Polo delisting coins. Could this send more volume to Burst?

  • I read that Poloniex is delisting quite a few coins. I assume these coins are not being replaced with new coin offerings?

    Will this send more volume to Burst from the volume lost of the delisted coins? Whats your speculation?

  • @Dillion they are in fact delisting many coins.may 2nd is the deadline to cash them out.

  • @Dillion Some of the volume will simply go to other exchanges that still trade them. I don't think we should see a significant increase in volume in other coins on polo.

  • @darindarin Do we know their criteria for delisting and if there is any risk for Burst?


  • admin

    @RichBC It is unclear what criteria they had this time.

    I speculate that they looked deeper in the coins:

    • how many people (polo accounts) are really trading the coins: 10, 100, 1000, 10000 ? Because two accounts can make a 100 BTC daily volume.

    • Have many transactions are made on the blockchain of the coin

    • how much work the tech support has with the coin. How many trouble they have with a stuck wallet or lost transactions. As this is costly for Polo.

    This is my speculative opinion. Still I don't understand IOC delisting as they had a 8 Million Market Cap... Maybe my first two points applied.

  • It means we need to start hauling ass and stop fucking around! Burst was safe because it was clear that there were like 30 shittier projects below it. Now Burst is on the bottom, there will be another round of delisting, and we need a real ROADMAP out there because we need to face reality that unfortunately we are last on the totem pole. Before you comment with the "oh but this is all time high in USD" many coins that got delisted had been heavily pumped. You have all seen the videos made by the rogue forum leader that goes out and yells to the world that the community is divided, as he attempts to make it his own person ponzi. In his arrogance Adam does not see how his actions put us closer to delisting every day. The "developer meetings" on youtube consist of him smoking weed with a dev that had 1 of his coins delisted already. There are 2 paths left, hard fork away from them, or do nothing and get delisted. I know it sucks to read someone be the devil's advocate but there is no denying this reality. It is time to step up our game and save our coin, or do nothing as that fat greedy pig plunders this coin and runs it into the ground.

  • @alexclarkbarry191 Man please dont panic... Its not really the last coin on the polo... lately it even grows a bit in price and its volume of trade is growing too! Anyway the network grows in size and marketcap is growing even faster! I may miss something but we are not in grawe danger! I do not think it would be any good for burst to hardfork. I understand the other forum and its personal jesus its not good for us but they can not control the network! Instead of panic we need to develop this forum faster and with that you can help too. Lets say im trying to help burst with a small asset. You may have a good idea and thats all what burst needs! So instead of panic share it whit us or start implementing it yourself and it will help on the end!

  • @potkas It is best to start the panic now and change direction quickly to avoid delisting. What would be wrong with having a hard fork to show that we are able to push substantial upgrades to the protocol? I know the other forum does not control the network, but it can damage the reputation of the network in the eyes of the exchange that keeps us listed. In the past crowetic has said they have wallet problems with Poloniex, and that communication channels between him and the exchange are weak/non-existent, and one of coins he manages is already delisted. Burst and its 100-200 BTC trading volume is not a priority for them when they have Ripple, Lumens, Ethereum, Monero, and others doing 100,000+ BTC. I do plan on putting effort in to help hold the fort up, but I want everybody to be over prepared and all hands on deck to prempt this problem before it occurs. We can think delist is not a possibility, sit around hands in our pocket, and then one day everybody takes a -90% loss.

  • @alexclarkbarry191 Hard fork would destroy the trust in the coin, half the network size not shure to half but cuts it down! And i believe it would mean trouble for the assets too! Im not an admin or programmer but i believe it would mean trouble! A lot of it and little of gain! And how would you stop the BN personal Jesus to move back in? To be exact to continue with the new fork and drop the old? Just too much hassle for no gain i believe which would in my eyes discredit burst in the eyes of investors and exchanges! All what wee need to do i believe is to start warning people not to invest in to assets which are managed by the BN personal Jesus and his team. Or the ones which generates incomes on BN from ads or similar... just warn they are possible scams governed by scammers! That is the best we can do i think. But then again i may be wrong so wait for an admin to say something 😉

  • @potkas BURST was created from as a clone of NXT, which forks often for big updates. If they do it why can't we? Hard forks show growth and adaptability is possible. How would a fork destroy trust in the coin?

