10:49:57 PM

If you guys want an M exchange asset (and I can't wait to dish a huge dose of "I told you so") then the CKG Bounty is off the table.

Nothing can happen before,

1. A vote of M holders gives a green light to change things
2. PJ says he is willing and able to make these changes

The advantage of your CKG option is it doesn't require either of the above, and maybe most M holders agree with you, but the worth of the IOU token depends 100% on the credibility of who issues it, and everyone knows E1 iOU was backed by risto and is worthless now despite his good rep when he created it, so too was b1 after he added unbacked tokens into the wild. Reputation can't beat a blockchain for player confidence.

I don't see a problem with your CKG bounty, so keep it, just be realistic about what good it will do. It's not a blockchain solution, and only good if the person who issues it has great reputation, and your bounty only requires reputable exchange, not reputable issuer of the IOU.

I have approx 800mil M, and without a depository I can't buy more M yet, so my voice is small, but I plan to buy M when I can.

When in doubt ask the game owners to decide things.

An M exchange asset is going to create deflation--I've said it enough times for those who are paying attention, and care, to understand the issue--I do not wish you good luck in you or loaf's agenda.

Sorry, I have not seen any discussion of this deflation problem, not sure of the argument, I think having fixed supply for M is a good feature, but it's always possible to increase M in the game by using a genesis account with a virtually unlimited supply of M.

Anyway, there seems to be a lot of animosity here that I was not aware of, or part of, so I'll say no more. The vibe here isn't welcoming to discussion, I seem to have been associated with combatants in a fight I know nothing of.

Be open to other people's opinions, let the players decide based on the tested principal of 'put your money where your mouth is', those who invested in CK should obviously decide things.

That's why we have a 10% M supply to initiate a general meeting. TBH, you rehash a lot of Loaf's arguments and seem to appear every time he starts this argument, so I'm inclined to think you are Loaf--if that isn't true, apologies, but I have stated the deflation problem last time you were on here pressing this agenda, so it shouldn't be alien to you.

I don't know loaf, but does look like we agree that putting as much of CK on a blockchain as possible offers the best future for CK.

I'm an old time NXT'er, and many asset issuers have created assets with variable quantities in the wild, but from a fixed asset number that's so high it's effectively infinite.

E.g. token quantity is 1000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 - a huge number

Then they issue 1 000 000 assets say, representing whatever it is their project is doing.

To increase supply they issue more tokens from the genesis account.

To decrease supply they send tokens back to the genesis account.

Jl777 has some trading funds that work this way, asset quantity is fixed, but the supply in the wild floats. If you trust jl777 it doesn't matter how many assets are unissued in the genesis account, sometimes he buys back his own assets to decrease effective supply, sometimes in the past he sold more units and issued more assets. The effective supply is floating.

So the genesis account is like the 'bank' in traditional monopoly, and in the case of CK the bank is controlled by 'the game', not any particular player. Using an Ardr child chain would still let you have variable supply of M in the game economy if that's the design preference for the game, just pick a genesis account quantity that's huge.

I want everything in ck to have the ability to be put on a blockchain, but M. This is where we disagree, and a free floating supply means that you are simply adding in game inflation to mask the actual deflation of the original asset--also not sure how that works for players who weren't part of the initial distribution of M token--aren't you essentially creating endless inflation by parsing the exchange asset into bigger and bigger denominations of the game asset?