Fair enough. Its easy to make comparisions with other exchanges where transfers are more stable then. Thanks for showing its not a bug and indeed- keep up the good work.
Which exchange? Looks like you are comparing changing a database entry like posting in this forum to joining a layer-2 protocol on the blockchains. I agree the UX must be the same, and we must improve it to exceed the expectations - which we currently are not, but as members of this forum (stakers) we must be aware of the distinctions and talk about it as they are - if not this will just be misinformation.
Why not integrate the retry link in the app in the meantime though? I had to use it yesterday: it would have been better if I hadn’t had to scroll through my favorites to find the link. Also, someone not aware of the link would have had to contact support.
Maybe pedantic worries about security from our side - previous versions of the link would force a sync state. A sync state cannot be blind (trust the backend) so we didn’t want to promote a insecure path. For now just link this post I did above ([Poll] Which one of these should be on the top of priority list) if someone for some reason is reluctant to contact the support…
When the new system is online we will make sure to tell the community.
Ok. One aspect that I like about it is, not trying to dissimulate and alleviate the issue. Fixing the source of it is the way to go. I like that Nash team never settles for half-measures.
Switcheo comes to thought, that i use a lot. When i use it with o3, it also is far from perfect, but never had to contact support, a simply refresh fixes it all. But when using it with a private key (yeah i know about the security) then it works perfect.
And agreed on to combat misinformation, so again thanks for explaining how it all works so we can describe it as a issue, one that is still being improved, and not describe it as a bug anymore.
Switcheo is doing something very simple, is like the transfer to external on Nash, you form a transaction and send it - is one way. Has nothing to do with this case, that is why their matching performance is very low (a few per seconds), they are doing batching to the trading contract like IDEX to settle it.
maybe i smoked too much weed but is nash not just a giant open verification platform?
delivery occurs on the chains
Good weed, more-less. Nash also maintains the layer-2 state information (or a copy of it).
right, right should have included that.
were all “zero’d in” in exchanging ownership of bitcoin in the most efficient way possible (settlement speed, custody, liquidity, trustless)
but that barely scratches the surface on the applicability … if i think the amount of times i have to verify my identity online or give digital consent
This is a key point for B2B/institutional customers coming from the traditional finance space, most people aren’t aware that instant-settlement + delivery is possible. Someone trading through their broker would need to get the broker to execute a trade on an exchange after which if they wanted to take physical delivery they need to go through the custodian. Fidelity, Grayscale and Coinbase-Custody can’t compete with Nash in this aspect.
I think with the launch of mobile trading and @canesin 's explanation of transfer issue being more of a problem at the client’s side this poll becomes redundant.
So I have closed the poll.