  • admin

    @alexclarkbarry191 A fork would not get BN out of Burst - you'd need to create a completely new coin, and I forsee issues with that gaining traction. Everyone who wants to switch would have to replot, which for many of us would be a massive undertaking, and initially at least, there would be no exchange support.

  • @alexclarkbarry191 it shows ass well the need to do it because of some trouble with the code itself usually although not always the case... And what you want to do is to get BN out of current burst. How would you do the hard fork to achieve it? They can just come to the new fork as you do... And if done , the assets would remain split between the 2 resulting coins. They would need to work either there or here or both... Holders wont be happy for sure... And you would probably half the investors between the 2 resulting coins too. What im trying to say is only that you would have in a result a fork with nothing achieved... Because everybody can decide to continue here or there... I believe BN would just come with us and what then? I just cant see why would they sit on the old fork... Dont take me wrong i would like their personal Jesus to leave burst but you cant forbid him to join the new fork...

  • @alexclarkbarry191 I'm sorry man but what you are saying is kind of stupid and not true at all.
    Coins under Burst volume on polo : HUC, NOTE, XVC, BTM, RIC, FLO, NXC, GRC, XBC, BTCD, OMNI, BCY, EMC2, RADS, PINK, EXP, XPM, NEOS, NMC, BLK, VRC, FLDC, VIA, BELA, NAUT, SBD and even PASC atm. How are we at the bottom?(btw those aren't "shit projects"). Coins with huge volumes have margin trading options.
    BN is srsly not a problem and I can't understand why are you panicking. BTC, XRP, LTC,DASH, MONERO etc has far more ppl like him in their communities.
    Hard fork is the worst possible solution to any problem as it ruins trust in coin and make so much problems that it's almost never worth it and for sure it wouldn't help with polo problem if it ever appears.

  • Like him or hate him Adam is one guy. Adam is not BURST and BURST is not Adam. He is a big fish in the pond at BN right now. What we need is HUGE growth... growth so big Adam is simply one player in the gog that is BURST...not a split creating two coins. Adam I believe was a heavy marketer of Bitcoin years ago... did that community call for a split to get away? Obviously BTC was much bigger, but you see the point?

    While I don't necessarily agree with his particular approach or presentation at times... I'd like to see 1000 "Adams" (at least the marketing aspect) across the world yelling and screaming to buy BURST, to mine BURST, etc.

  • burst may be in the lower rung on polo Via amount of Sat it's trading at but has on average 200+ BTC volume per day for well over a few weeks now i would not call that a pump and puts it far from the bottom in Polo's eyes .... Polo delist coins its not manking any $$$ off of. they make there money from fee's that is a direct % of the amount of BTC going into and out of a coin ... burst wont be in that list anytime soon.... i would not get worryed untell you see that daily BTC # start droping and stay down for weeks.

  • admin

    The only reason for a hard fork (change of protocol) in my opinion should be to solve a technical problem that can not be solved otherwise.

    Also a delist on one exchange is not the end of Burst or minus 90%. See https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/iocoin
    Who knows which Exchange will be leading in two or five years.

  • admin

    @RichBC said in Polo delisting coins. Could this send more volume to Burst?:

    @darindarin Do we know their criteria for delisting and if there is any risk for Burst?


    I have no source, but i read something about ... factor is not only volume but also active community, development (code and project) and i guess much more factors like @daWallet mentioned. After all it is maybe the decision of one single person ... and not based on pure stats and numbers but maybe also on sympathy, unique of a coin etc. ... i personally do not fear that burst gets delisted, ... they would have done it already a year ago.

  • @Hyzi0 How does hard fork ruin trust? Monero and NXT hardfork twice or more a year with 0 problems. We were forked from NXT if they can pull off productive forks to make coin more valuable why can BURST not do that?

  • admin

    @alexclarkbarry191 What does a fork achieve? If we fork onto a new protocol/encoding, whatever we change, BN can switch to the new wallet/client.

    What you're describing is forking to a completely new clone coin. As I said earlier, that's not likely to work - replotting is something most miners won't want to do, and until there are a significant number of miners there will be no Exchange market for the coins. I don't even want to think about how the assets deal with it.

  • admin

    @haitch I think @alexclarkbarry191 wants regular updates on the wallet implementation (core).

    Not every new feature or addition needs to be a fork. A (hard)fork means that the new wallet version won't communicate with the older versions, because the protocols are incompatible.

    Maybe NXT and Monero did that because they added new features. I don't think it is helpful to push any Exchange twice a year to update their wallet in X blocks or they will lose money.