You mean moving the decimal? I think it probably doesn’t make a difference in the long term

Correct

But could xp be used as gas instead of ₿

What’s xp?

Xcp is the currency of the DEX

Experience points

Gmoney playing too much Roblox

Xp, cp xcp I dunno u guys all using terms in here that are new lol

/ban

shorthand for "CounterParty" instead of the other two letters

@moderator

Well my stalker is here so I’ll see my way out

Que: vampires. Scene.

&^mouth••《zip

Im just asking a general question about using something different than bitcoin to move assets on counterparty.

thanks. I will do my best try to keep it professional here, and hope that others also make a similar effort. New year, new slate?

I did like that proposal, and thought it got codified. Does anyone have links handy to what was being worked on and what stage it got to?

if I understand this correctly. It is not something that is recent

Imagine paying PEPECASH to the server to instead of BTC to the network so your tx can be bundled. I remember that idea and really hoped it got somewhere close to launch.

L2 transfer 🙂

supposedly anyone could run a server and accept whatever they want. I had high hopes for that

Off chain recorded in cp database only

Yes love this idea

Another fork with that functionality?

https://tokenscan.io/asset/OFFTHEGRID

I thot this was a safe space for thots I guess any new functionality is a fork so anything new let’s just call it a fork. Great way to get new ideas

As unclear as the "move the decimal" poll was.... it's now clear the idea is not understood. Hard to table without immediate jump to conclusion type response.

More a psyop and proper usage of supply metrics. But understood as a tampering or supply change .

If you read into the xcp dex proposals. That is one of key demands for such, to continue developing and building out tools.

Usage of supply

Liquidity pools.

DEX.

I didn't like the proposal at first. Then I understood the demand to develop, but when developing is anchored to a token with no liquidity- which made the DEX dead, 2 sided sword.

https://docs.counterparty.io/docs/advanced/specifications/gas-system/

There is alot to consider. And not to be selfish or self center and look at the bigger long term vision...it isn't about us.

Ya exactly at first it's token fuckery but when you consider the liquidty supply metrics it makes sense

Pshyop wise lower price always allows one to own more.

But assets on premium chain should be not cheap

It isn't an airdrop. It isn't a new supply of excess tokens. It's not like a dev supply. It's not a new transaction on the ledger

Like I'm understanding, but I did feel off about it at first. But I do understand that either that token gets discontinued, or something has to be done

Price is irrelevant. Network usage. Or you just accepting its a memecoin.

MC. Will be MC if that's how you want to perceive it. But I like to avoid FA

just posted a little 40 second snippet from an 18 minute documentary of "The First 5 Years" of Counterparty

https://x.com/davesta_xcp/status/1873844504698249416

also thank you for the corrections and further information about lead maintainers and early github commits under different usernames in 2014 whoever runs the Counterparty Twitter account (@teysol ? ) ❤️

Should be meme ish....price always matter for users and investors....market cap would NOT change

Mc wouldn't change price x supply...

Anyways good to have fruitful exchange

Does a user of a protocol really care for the price of the token that represents the protocol? Or do they care more about stability, features, adoption, tooling, platforms, liquidity, ease of onboarding?

If in terms of meme ish. In terms of utility, there is factors to consider.

I care when I’m investing a substantial amount of time in a platform.

I want to know they will be around in 5-10 years

If the platform is only worth $5-10MM, I’m not so confident

The token doesn't represent the assets though. Pretty sure rares proves that

And Bitcoin is the chain. So..

If companies look at CP to potentially put equities on the protocol and see a small market cap, it definitely has an effect imo

Yea but someone has to maintain it

No money, hard to survive

The token price doesn't represent the devs salary

The proposal doesn't tamper with marketcap pricing. Moving decimal reduces price per token at same ratio

Yup, aware

I get that, but a small market cap means less financial support IMO

Ya potential of xcp not realized imo

If we were worth a $1,000,000,000, we would have more money floating around here for devs than we would know what to do

Haha hard to get into a talk without getting into FA. But yes it's a balance.

It took us months to raise $10k years ago for an upgrade

When the environment is right. Funding is a thing of the past.

first and foremost, using market cap to measure any genuine concern is misleading. This is just a made up number having nothing to do with a few factors. As we saw with several scammers using the system, anyone can conflate a huge marketcap, but if there is no liquidity, then the measurement is entirely false.

