i know that feeling lol

whats the current numeric fee proposal amount?

https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/cips/blob/master/cip-0029.md

XCP Fees :
- 0.50 XCP fee for the initial issuance of a named assets remains unchanged.
- 0.25 XCP fee for the initial issuance of a sub-asset remains unchanged.
- 0.10 XCP fee for the initial issuance of a numeric asset.
- 0.01 XCP fee for all other updates to the issuances table.

Note that our stamp friends are now advising people to register numeric assets asap before we add any xcp fee so as to circumvent this upcoming feature. I think we may need to consider accelerating the implementation of these fees in face of this blatant CTA to further increase spamming. Also note they are stating as a supposed fact that also xcp fees will be added to a bunch of other actions https://t.me/BitcoinStamps/135891

Why not get in some free ones before we have to start charging? We could certainly pre-register millions of assets to drop the reissue fees to 1/10th the cost and make it transparent to users while allowing them to continue interacting with xchain and Freewallet.

The point of stamps was to not require an xcp fee in the first place and have all fees in btc. Ideally btc fees for issuance, etc. would be much more feasible for everyone.

We are just being forced to pull stamps away from xchain and use our own version of CP to continue. and also shift mutually beneficial dev resources elsewhere. I’d rather help fix the database problems in reality. Much easier to work together but it seems the decision has been made for us.

"being forced"

You make the decisions for your project... YOU decided to rush SRC-20 without consulting with devs... YOU decided to keep doing it after you knew it was a problem... no one is forcing shit... I made a personal decision for my personal project (XChain) to not show your non-usable assets.... no fork was forced... no one FORCED anything bro.... Tried to work with you.... Tried to show you how you could do things responsibly.... but you know best.... Best of luck with that.... but dont play games.... or try to make it seem like your being forced into anything

curious if you are refunding the server funds that were sent since all the stamps and donations were refunded and the banner was removed?

You keep talking about refunding server funds and how your bringing attention and dev funds to CP..... Can you please clarify how your bringing funds to CP Dev DIRECTLY.... your talking about refunds... what refunds? AFAIK you have donated NOTHING.... have profited off the FREE use of XCHain, FREE use of Freewallet, made the lives of devs here pretty difficult for the past 3 weeks with your "profit over everything" attitude

yeah we just about have a wallet ready and are preparing to move things outside of CP anyway for SRC-20 so it's kind of a moot point. We have been busy building for the past weeks to alleviate any problems only to be faced with roadblocks and removal of support for stamps

Amazing, I wish you the best of luck with that... no need for you to use CP at all for your src-20 stuff at all then.

correct we don't intend to (use CP for src-20) anyway

Cool.... Gonna be interesting to watch you de-couple "Bitcoin Stamps" which use CP and all the features from "Bitcoin Stamps SRC-20" which now has DEPLOY / MINT / TRANSFER functionality.... seriously wish you best of luck with your project.... just wish you wouldn't have had to come into CP and shit in the sink... but, CP is stronger because of it, and unfortunately, a "free" way to use CP is now closed due to abuse.

As a user, do you prefer seeing A assets or subassets if you had a choice.

We’re doing our users a disservice pricing A assets cheaper. 

Users will have to endure these unusable records forever and won’t stop until the price of XCP prevents them from doing so. 

0.25 fee for A assets makes more sense if the goal is to stop the spamming of unusable assets. 

Yes... If your referrring to the "donations" which were sent... and the "free banner" that you got... those are separate things... review the chat history of your own channel.... but to answer your question... YES, I refunded all the "DONATIONS" of stamps before I removed the banner.... not trying to take stamps or use stamps or support stamps or scam..... just want to divorce myself from you and the "stamp" drama and focus on CP dev and what is best for CP.

https://xchain.io/tx/9fa113643cfd5905d2b233cd4be0ff35d7c428995bb7ef5ace00d97c248bcd39

FYI... anyone who sent me a stamp when the project first booted up.... I have returned your stamps... I no longer feel comfortable being involved in the Bitcoin Stamps project and as such have returned all the stamps sent to me early on... https://xchain.io/tx/9fa113643cfd5905d2b233cd4be0ff35d7c428995bb7ef5ace00d97c248bcd39

I wish the Bitcoin Stamps project the best of luck... however, I am no longer comfortable supporting a project which is unclear on what a "stamp vs Bitcoin Stamp vs src-20 stamp" is...

