DXInOne - Issue #5: Why did the DXSystem allow us to get into this state?
By: Simon Minister | Posted: 26th June 2006
Written by David Bennett, DXPowerTeam
This is a comment you also hear quite often: "Why did the system allow us to get into this state in the first place?"
Usually, those asking this question do not give depictions over what they think this system should have done… just ask why the system did what it did.
Fair enough, however. It is something that one can assume the system could have dealt with using better methods than they have used, correct?
Sure. If you are thinking that the system would prioritize what we are doing, and what OutXchanges are like system-wide at this time, then you would think that DXInOne would have a vested interest in maintaining a balance consistently over time.
So, let's get into THAT… why did the system 'allow us to get into this state?'
There are actually 3 parts to this that come to mind.
DXInOne has little interest in what is going on with OutX speeds at this time
That is to say, DXInOne is making consistent changes to the system. Some of those changes are based on what we do, currently. Other changes are based on where DXInOne is headed, by and large. For DXInOne to try to focus, currently, on keeping OutXchanges flowing, the 'rules' that enforce system liquidity would have to change very often – every few days.
Therefore, it is a task that DXInOne leaves to us currently, and they themselves make some changes here and there. They are trying to be 'centrally involved', in a way that brings 'strong government interaction vs. weak government interaction' to mind.
We all know that 'strong government interaction' tends to work against economic standards. It is better to remain involved only passively – to let business, itself, take care of the central roles and compete directly to create better ways of doing things over time.
Regardless of internal system variables, marketing/training should be able to make the system move effectively
By this, we are saying that the system can be controlled through the DXUsers' efforts to control it. Whatever DXInOne sets as the steps to make the system operate however it does, it is ALWAYS something that we can control, internally, whenever we desire to make the system fluid.
DXInOne has assumed that folks would get involved, and then get 'stuck,' and therefore turn to better training standards to improve what they were doing to control fluidity. Controlling fluidity DOES fix everything these days – marketing CAN and WILL be able to draw new infusions of cash, PROVIDED that we keep the system fluid. Whenever the system IS fluid – whether it is because there are 50,000 active participants or JUST FIVE ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS, if the system is fluid, others WILL get involved via word of mouth or better advertising standards.
DXInOne has been very, very clear for a long time about helping us ADMIT to ourselves what we are to do. No one really has wanted to listen; most of the DXUsers have tried to figure out loopholes to avoid the needs of the system.
But no matter how you look at it, without reserves of various sorts (E-Gold, E-Bullion, other e-currencies, and the multitude of bank wires for hard currency choices and accessibility)… DXG can NOT be 'converted' into anything. If there are no reserves, there is no conversion. DXInOne is not responsible for putting various e-currencies and hard currencies into the system for the purpose of processing exchanges. If they did, it would tie up money they have for infrastructure developments to come: the PDA's, the Hotel purchase (which most agree could have been successful), etc.
DXInOne has jobs to do with the money IT owns. WE have jobs to do: that is, to maintain fluidity for this system with the money that WE own.
It has ALWAYS been the reason we've been paid: to ensure system fluidity, through any combination of personal funding and marketing to others. Our job is based on system fluidity regulation, and the marketing expansion that follows (or comes concurrently).
The main point
The point is that we could have, at any time, made the system fluid. DXInOne was waiting for us to understand the signs they put into place: the 'incremental fees', the 'elimination of the TDV Reduction Tool', the drop of the ability to move DXDA to RB, etc.
They have been saying for a long, long time that we need to get into the habit of paying discounted OA/DXD fees, and not standard OA/DXD fees. Why have most not listened?
Mainly, training. Most have not understood 'why to add more money if their OutX's are not yet processed first.' Also, some of that is based on standards the system itself set, meaning that most KNEW that they should be InX'ing to pay discounted OA/DXD, but they were afraid of being the only ones.
NOW, that is ending. If you do not pay your OA/DXD fees from IB, then you simply cannot earn DXG that you can eventually convert into anything. In short: if you are not also part of the SOLUTION, that you cannot be part of the problem, either. There is no DXG creation into circulation without adding fresh funds.
UNLESS… and this is a big thing to keep in mind: if marketing is drawing more reserves into circulation than DXG in circulation, then YES, there can always be a reason for allowing DXG to be produced whether money is InX'd or not.
But those are going to be 'rare' times. Marketing WILL be able to draw such reserves, but ONLY WHEN we keep the system fluid enough to be enticing to the masses.
'Money in, money out.' Marketing will naturally follow. Money will naturally appear to be made, for those who are already quite vested in the system.
In the next issue, we will take a look at what happened historically, just to get that review with this NEW information in mind…!
This DXInOne article along with others regarding DXInOne and ECurrency Exchange can be viewed at Dynamic-Xchange.com
This article is free for republishing
Printed From: http://www.articlealley.com/article_66928_19.html
Back to the original article
Tags: vested interest, few days, thr, asking this question, liquidity, marketing training