I just spent some time looking over the coinpayments site and service. I certainly think it would be good for DGB to be added to their list. It's a good service for merchants and it would help us to have access to this sort of merchant service. However, I'd also point out that they have a warning that coins will be de-listed if they don't have a $5,000 monthly sales volume. I'm sure that eventually, that would be easy for DGB. Over the coming year, as more and more people and merchants begin to use DGB for payments on a daily basis; it'll be a breeze to get $5,000 monthly sales volume. Today? I'm not sure?
So, we might be a bit careful because we don't want to rush into getting listed - and then delisted - and then go back through the process of getting re-listed. In my opinion, this is all about companies like coinpayments forcing the digital currencies to carry the burden of expanding their external services ecosystem. The best metaphor is the classic literary example from Tom Sawyer, who convinced the other boys to whitewash the fence for him ...
At the same time, I hate the voting schemes, and pay-to-play mentality that dominate these sorts of sites. DGB is a great coin. They'd be lucky to have it. It has as much or more potential than many of the current coins they accept. In the near future, when DGB grows into a major platform for micropayments, maybe they'll approach us about expanding their services for DGB, and then we can say something like ... if our users vote for you ... and if you pay us for the pleasure ... then maybe we'll do more business with you.