IMO the project started out with good intentions by @mikeinspace to experiment around with Counterparty and make a cool use-case using the platform... I was supportive of this experimentation, even if it was confusing (Bitcoin Stamps vs Stamps)

I even build tokenstamps.io and tried to help support the project as much as possible (added green banner on site without being paid, etc)

Unfortunately now tho, the project focus has shifted from having fun to being more motivated by profit... which is fine, every project has to make their own decisions for what is right for their project... no judgements on them and their decisions... I can only speak for myself and my personal views... and over the past few weeks it has become clear to me this project has been taken over by people who care more about profit than about improving bitcoin or using counterparty in a sustainable way... and I can no longer be supportive of Bitcoin Stamps.

I do plan to continue supporting displaying of "stamps" on xchain.io... However, I have removed the "This is an official card of the Bitcoin Stamps project" green banner from all "Bitcoin Stamps" assets.

I am not interested in debates on this decision, or discussions on how, why, etc... This is a personal decision for myself and my personal projects (xchain, freewallet, etc)

This is what I posted in your Bitcoin Stamps channel yesterday before removing the banner... also checked in with mikeinspace before doing so.... but wont share those private messages here.

This is so petty, everyone here agrees spamming the database table with unusable assets is unacceptable and gave src weeks to make a change

Only thing is you haven’t done anything

ok, i'll pull up the transaction that i paid to the xcp server fund dispenser. i would expect that to be refunded as well.

but we have, we just about have a wallet ready and are moving to shift all of this off of CP.

Stamps are awesome. SRC spamming is the issue. I don’t consider SRC a stamp. Something vs nothing lol

What can you do with src right now? Can I even hold it or send it somewhere?

I was not aware you made any donation... you never pointed it out... but YES... by all means... since PROFIT is all you care about... .point me to a TX where you donated and i'll refund it to the address that donated.... I want NO funds from you or your project...

Thanks again for showing your true colors.... also remember, you asked me for $1000 when you were "forced" to close your profitable mining service for a few hours.... and, MIKEINSPACE paid you the $1000

nobody said we give a shit about profits. i do thiis for fun as a side gig

you offered $1000 i never asked for it, and didn't take it from anyone

So done with you... your chat history speaks for itself here

Answer this?

cool... glad to see you rejected mikes $1000 when he offered to paid after I laughed in your face when you asked for a $1000 donation from me

keep your donations, keep your fake charity and "support" for CP... wish you the best of luck with SRC-20

keep antagonizing me and I can go even more scorched earth.... drop all stamps images from xchain, post message about how SRC-20 is abusive and horrible... dont want to do it, want to just have you keep working on your project and migrate SRC-20 off to your own thing.... but, keep it up... keep making me the bad guy and spinning false info to your community.... Dont want to take things further, but can if needed.

Now back to work on BTNS... l8r

Post post tx

https://xchain.io/address/1Eo7Fjy9MaLWHccZsfH6XDoDRLDuVn6vEC

That is an address... not a payment

but i'll do the work for you... sec

that was the address that send the donation. wanted to make it easy for refund

nobody asked for any money from you. you offered. all we wanted was some assistance in creating a better way. we are well on that path at this point anyway so it's really a moot point.

this is what we have been building! Our wallet is getting close, we start parsing the new transactions and will have a dex built asap.

So nothing. That’s called a scam. Taking money with nothing but a promise.

