The move is already affecting
SV, with the down by 21 percent over the past 24 hours.
But it could be worse in that
liquidity extraction would trigger a damp, affecting well-meaning investors and
even SV architecture or objectives of “offering a stable system that will be
rigid to excessive changes while maintaining a quick, secure and scalable
platform.”
Of Censorship and Building
While most crypto enthusiasts
celebrate the removal of SV from , there are others who believe
it is a wakeup call. According to a Twitter user, , “Exchanges delisting
BSV is not censorship. It’s not a slippery slope. It’s not a bad precedent.
It’s a wakeup call. Build better networks. Do it right from the beginning. Like
Satoshi did.”
Censorship is slowly creeping back
into the space. All the same, prevailing argument is projects
should aspire to build better networks from the beginning instead of forcing an
exchange to list their .
Also Read:
exchanges hold too
much power at the moment. The primary reason behind the delisting of BSV is
because of Calvin Ayre of CoinGeek and Craig Wright acting unethically.
Even if did delist the asset
not only harming investors but setting a bad precedence of “revenge” and/or
“settling personal vendettas”, exchanges should do their
background, vet projects and delist them only based on TECHNICAL GROUNDS, not
claims. After all, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Regardless, the removal of SV is indeed a wake-up call that developers should create better networks. While Satoshi hasn’t been in the fray for a long time, his creation still serves as the benchmark. Some comments suggest that other people believe it is censorship since SV is a plagiarized that doesn’t offer anything new to the industry.
While there are different arguments,
it is clear that exchanges hold too much power. They are
centralized entities controlling the fortune of crypto projects. This goes
against Satoshi’s ethos and vision for space.
Published at Tue, 16 Apr 2019 13:16:50 +0000
