✔R
Доброе утро)
Хотел пообщаться с адмиемстрацией по поводу вакансий
Size: a a a
2019 September 29
✔R
Доброе утро)
Хотел пообщаться с адмиемстрацией по поводу вакансий
Хотел пообщаться с адмиемстрацией по поводу вакансий
Хотите работать в командах Даш? Как минимум необходимо знание английского и соотв. вопрос автоматически переадресовывается в англоязычное поле проекта, например в t.me/dash_chat
AV
Или плохо информирован. Похоже он не лучше Вас разбирается в блокчейне. Конкретный адрес (XhvoRMJEDYhisjgoqXS3RW3K2RBdtDKbW1) он признал, но не понимает, что признать этот адрес значит признать весь кошелек с 211k и мастернодами. Я бы очень хотел, чтобы нашлось объяснение кроме “группировщик не работает”
А в чем вопрос? Ну допустим, что кто-то из разработки владеет 211 нодой. Мне лично не понятна судить проблемы.
A
А в чем вопрос? Ну допустим, что кто-то из разработки владеет 211 нодой. Мне лично не понятна судить проблемы.
Это скорее проблема морали и справедливости. :)
AB
А в чем вопрос? Ну допустим, что кто-то из разработки владеет 211 нодой. Мне лично не понятна судить проблемы.
А прочли всё исследование? там не 211 , а 1211, кроме того обвинения в манипулировании курсом и голосованием. Но Дмитрий не предлагает заводить уголовное дело. Он предлагает перестать сдавать деньги на разработку, то есть сэкономить для ДАО 3000+ в месяц.
AV
Прочёл, но это исследование в стили "поднять вопрос", а не снять существующий. И оно содержит много допущений. Поэтому это быстрее гипотиза, чем исследование.
В чем принципиальный вопрос?
В чем принципиальный вопрос?
AB
Прочёл, но это исследование в стили "поднять вопрос", а не снять существующий. И оно содержит много допущений. Поэтому это быстрее гипотиза, чем исследование.
В чем принципиальный вопрос?
В чем принципиальный вопрос?
Что за допущения? Эта “бумага” очень хорошо вписывается в мою картину даш-мира, то есть объясняет явления за которыми я внимательно наблюдаю уже около года
AV
Что за допущения? Эта “бумага” очень хорошо вписывается в мою картину даш-мира, то есть объясняет явления за которыми я внимательно наблюдаю уже около года
Два вопроса курс и голосование обладают сущьностью в которых один из критерий и является "манипуляциия". Поясню: те кто при голосовании получают не удовлетворительный результат сразу выдвигают обвине в манипуляции, иначе это не голосование.
AB
Два вопроса курс и голосование обладают сущьностью в которых один из критерий и является "манипуляциия". Поясню: те кто при голосовании получают не удовлетворительный результат сразу выдвигают обвине в манипуляции, иначе это не голосование.
А можно без общих слов? Я это тоже умею, и многие умеют. А кто не умеет может чужими словами сказать. На заданный вопрос есть ответ?
✔R
Специально для тех, кому «фантазийная санта-барбара» интереснее раскрытых вчера подробностей по Даш платформе - запощу сюда ответ Раяна Дмитрию-Энди:
babygiraffe MNO 2 points,1 day ago
How to explain the first example of the second document?... As I said, address XvEU6pEWA2oC4FVdcxVdXcxHaMjyLZvPdt is one of the Dash Core Group Kraken deposit addresses. Once deposited, those funds belong to Kraken and Kraken credits our account with Dash. We then sell the Dash for fiat. It is very logical that a person looking to operate a masternode would purchase large quantities of Dash on an exchange like Kraken. When a customer that has accumulated a large balance of Dash initiates a withdrawal, Kraken gathers enough inputs from its inventory to facilitate the withdrawal. To minimize the kb size of the transaction (and therefore the cost), an exchange processing a large withdrawal gathers a few large denomination inputs (rather than several hundred smaller ones). Therefore, it is highly likely that Kraken would select deposits that were made by DCG to facilitate a large withdrawal like would be required for a new masternode.
"Wallet 3460" is your label for the box in your first chart in the second document. In your chart, it only shows address XhvoRMJEDYhisjgoqXS3RW3K2RBdtDKbW1. The only thing I admitted was that address belongs to DCG. It was used for the infrastructure budget. I vehemently deny that wallet contains 200 masternodes. DCG does not operate any masternodes. It has never operated a masternode at any point in the past.
