people who speak just to say something. i continue to respond like 1 comment here (in opencart, another big cms for the ecommence)… only 1 word excelent
64 comments and every 5 stars. i m not interesting to the social, i interesting in these things. these guys working really good. and if you want i can report some comment here if you’re so tired that you haven’t even tried to read plugins instead of social.
Believing that ezdefi is a winning company is just an assumption and following that assumption is just like gambling.
On the other hand and based on facts ezdefi is not a winning company and we do not know if it will be.
If it ever become a winning one we can come back and pay (and more if if needed).
But for now they should pay us because they are being advertized through us.
These are not extensive reviews and could be just bots. Also, these nicks “name” followed by 2 digits
Kind of suspicious, don’t you think?
I would be grateful @GreyFox if, since you have such a good connection with the EzDefi Support, to invite one of their people to this forum so they could very briefly state what they guarantee?
This proposal requires 12% of our current VaultZ funds
So it would be optimal if we spent it very carefully. I am not voting against it yet, all I would like to see is a some sort of communication with people behind it.
please monobody, use the plugin, try it. look at all the comments and then you get an idea. I’m definitely going to try to bring the ceo here. but if it doesn’t come then you don’t? you understand that this mentality doesn’t make sense.
only this comment, show you that maybe btcz will be used in 50 different website. I don’t understand if you want like me that this coin goes up. comments like " EzDeFi Is a Helping Star" you can understand if you test the plugin like me. please test it
Attacking the personality or mentality of others when they dont agree with you is not a way to convince them.
On the contrary it shows an irrational person who sticks to his point of view despite the observed facts. Of course this can be clearly seen at the choice of votation that doesnt support a change of mind.
I didn’t tell you anything. I said what’s true. you suggested that I wanted to hurry for what?
I answered what I think, if the btcz have gone low it is for people like you who this year has been absent. while people like me threw time and money. so if you allow when you say something like. why do you want to hurry …? do you gain anything?
no.
However, a vote was taken. I am sorry that many did not participate.
If you had any questions to ask, I would have answered you sooner. and I would have sent you the comments first. but you just wanted to vote no(you vote before of today). so today you want only criticize. you’re right, I just had to ignore you.
You are attacking again! Thank you for confirming me!
You havent answered anything.
Also showing some screenshots of reviews that one guy could write using multiple account (all at the same time and with the same text patterns at usernames) only strengthens my point of view.
So thanks again!
All these comments are made in the same time (4 months ago), again fishy to me.
I am being only careful here.
Since you have tested it @GreyFox maybe it is worth it. I haven’t and I do not run any web page needing such an app but it could serve our coin. I await for more people’s feedback before I make my vote. But there are only 12 minutes left till the end of voting and I feel such an expense should have more people expressing their opinion on this.
I would be in favor for any future big proposal to:
- have a separate dedicated thread and not be a part 2 of earlier big proposal;
- have an information like (Please vote, 2 or 4 weeks vote) so it indicates a need for vote and a voting time
I’m confused - which vote is open in this proposal?
This one.
Managers vote still has 4 days to close.
It seems as we have here 2 proposals with 2 votings each with different voting deadlines.
We need much more information on this EzDefi before releasing 20million BTCZ.
We also need MUCH more participation from community to release this.
I absolutely love the exposure we could get from having a working plugin integrated with all these platforms, but this is an extremely large sum and just from the comments:
- how well established is this company?
- will the maintain plugins as open source and continue to support updates? (CMS’s get updated often sometimes there are breaking changes) Are we to pay 1400 USD or so and have one shot at a plugin?
- We need a ton more participation to make such a huge VaultZ decision like this
- We should carry the proposal in its own thread with its own title and spread proposal address.
I love the much needed exposure into the market but overall its expensive, we have no details of how sustainable this company is, how much support we will get, this presentation of the proposal seemed confusing.
I don’t see it as passing either, we need 70% in accordance to the community paper. The community needs to ask more questions.
EDIT: I want to also elaborate @GreyFox is doing what he can to keep project moving and momentum and I appreciate it and I"m sure others do also - but we need as much fairness, clarity, and we need to set our egos aside. If we want to lead we need to encourage discussion and avoid bickering - it’s unprofessional. I’m not saying @Greyfox did or didn’t do this, but this thread caused a lot of community unrest that was much different from meaningful discussion.
4 Likes
thanks @cryptorex
finally the first technical question that arrive here:
- how well established is this company?
- will the maintain plugins as open source and continue to support updates? (CMS’s get updated often sometimes there are breaking changes) Are we to pay 1400 USD or so and have one shot at a plugin?
- We should carry the proposal in its own thread with its own title and spread proposal address.
pity that they arrived a little late. The vote is over and the “yes” have not reached 70% of the vote, which means that the community is not interested in being in online stores. I will respect the community.
yes monobody becouse i thinked that was urgent the ezdefi and not the money for the managers. but i writed in the proposal “I hope that with the demo this time you can get a quick idea of the opportunity. Vote yes if you want to integrate btcz into EzDefi. I put 10 days for the vote because I don’t want the prices to rise again. If you think it is wrong and contrary to the principles of the community just reply to the post and I will increase the time.”
see you
ps. you can see that 743 installation are make it… the problem is always the usual. people put more negative than positive comments. so the fact of not seeing any negative comment in 743 installations makes me think. but it’s useless to keep talking about it. the community already choose.
I apologize to everyone but I cannot understand why so many stories and why everything is being done this way, it seems that we are not using reason here. Do all proposals have to pass? Why does everything seem to move so fast?
I don’t understand why so many stories when these guys try to do something for btcz. I support greyfox and vandar in everything because they spend more time here than you and me. my vote is yours
1 Like
Ok wins 2 Milion and 34 milions whit the same votes. So i think Is correct do a medium
34+2/2= 18 Milion
18/5 managers= 3.6 milions at managers (for 6 mounths)
I think Is correct Also becouse the last votation less of 10 and 34 were the Wins. So a part of the community dont want spend and another want. I think the Truth Is in the middle.
Of course managers don’t have to spend it ( Or can spend only part of it). at the end of their work tell how they changed them and how they spent them
@gilardh @Nucashmining @Monobody @VandarGR @Rokmikuz
Please managers, send us your wallet and good luck!
Hello.
Based on the above results I think the fairest solution is taking the mean of all participants to the votation.
By doing so, we have (4 * 2 + 10 * 3 + 12 * 2 + 6 + 4 * 34 + 21 + 25) / 16 = 15.625 M for all managers,
which means that each manager could get 3.125 M (15.625 / 5) for 6 months.
2 Likes
However, there were 3 people who picked two numbers.
So and to be really fair, we should get the mean of each one of these 3 first and then calculate the new mean of all participants.
Based on that we have:
(((12 + 34) / 2) + ( 2 + 21 ) / 2) + ((6 + 34) / 2) + 25 + (2 * 34) + 12 + (3 * 10) + (3 * 2)) / 13 = 15.03 ~ 15 M for all managers
and 15 / 5 = 3 M for each one of them.
1 Like
I concur. Sound legit to me and I would be in favor of such solution.
2 Likes