confirm. One token is basically dust, but it might be worth updating the quantity in the original post. :)Your post says 1,000,001 tokens, but @pocket-a tells us you only have 1,000,000. I suspect you spent one of the original tokens on your confirmation message when you typed
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Fixed!
Cool. :) This is the largest lot of pocket anybody has offered to sell yet by a long shot; I'll be very curious to see how much you get.
meep
A heartfelt "meep" and good day to you, sir/madam.
meep
Well, it all depends on the visibility I manage to get ;)
Yeah... I'd love to help promote your sale, but I've got to be careful not to appear to be pumping POCKET, particularly not before genesis ends in a week and a half.
Don't worry.
Btw, I'm new to steem, and I'm starting to notice that what you are proposing is missing. But I believe the way you proposed is too overcomplicated.
What do you think about my points?
When I wrote the MIST post, it was to lay the groundwork for Pocket, which is to lay the groundwork for more interesting stuff in the future. By the definitions I gave in the MIST post, Pocket is itself a MIST. It's a set of rules (the pocket protocol) that define some function (claiming and sending tokens).
What did I propose? I'm not quite clear if you're talking about Pocket, the MIST thing, or something else. I didn't really propose much in the MIST post except a conceptual framework.
Maybe so. How would you improve it?
The MIST "meta-protocol" is simple and ok. The problem is in my option that whatever protocol one wants to implement should be done on the blockchain by modifying that protocol, not by using the text of the post as an instruction.
It's the implementation of the protocol in Pocket that I believe is the wrong way to solve the problem. I understand that this is the only way to do it without the consensus of all the community, that's why I believe that the discussion should be done with the steem development team.