On page 3 of the first document, none of the addresses at Poloniex that you've listed have ever been recipients of funds from DCG. We don't even have a DCG account at Poloniex. My conclusion is that "Wallet 3460" (whatever it consists of) is tainted with mostly Poloniex's wallet or possibly another exchange and most of what you include in "Wallet 3460" has nothing to do with DCG at all.
Ask yourself, is it even remotely reasonable that DCG accumulated 1,100,000 Dash (worth $80 million) from a proposal system that has generated less than 300,000 Dash in its entire history (only a portion of which went to DCG, and DCG incurred expenses against the share that it did get)? Or is it more likely that your process is broken, one that depends on a tool with the warning "This feature is very experimental, inaccurate and not updated in real-time"?
I won't be replying to any additional posts about this. DCG has always been committed to transparency. If you would like an accurate depiction of our financials, review the accounting statements that we present during the quarterly call.
babygiraffe MNO 2 points,1 day ago
How to explain the first example of the second document?... As I said, address XvEU6pEWA2oC4FVdcxVdXcxHaMjyLZvPdt is one of the Dash Core Group Kraken deposit addresses. Once deposited, those funds belong to Kraken and Kraken credits our account with Dash. We then sell the Dash for fiat. It is very logical that a person looking to operate a masternode would purchase large quantities of Dash on an exchange like Kraken. When a customer that has accumulated a large balance of Dash initiates a withdrawal, Kraken gathers enough inputs from its inventory to facilitate the withdrawal. To minimize the kb size of the transaction (and therefore the cost), an exchange processing a large withdrawal gathers a few large denomination inputs (rather than several hundred smaller ones). Therefore, it is highly likely that Kraken would select deposits that were made by DCG to facilitate a large withdrawal like would be required for a new masternode.
"Wallet 3460" is your label for the box in your first chart in the second document. In your chart, it only shows address XhvoRMJEDYhisjgoqXS3RW3K2RBdtDKbW1. The only thing I admitted was that address belongs to DCG. It was used for the infrastructure budget. I vehemently deny that wallet contains 200 masternodes. DCG does not operate any masternodes. It has never operated a masternode at any point in the past.
On page 3 of the first document, none of the addresses at Poloniex that you've listed have ever been recipients of funds from DCG. We don't even have a DCG account at Poloniex. My conclusion is that "Wallet 3460" (whatever it consists of) is tainted with mostly Poloniex's wallet or possibly another exchange and most of what you include in "Wallet 3460" has nothing to do with DCG at all.
Ask yourself, is it even remotely reasonable that DCG accumulated 1,100,000 Dash (worth $80 million) from a proposal system that has generated less than 300,000 Dash in its entire history (only a portion of which went to DCG, and DCG incurred expenses against the share that it did get)? Or is it more likely that your process is broken, one that depends on a tool with the warning "This feature is very experimental, inaccurate and not updated in real-time"?
I won't be replying to any additional posts about this. DCG has always been committed to transparency. If you would like an accurate depiction of our financials, review the accounting statements that we present during the quarterly call.
AV
Вы сказали, что в бумаге допущения. На что конкретно Вы предлагаете обратить внимание? Где лажа?
Проблема не в бумаге. Проблема в подходе: не имея неоспоримых доказательств обвинят не возможно, но поднять pr компанию можно.
Мой вопрос прежний. Меня не интересует нюансы. В чем и зачем? Не поняв это вы просто попадаете под монипуляцию своим сознанием. 😊
Мой вопрос прежний. Меня не интересует нюансы. В чем и зачем? Не поняв это вы просто попадаете под монипуляцию своим сознанием. 😊
AB
Специально для тех, кому «фантазийная санта-барбара» интереснее раскрытых вчера подробностей по Даш платформе - запощу сюда ответ Раяна Дмитрию-Энди:
babygiraffe MNO 2 points,1 day ago
How to explain the first example of the second document?... As I said, address XvEU6pEWA2oC4FVdcxVdXcxHaMjyLZvPdt is one of the Dash Core Group Kraken deposit addresses. Once deposited, those funds belong to Kraken and Kraken credits our account with Dash. We then sell the Dash for fiat. It is very logical that a person looking to operate a masternode would purchase large quantities of Dash on an exchange like Kraken. When a customer that has accumulated a large balance of Dash initiates a withdrawal, Kraken gathers enough inputs from its inventory to facilitate the withdrawal. To minimize the kb size of the transaction (and therefore the cost), an exchange processing a large withdrawal gathers a few large denomination inputs (rather than several hundred smaller ones). Therefore, it is highly likely that Kraken would select deposits that were made by DCG to facilitate a large withdrawal like would be required for a new masternode.
