New MAID Listing: ChainRift Exchange

exchange

#63

You are correct. There was no official recognition as a partner but if you dig into the thread you will see a pretty clear picture take shape of support. Here is just an example. If you really care dig into that 1,000 + thread. Its painful. As painful as watching some of the threads today.

And this is a very different tone than Davids today and something I noted was good news back then. But today a different story.

I see overtures to support.

Im happy with the outcome here in this thread. Regardless of what Maidsafe thinks is appropriate, they need to be transparent.


#64

but we can support them if possible

Different kind of support. Not one as in support their promotion of the product, but one as in giving them help to create the product. Two different things and nothing like

It’d be like saying I am supporting this beam while me mate bangs in the nails versus supporting a company using my reputation.

So in this case I will still disagree that there was any support in the terms you are using.

So bottom line, this is new and we will pursue it and clean it all up. In terms of this project I feel we do support the ethos and objectives and will need to speak with them a bit more and see where it goes, after their crowd funding round though

Really that is the willingness to support, but is not suggesting that Maidsafe actually was supporting them with their reputation or with any help (yet)

Just expressing my take on it.

Yea it is a little difficult to know how far to go with being transparent isn’t it. I only think of the 20 page book I’d have to write to express all my interests in other things I do in my dealings. Then to extract the relevant parts because an exchange will list a coin. Most projects just say what exchanges are listing their coins without anything else. Maidsafe has given so much more here.


#65

Thanks @neo I appreciate your take but it doesn’t change how I see it. This one response from the CEO is just a sample of the responses. It’s the entirety of that exchange…
The point has been made. If Maidsafe wants to pump an organization, providing a little background is appropriate. Just like David suggested he should do back then.


#66

Not great phraseology there. It is a bit selective and does not represent anything MaidSafe have aspired to.

In that thread, we actually did not endorse that project and asked them to remove logos and the like that hinted at endorsement. You can use a looser term like support to exaggerate a position if you wish, in fact, you do choose to do that, which is unfortunate.

I will support people where possible and that will mean engaging at length with them. That engagement is at a cost, but occasionally, as in that thread, it can extract much more info from a project to validate it or otherwise. I do not think that there was any doubt of our position there, yes we knew some folk, said so and said we trusted them. This is fine though and it is the openness you say you wish. The more open we are then the more you will see “mistakes” as relationships develop or otherwise so that open approach comes at a cost. Perhaps the biggest cost is leaving us open to be accused of many things that are “proven” by out of context messages and specifically chosen phraseology to cement that false message.

I do not mind criticism, but blind criticism that is made by people who take a high ground, with no proof of any experience is occasionally difficult. We still do it though, it is the price of openness and many folks will abuse that. I feel you have done so here @BIGbtc by asking for openness and then using that to show “mistakes”. The other option is for us to say nothing until we have a ton of proof, that would mean allocating resources to getting that proof and not on launch. It also means the opposite of openness, so you cannot play 2 sides of the game as you are asking us to do. We choose openness, if folks “get it” then cool, if they use it to throw cheap shots, then that is also up to them.

Lots of people stand in the shadows shouting at people to show their faces so they can be abused, it is not always clever. In terms of exchanges though I do think it is important to be unmasked and especially so if they use KYC etc.


#67

I really believe and respect that. Although, of course I have no “mathematical” proof of it being so. :wink:

I guess this is the post that that threw me personally at the time.


This combined with NVO listing Alex Alexandrov as part of the team on their website and Alex never denying it. But of course, I’m the amateur here, and Maidsafe did nothing wrong really.

Again, @dannyrdee, please don’t take any of this the wrong way. I was just really disappointed in my own lack of judgement and naivete back then, and NVO was an important lesson for me personally.


#68

Am I the only person that sees little similarity here but the term “exchange”

NVO was an ICO clearly run by amateurs claiming to use the SAFE Network in it’s design.

CHAINRIFT is just another exchange listing MAID.
Yes a new exchange… start small, be clever.

Maidsafe has simply let us all know of another exchange that now lists MAID.

I honestly see zero comparison.


#69

Excellent phraseology IMO. Awesome spin though @dirvine

Sorry I dont subscribe to your watered down interpretation of support. I used pump, I like pump, because thats what you did. The Maidsafe support sentiment is all over that NVO thread.

I mentioned to @neo

No ambiguity from Nick claiming support of NVO

And this ChainRift thread has the same style opening monologue. There are important questions to ask people who are “shouting from the shadows that they want to be custodians of your money” and there is an expectation that those behind the Maidsafe blog promoting the unknown individuals are open to sharing what they know about those folks who are “shouting from the shadows that they want to be custodians of your money”.

This introduction was not handled right, both on this forum and on the Maidsafe blog. Hopefully you will learn from this and provide a little background next time you pump some org.

We are all in trouble if asking a few important questions gets the Maidsafe team in a tizzy which apparently it does.

And David, I’m more than comfortable with who I am and I know my strengths. Ive demonstrated some here. And while I wont apply for the Marketing job (like that other poor soul - embarrassing exchange btw, why?) I will be around to make sure my 5 years of waiting pays off.


#70

Not really. Have a look at the Maidsafe blog, have a look at the forum. Much more than a pointer to a new exchange. But if thats all they meant to do, then they made a bigger deal out of it.

This has turned into a sh*tshow because questions were asked about the team behind ChainRift and why Maidsafe didnt offer any background on these guys. And if there was no NVO, if there was no blind support of NVO, maybe this thread would be smooth sailing.

I do see your point. NVO was asking for investment, not so with ChainRIft. But the (high) degree of trust is the same.


#71

You’ve clipped out pretty much all of my post, Brett. Reposting here so the context of my comment is clear.


#72

Not intentional Nick. The context doesnt change the tone of yours and Davids through that whole thread.

Increasingly, Im sorry to say I see an amazing amount of defending of poor judgement and poor communication. Hopefully, the upshot is you will be more careful when introducing companies that require trust.


#73

Happy with the new listing, thanks for the effort guys at ChainRift and Maidsafe. Will check it out in dept later.


#74

No reason why these guys cant hit a home run. Being the cheerleader and bringer of earlier posts.

Like I said earlier, looking forward to watching you grow a successful org.

Keep us posted on how this is evolving Danny


#76

Hi All!

Sorry I am a little late to the party, but I do appreciate the concerns, and you all should always be careful whenever using a custodian exchange. The default position is always “Don’t trust, verify!”

At ChainRift, our vision is to deliver a user-friendly, highly scalable, community-focused exchange. We are working on a non-custodian exchange in parallel but the tech we plan to use is still immature. For now, we are just another centralized, custodian exchange like binance or bitfinex.

That being said, we are opposed to raising funds from public in any format. Our business model is to simply charge a small fee on trades. We don’t charge listing fees or any other fees. Most of us are public faces, and have been around in this space for a long time! Check out our angel profiles, twitter/github etc. Just google our names and you will find us!

Admittedly, we have not done a great job at self-promotion so far but we hope that our product speaks for itself! We would appreciate any feedback, and look forward to serving you all for a long time to come!


#77