Quote from: versprichnix on April 13, 2020, 03:21:00 PM

Quote from: crypto_zoidberg on April 13, 2020, 02:49:24 PM

...
As I mentioned earlier, basically I see few major options:
1. Add more listing(s)
2. Do development and take some improvements from Zano.
3. Hire some marketing group
4. Mix of 1/2/3

I personally think that more listings won't change the picture a lot since the project may look not actively developed. Marketing may help. And development of course, but I guess I think so because I'm developer.

Opinions?

i think in rather reasonable averages (absolute rationality does not exist for me), so i try.

1. medium of three listings (at this time), at least two, preferably not more than four. I know stex and btc-alpha at this time. So i see a light pressure for a third one. (I like coinex, altilly, and southxchange)

2. not enough expertise for this. Economically the code has to deescalate deflections (example is the heavily fluctuant historic decred stake reward after launch, or the heavy fluctuation of transfer fees of the bitcoin (NOT their amount), they are a sign of deficiency in coding decisions), and to give small instances a light advantage to big instances (in mining/minting for example).

3. In my opinion less important, better is recommendation. If done then be neutral, concentrate on Boolberries advantages, and never make poor other competing crypto-currencies.

1./ Exchanges- Stex & Alpha KYC so I'd recommend a non KYC for a privacy coin like TradeOgre (Listings by community requests) or maybe Qtrade another non KYC that only lists quality/heavy developed coins/projects or any others that have genuine volume and no required daily trading volume that only increases volume bots etc...

2. I think we have covered boss, so the fork choice rule (https://github.com/hyle-team/docs/blob/master/zano/PoS_Analysis_and_improvements_proposal.pdf) PT II: Fluctiation of fee's vs BTC/cost basis/weight, not sure I'm understanding your question, appreciate more info or feedback, thx.

3. Well this might be the bit I break your heart on BBR, much like me you seem to have made an emotional attachment to BBR, yet it's simply a version of the same guy's code. So we started with the original CN protocol and design, then we had boolberry with major improvements over and above any other CN at that time including @alias, pruning of blockchain, a GUI (yes back then it was a rarity, well for some anyway). Now we have zano with asynchronous core multi-sig, escrow, E-Commerce on chain, & many more future improvements and enhancements, all made a lot easier and streamlined having the original coders continue to improve their own code rather than have 100 contributors that don't add any value or improvements. (Zano is no "poor other competing crypto-currency" you could not be further from reality. It's leaps and bounds better, most likely to go on to spur another 300+ forks in a few years or 6 months by the needy needing another turn!