"Wallet 3460" is your label for the box in your first chart in the second document. In your chart, it only shows address XhvoRMJEDYhisjgoqXS3RW3K2RBdtDKbW1. The only thing I admitted was that address belongs to DCG. It was used for the infrastructure budget. I vehemently deny that wallet contains 200 masternodes. DCG does not operate any masternodes. It has never operated a masternode at any point in the past.
On page 3 of the first document, none of the addresses at Poloniex that you've listed have ever been recipients of funds from DCG. We don't even have a DCG account at Poloniex. My conclusion is that "Wallet 3460" (whatever it consists of) is tainted with mostly Poloniex's wallet or possibly another exchange and most of what you include in "Wallet 3460" has nothing to do with DCG at all.
Ask yourself, is it even remotely reasonable that DCG accumulated 1,100,000 Dash (worth $80 million) from a proposal system that has generated less than 300,000 Dash in its entire history (only a portion of which went to DCG, and DCG incurred expenses against the share that it did get)? Or is it more likely that your process is broken, one that depends on a tool with the warning "This feature is very experimental, inaccurate and not updated in real-time"?
I won't be replying to any additional posts about this. DCG has always been committed to transparency. If you would like an accurate depiction of our financials, review the accounting statements that we present during the quarterly call.
babygiraffe MNO 2 points,1 day ago
How to explain the first example of the second document?... As I said, address XvEU6pEWA2oC4FVdcxVdXcxHaMjyLZvPdt is one of the Dash Core Group Kraken deposit addresses. Once deposited, those funds belong to Kraken and Kraken credits our account with Dash. We then sell the Dash for fiat. It is very logical that a person looking to operate a masternode would purchase large quantities of Dash on an exchange like Kraken. When a customer that has accumulated a large balance of Dash initiates a withdrawal, Kraken gathers enough inputs from its inventory to facilitate the withdrawal. To minimize the kb size of the transaction (and therefore the cost), an exchange processing a large withdrawal gathers a few large denomination inputs (rather than several hundred smaller ones). Therefore, it is highly likely that Kraken would select deposits that were made by DCG to facilitate a large withdrawal like would be required for a new masternode.
"Wallet 3460" is your label for the box in your first chart in the second document. In your chart, it only shows address XhvoRMJEDYhisjgoqXS3RW3K2RBdtDKbW1. The only thing I admitted was that address belongs to DCG. It was used for the infrastructure budget. I vehemently deny that wallet contains 200 masternodes. DCG does not operate any masternodes. It has never operated a masternode at any point in the past.
On page 3 of the first document, none of the addresses at Poloniex that you've listed have ever been recipients of funds from DCG. We don't even have a DCG account at Poloniex. My conclusion is that "Wallet 3460" (whatever it consists of) is tainted with mostly Poloniex's wallet or possibly another exchange and most of what you include in "Wallet 3460" has nothing to do with DCG at all.
Ask yourself, is it even remotely reasonable that DCG accumulated 1,100,000 Dash (worth $80 million) from a proposal system that has generated less than 300,000 Dash in its entire history (only a portion of which went to DCG, and DCG incurred expenses against the share that it did get)? Or is it more likely that your process is broken, one that depends on a tool with the warning "This feature is very experimental, inaccurate and not updated in real-time"?
I won't be replying to any additional posts about this. DCG has always been committed to transparency. If you would like an accurate depiction of our financials, review the accounting statements that we present during the quarterly call.
Спасибо, читал. Как Вы понимаете фразу “The only thing I admitted was that address belongs to DCG” ?
AB
Проблема не в бумаге. Проблема в подходе: не имея неоспоримых доказательств обвинят не возможно, но поднять pr компанию можно.
Мой вопрос прежний. Меня не интересует нюансы. В чем и зачем? Не поняв это вы просто попадаете под монипуляцию своим сознанием. 😊
Мой вопрос прежний. Меня не интересует нюансы. В чем и зачем? Не поняв это вы просто попадаете под монипуляцию своим сознанием. 😊
Понял. Меня интересуют факты. Мы на разной волне :-)