@NorthrnSatosh addresses some real metrics that should not be casually dismissed. Currently, our community could use more ease of onboarding, and adoption.

If you honestly take a birds eye view of the entire social system, the investors who want to make bank on holding XCP directly conflict with the interest of the users who want an affordable way to use the protocol. With the high prices that have been proposed, this would theoretically oppose onboarding. If the payoff does not justify the cost many will not stop to learn how to use this stuff which we are all so passionate about.

I would advise none of my friends or family to buy BTC at the all time high.

I think a point of confusion is the conflation of XCP and counterparty with some kind of old-world stock where many misunderstandings develop from. Take for instance the unresolved debate, does one human being that decides to become a member entitled to one vote on any measure, or is it that only those who have the biggest wallet cap have the only important voice, as dictated by majority rule? While governance is an entirely different beast, which I'm not inviting for us to tackle here tonight, I still believe that there are multiple parties whose objectives do not align, even though some things are unanimous.

I, for one, think we can all agree that, as a community, our best efforts should be to be an appealing, welcoming, and friendly atmosphere/vibe in the chat so that as new members arrive they feel at home. Only with the influx of more people buying, creating and coding, can the project survive past another 10 years.

Scammer and market cap example is a bad one.

A assets are free and require no XCP.

Advising friends and family to buy Bitcoin at an all time high when it was $1k would of been good advice

I got tired of going on record with my friends back when BTC went past and then back down to 17k. I had already been trying to clue people in for years at that point and grew to understand that it had to "be their idea"

ttbomk the only time the current maintainers asked for funds, the request was met in like 36 hours. The service was also immediately rendered as agreed.

im not really interested in going back and forth and did my best to state my pov in the above. take it for what you will

the proposed remedy for the conflict is to lower the rate it cost in XCP in a time where the price is unreachable and therefore impractical to use for anyone else that those selling their bags before the 10x or 100x

Maybe a sliding scale XCP fee depending upon the assets length

my take-away is that it would be nice if we could all venn diagram a plan of action, which we all agree on and can participate in. Not saying I have that answer, or that there is a single answer. However, give the new year, I would like to focus on moving forward, together, positively. even you and me. I know we have had a tendency to disagree before. However, I'd like to apologize for any wrongs I've done in the past. Like removing you from the chat during the elections without consensus. that was a dick move on my part. Anyhow. all the best to everyone here, and watching from afar. We got this. 2025 will be the year of our biggest green candle yet

I'm sorry @XCERXCP

Water under the bridge, thank you, same

bet

it happened the same to polkadot , they did x100 of supply for better liquidity.. otherwise price of dot now would be 67$ x coin ... its like a psicological barrier for most of retailers

its like dogecoin .. why doge pumped so much? cause in the mind of normies its cheap 😆

they dont look at mcap , its just cheap

btw i don't have an opinion on XCP, lets the OG's decide! i can only tell what i saw with other projects :D

Ya this isn't a new concept. It's a liquity requirement and psychological issue to help attract both users and investors

Think you mean $670

yes, sorry

Do you think pokadot would be $670 a token if they did not do the 100X?

honestly? i don't think so..

but that's my opinion

people are happy to have "cheap" coins

would have been even better if 10bn supply and not 1bn probably ... XRP , XVG , DOGE , XLM Docet

the next example we will see its PENGU :D

anyway i dont want to discuss supply for XCP, its a delicate topic and only devs and OG's needs to discuss that imho.. if it was not for OG's , devs and other key people XCP would have been dead a long time ago

i'm just a observer :D

It’s a fun thought experiment, I don’t think it’s make or break either way

doge pumped because of ppl like Wolong/Fontas. Price has little to do with pumps.

every coin has a wolong or fontas inside :D

back in time there were a few , now there are many

many fontas and many wolongs now

https://cp20.tokenscan.io/address/bc1qntcgdcamlpkp32x52ufuyxtc0wpsuwswafdxc9

https://classic.tokenscan.io/address/bc1qntcgdcamlpkp32x52ufuyxtc0wpsuwswafdxc9

Same address, different balance on 2 different chains....
Wonder if dude knows 5000 xcp on classic but not on 2.0

hopefully that was purposeful