We don’t promote scams on CP

We need to stop it

it's called building

Says every scam in crypto

Your donation of 0.05 BTC (~$1000)
https://xchain.io/tx/396b29278944cb0846c7ffde9d709af8b777ce2cdde61a745a331a2fd35f3bf0

Your refund of 0.05 BTC
https://blockstream.info/tx/39042dca739ed3ccfb835cfb52f77a6328edad6281c29bc6c92c56ebfa42e9a6

You spent way more of my time than $1000... but happy to refund your donation... FYI, in the future, maybe consider NOT donating to something if it is conditional 🤷

allowing people to store immutable assets on btc is a scam now? we had to start somewhere. we are just building based on demand

lol, it wasn't conditional. you were well aware that we made donations and claimed otherwise.

and I supported your project from the beginning... invested my own $$$ into it, as well as built out sites and APIs to support it.... also tried repeatedly to help you engage with CP community and integrate SRC-20 in a way that makes sense.....So "We just wanted assistance" falls on deaf ears..... I creatd "Stamp Devs" channel to get all devs talking... I continued to reach out to you, tell you there was issue, and even wrote the god damn BTNS and SRC-21 spec for you.... ALL you had to do was stop your minting service, pivot (1-2 days of work)... and all this could hve been avoided.

we have been working on pivoting src-20 completely outside of CP as you are well aware. This wasn't a 1-2 day turnaround

It seems to be a lack of understanding regarding broadcasts

Too many cooks

Having something do nothing lol

Sounds like a hard pivot

You literally have nothing and you want us to keep letting you sell spam

It’s hilarious

i vote we move on, there is a CIP that can be commented on now

https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/cips/blob/master/cip-0029.md

None

we could try and limit discussion here https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/cips/issues/80

absolutely not. xcp tokens have no permissionless distribution continuing after burn ended long ago which means ppl that had them back then could decide distribution from then on. yes, it's not as bad as ico letting 1 party gain entire sale supply for free, but far from ideal. counterparty most redeeming feature is that it can be used without permission with bitcoin alone.

there are multiple features that require xcp, not only issuances, it is the closest thing counterparty has to gas which is the reason this proposal is employing it

yea, gas is bad. I would rather burn sats than need yet another token I can't acquire without someone choosing to sell it

you pay miners every time you use bitcoin

Also other solutions to the "need XCP to issue" problem.... can update issuances so that they auto-purchase the required XCP from a dispenser before issuance.... to end user, experience will be same .... Register asset on Counterparty using BTC... cept now they can register NAMED and SUBASSETS using just BTC as well.... sucks we gotta close hole on numerics, but its an attack vector that needs addressing... coming up on 20% of database being spammed unusable numerics.

op return allows burning sats, you can require elevated amounts

its an interesting proposal

but we dont always use op_return

I think fancy features with xcp are ok as they can be worked around

cost of opreturn is minimal so figure easy

what if dispenser closes before auto purchase? plus that might be variable cost

numeric assets were an add-on to counterparty, it makes sense to bring their cost in line with named assets IMO, sure its another asset but you’re also creating another asset so cant play the maximalist game

if you notice the entire omnibolt movement now is doing everything to avoid using omni token

omni was an ICO, its existence is on shaky ground

XCP was forged from burned bitcoin, the narrative persists to this day, its not for everyone but it has its own lore and user base

I don't care about tokens not being bitcoin, if you want permissionless, pow (or proof of burning pow asset) remain only permissionless distribution methods

if someone wants to make an XCP free counterparty then id love to watch it play out

Wasn't the btc burn xcp mint in direct response to that ico?

its not difficult technically

just do it if you think its valuable

yep

iTs tHe fIRsT nFt

pob was nice idea, just wish it never ended

no one is getting rich from XCP

so its an odd position to hold

its probably the worst performing crypto over the last 9 years lol

it's about control and permission, not cost

its joining a network

you buy bitcoin from someone

or your buy it with electricity

or labor

from someone

I'd rather pay way more in sats than need to rely on yet another token I can't acquire without sellers permission

99% of people using bitcoin buy it from a seller with permission

this is an odd argument

maybe you can use dust limit as reference and set issuance burn cost to multiple of that

you buy an ASIC with sellers permission

how can you join the bitcoin network without buying something from someone

because bitcoin forces miners to sell never ending stream of bitcoin as mining is costly

who cares?

