Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 6, 2018. It is now read-only.

Help enlist pertinent altcoins #107

Closed
ghost opened this issue Aug 17, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

Help enlist pertinent altcoins #107

ghost opened this issue Aug 17, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 17, 2018

We have atm a running proposal about listing fee policy:
bisq-network/proposals#35 (please comment and/or vote)

This listing fee policy proposal concerns mainly the visible weak end of Bisq's altcoin list.
In parallel, we can also have a look on the top of the altcoin list.

On https://coinmarketcap.com/coins/ one can see the Top 100 Coins by Market Capitalization

From this Top20 list :
#3 XRP #5 EOS #6 XLM Stellar #8 ADA Cardano
are not listed on Bisq.

Noticeable is #10 which is XMR Monero. The best traded altcoin on Bisq.

#11 TRX (Tron) #12 MIOTA (Iota) #14 NEO #15 XEM (Nem) #16 XTZ (Tezos) #18 VET (VeChain) #19 QTUM
are also not listed on Bisq

I'll not browse entirely this TOP100. I stop the browsing here.
But in the TOP20 best performing altcoins, atm Bisq has only 9 listed.

I imagine there may be technical reasons why some of those altcoins cannot be listed on Bisq, and maybe other reasons.

But, given what XMR Monero is able to do from time to time,
I wonder if we shouldn't do something to help enlist some of the above actually not liste altcoins ? And if yes, for which altcoins ?

Thoughts welcome.

@cbeams
Copy link
Member

cbeams commented Aug 18, 2018

This is more of a proposal itself than something for the bisq-assets repository. Most people will not see this issue, as most people do not watch this repository.

In any case, I have no interest in seeing proactive enlistment / recruitment of popular assets / altcoins, based on CoinMarketCap metrics or any other factor.

Individuals contributors are free to do as they please, but I would push back on anything that feels like "Bisq" trying to do something like this in an an official way.

I'll hold off on going into a lot of detail as to why. I've said much of it already in bisq-network/proposals#35 (comment).

Please consider closing this issue, @HarryMacfinned, as I don't think it'll get much attention here.

@cbeams cbeams assigned ghost Aug 18, 2018
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Aug 19, 2018

I close this issue as suggested by @cbeams , because indeed this repo may not be the best place for discussing the topic.
This doesn't close atm the proposed idea. I'll probably resubmit it as a proposal, but after the other running proposal concerning assets bisq-network/proposals#35 , is closed and we have clear decisions.

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Aug 19, 2018
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant