new projects and verification
Hi. I am sure that you guys are monitoring the situation related to new projects, and their rekts immediately after sales (this also applies to verified projects) I think you should reconsider the rules for issuing verification, because of this situation, there are fewer and fewer people on the wax, in particular the atomic hub:)
Hi please display prices in monocode so you can long press the numbers and they will automagicly copy to your word salad bar above the keyboard. I know you can do it.
VIDEO takes priority over IMG
sometimes I have NFT in my inventory that has a video, but atomic wont play it in my inventory because it also has an IMG. I believe the IMG is there in case the video cant load or work. IMG should not override VIDEO just because it exists, because people are adding both as a fallback in case video doesn't work. But, video does work on atomic, so it is simply not animated because it thinks the IMG should always take priority if it exists, not because it can't actually do it. So the NFT which I bought because it was animated, now doesn't even animate in my inventory. Anyway, my suggestion is to always play the VIDEO if one exists and can be played, and only do IMG if not. If you are going to tell me that the sorting is based on the order that the IMG and VIDEO properties are added to the template, then Im going to say then you should probably have a way to change the order in the NFT creator, so the only option to "fix" this simple and common issue is not relying on having to learn how to create custom templates using CLEOS.
nft renting service
many collector dont play all game nft they buy, that why there should be option for renting game nft with smart contract ,where both parties can discuss time and renting price. if u guys made that happen ,that would be great
make "sort by lowest price" the default market filter
the first thing I always do when using the market is to set the sort filter to "sort by lowest price". This is very annoying as I can imagine this is true for literally every user. As a buyer, you want to see the lowest price first, just to know the floor of a collection or matched search. Please consider adjusting the default sort filter.
SUGGESTED PRICE RANGE
Can you please offer a suggested price range rather than just a suggested price? For example if the lowest market listing is 25 wax and the suggested price is only 5 wax it is very unlikely anyone will see the value of the NFT at the real market demand.. However, if you list it at a suggested price of between 5 to 25 wax it suggests a true market worth?
Suggested price by like rarity
Change the algorithm of suggested price to also include cards from similar rarities. Some of the collections have very high priced cards that don't get sold very often due to their value. It would be nice if AH was able to add a condition to search for similar cards in the collection with like rarities when there is little to no sales data on that particular template. For example in kogs if a kog is foil and set s2 compare it to the price of other s2 foils. Or warsaken if a card is rank 4 and gold compare it to the average sale of all rank 4 gold cards.
Hey, I like to take screenshots of my NFTs, and I am always looking for how to fit more into the screenshot. The recent update on atomic did a really good job to maximize the space available. Maybe can do even more! With a TOGGLE that enables SCREENSHOT MODE, which simply hides redundant information like your account name and "list on market" on every item. This reduced the vertical pixels from 1400 --> 1088. would be able to fit another entire row and still be under 1400.
unpack_url for WL collections
By adding an “unpack_url” attribute to an nft the unpack button will appear within AtomicHub linking to your collections unpack page (No matter what contract the pack was created on). This feature is extremely helpful for pre-minted packs and helps new users to figure out they might be holding a pack they dint even realize was a pack. After doing my own research I found out that you need to be fully verified by AtomicHub for the “unpack_url” attribute to work on the main net. I have a few questions & thoughts that I’d ask please be shared with the team. Is there a solid, extreme reason why WL collections couldn’t also utilize this feature? Would the team be open to reconsidering making it available to WL collections? As a small Indy artist, it’s always the goal to constantly improve my work in hopes of one day getting verified. It’s discouraging to feel held back without access to the same features that corporate collections have. Thanks for your consideration guys.
Create a Smart Contract to "LOCK" funds (WAX) for Projects with Monthly Unlocks to prevent Rug Pulls
Hello fellow Wax NFT Collectors. As of the last 13 months we have seen projects Rug Pull completely and others using a slow Rug Pull method which has cause many MILLIONS worth of WAXP to go to the hands of "creators" and "project owners" leaving entire communities with worthless NFTS. One such project was waxtorycards, a promising project with amazing looking NFTs and good concept; however, the three people "Developing" the project had a different idea of what a "community" is and when approached by the pink team they went awol and rug pulled: https://wax.bloks.io/transaction/f67e00cfadceb1c7f39a4b2d11d4d8aaf4080803106d5f3c27f384b7582bc765 Another project which in my opinion is a slow rug is journeytogod which was operated on a discord server than got "deleted" as it was reported to be a "gambling" server (no gambling ever took place though, and there's little to no info about it all.) The latest of which in my opinion is the largest and most painful one comes from the company known as lgnd.art which recently pulled the funds of upliftword and left their community at a loss with assets that have depreciated in value by upwards of 80%. Of course there's much more behind the scene but this is another example of a "community" not "owning" anything since the "owner" can pull the resources and tries to "sell" it back so that it can continue "running" or so I am understanding. I am not an investigator, but rather a collector and go by what I see and feel and base my opinion on this regard. Here's the message from whom I consider to be the main representative of LGDN Team. "Uplift Community, I want to start off by saying that the entire LGND team is grateful for all that we have accomplished together. And we see a huge opportunity for The Uplift. Think of this like the moment when a space station that has been successfully launched into orbit slowly begins to separate from the main ship, and they will begin to take their separate paths. They will need to depend on each other for a bit longer, as critical systems and controls are handed off to ensure that the space station will be operational. Finally, in time, the space station will fully disengage and embark on the next stage of its journey, but with a new set of support and control systems. Both spaceships can achieve their goals, but on separate missions, and they will be inexorably tied together as they survived a turbulent and rocket fuel powered liftoff to escape velocity, and will always be connected by that accomplishment. As LGND has been preparing for the next stage of its journey, it is clear that our core development effort will be more focused on the art and music sectors than the metaverse. For this reason The Uplift is no longer strategically aligned as an internal platform, however it is still very much aligned as an ongoing partner and community. We see the metaverse space as one where there will clearly be massive growth, and specifically that the Minecraft metaverse is likely the next to take off with such a huge community base. LGND will continue to be a participant in this space in the future, and an ongoing partner and supporter of the Uplift. For this reason, when we began discussing the need for a strategic shift, it became clear that there is an opportunity for the Uplift leadership and community to buy out The Uplift, take on full ownership, and become more empowered than ever as a future DAO. This buyout process is now underway, and our combined leadership remains committed to continuing to support critical needs and enabling The Uplift for success. We will still be in orbit for a bit together, handing off systems, powering up rockets, and ensuring the ship is ready for the next stage of space travel. To the future. Thank you. Michael BLU and the LGND Team" I ask that the WAX team and the Pink team PLEASE consider adding smart contracts for projects and have unlock periods so that they don't up and run with funds because they make the decision that they made enough and now want to leave the bag held by their "community" who funded such success stories and then gets screwed. If anything like this happens, there should be a DAO that selects that happens with the FUNDS that have not been "withdrawn" for certain projects, for example, distribute in even proportion to holders of said projects and blacklist collections and their respective "owners" from being able to move more assets until sufficient proof is provided that they have no ill intent to intentionally harm the community and the collective value of the NFT assets that communities hold. Markets will do what markets do but in my opinion people selectively deciding to end projects on a whim due to them having enough profit and in my opinion fundamentally slow rug pulling on their community is atrocious and should not be allowed in this ecosystem.