ppl who like permissionless decentralized things?

why does the miner’s profit margin have any meaning to me the buyer of bitcoin?

how is this any more decentralized than buying XCP from someone selling it, a market maker perhaps

and you can buy XCP directly onchain

I can't stop you, I'm just explaining why. omni use doesn't rely on that ico token anymore basically for a reason

well it was an ICO token

bc there is no costly emission of new xcp

nobody is forced to sell xcp

so will bitcoin stop being decentralized when the last coin is mined?

fees never stop

so yeah not just emission but redistribution stream

that assumes there is network demand

yeah, but it only matters if there is

but we’re side tracking here, you can still interact with coutnerparty tokens without needing XCP

XCP is kind of a grounding rod against forks too

now that i think about it

I understand why you want to make issuance costly, just think it's bad solution.

its been the solution since inception

the “social contract"

my suggestion is just consider providing alternative method of making it costly with bitcoin alone

i think thats only part of it, its also bringing it in line with the ethos and culture surrounding the protocol

the protocol got a second breath imo specifically from adding ways to interact with it directly with bitcoin

i have to disagree that stamps has been a clear net positive to counterparty

and I think the intent of pob to make distribution unforgeably costly and permissionless is part of its ethos and appeal and why I always defended it

counterparty devs needs to weigh the cost of growing a community at odds with the existing ethos vs supporting the large community of artists and collectors that have already built on it

IMO the second deserves much more attention and consideration

the biggest stakeholders

while I love the devs, this does more than help solve one problem as it is adding permissioned barriers that undo the point of a permissionless protocol. I made a suggestion on how to do both. and you can implement both sats only solutions and xcp solutions at same time

But doesn’t that contradict your point

That’s also more confusing for users

Just go full btc only

May play around with this sats solution in BTNS... will need anti-spam mechanism as well... rolling with GAS initially... but seems like a good playground to test it out.

anti-spam bloating state is important, I agree. I don't want to go btc only. I have always been fine with usdt and tokens here not pretending to be anything more than they are

The thing is if numeric asset fees are deemed a disaster they could always be removed later

It’s an ever evolving protocol

if there is no good solution, I understand. just trying to be constructively critical

I get it and I’ve always been a champion of numeric assets

But I’ve grown to appreciate XCP more as time goes on (even though I hold very little)

I lost some to poloniex long ago when it closed for withdrawals, none since. (actually not true, got from dispenser to grab stuff off token dex at least once)

I actually always wondered why xcp fee was static and not set as % of unburned xcp

plan has always been (from what the founders have said) to transition to a sliding fee model based on usage, remaining supply, etc... just never got around to sussing out that fee model/formula..... think a good step towards that is looking at actual database impact, and applying the XCP fee evenly across all features based on actual database impact... then once everything is using XCP where needed... easier to switch from static fee to sliding model

Also if anyone remembers, XCP was the catalyst for rare pepe trading back in 2016

It provides value to the network because it can be the liquid token of the dex

there is a solution for having that while remaining permissionless to get independently. if you had a burn address collect btc (or better opreturn with a note flagging intent), and once every epoch (every 2 weeks when difficulty changes) you issued new xcp (or another token to use for fees) equal to new issuance per epoch total then split proportionally to each burn by amount burned out of total

It’s not a bad idea and I think it’s a fine proposal to discuss

It would need to be a high enough fixed rate to convince existing holders

Any sort of sliding rate would just create a new game

But maybe that would be fun too

There is some discussion somewhere related to a type of gas token when the EVM was implemented

continuous proof of burn is interesting to me. it opens some interesting other processes like trust minimized btc-peg token I could talk about but tbh isn't necessary on counterparty which can already see btc tx.

can't imagine EVM discussion amounting to much given how they landed on premining almost all of it and closing off new distribution. marketed as "it's just cheap fuel brah" to "ultrasound money" and proof of premine.

idea is rate of new fee tokens is fixed amount per 2016 blocks (difficulty adjustment epoch) but the rate depends on amount burned, cheap if few, more if many, no way to really game it afaik