Author Topic: BitShares PTS2 - Community Input Thread  (Read 48116 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Simeon II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
Stan, do you understand the difference between a mathematically controlled logarithmic inflation and what you are proposing? If you know anything about the time-value relationship of money you would not try to equate an instantaneous frontloaded 15% centralized inflation scheme with what PTS currently has. It does amount to a theft of 15% from current shareholders. In other words, if I sold my coins tomorrow or next month we both know I would not incur the full 15% inflation. AGS contributors were promised a stake in FUTURE DACS, not the upgrade of PTS (which they knew about prior to investing in AGS). This hypothetical objection from AGS holders is a fiction, and is perfectly staged to grab 15% of our equity in the name of "fairness." I expected more from you guys.

 +5% +5% +5% +5%
YES FINALY SOMEBODY GETS IT
 +5% +5% +5% +5% +5%

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Bitshares PTS is up at least 15% in the market since they announced this. If you don't like this upgrade, then why not sell now?
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 11:01:46 pm by donkeypong »

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Stan, do you understand the difference between a mathematically controlled logarithmic inflation and what you are proposing? If you know anything about the time-value relationship of money you would not try to equate an instantaneous frontloaded 15% centralized inflation scheme with what PTS currently has. It does amount to a theft of 15% from current shareholders. In other words, if I sold my coins tomorrow or next month we both know I would not incur the full 15% inflation. AGS contributors were promised a stake in FUTURE DACS, not the upgrade of PTS (which they knew about prior to investing in AGS). This hypothetical objection from AGS holders is a fiction, and is perfectly staged to grab 15% of our equity in the name of "fairness." I expected more from you guys.

Offline Simeon II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
Sorry to jump in to the discussion late, but I think this discussion of the 15% unmined PTS is absurd (mathematically, economically, and morally). The inflation of PTS to account for this 15% would normally occur logarithmically over a period of YEARS and has not yet taken place. If I were to sell my shares now, these non-existent PTS would have no inflationary impact on my coins. Furthermore, the amortization schedule of the 15% is fixed. You are now proposing to frontload all of that into a marketing fund and to allocate it to I3. Guess what happens when you do that? I incur ~5-10 years of monetary inflation from you overnight. This may be overshadowed by the price bump of a working DPOS release, but that is irrelevant.
'....
There should be a snapshot of PTS and we should transition to DPOS with a 1:1 mapping of PTS1 -> PTS2. What you guys are doing here does not inspire confidence.

 +5% +5% +5%

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
FundShares distribution of PTS + AGS should be equal, ie: 8 million of FundShares = 4 million PTS + 4 million AGS.

It would be better if we actually had some sort of product released instead of trying to rename and redistribute things..
Did you not realize it is the exact same thing? For the release of the products we need a proper functioning PTS, because that is part of the deal. The renaming and redistribution is for the product to be released. Hard-forking or replacing PTS with DPoS is faster than the release of bitsharesXT or DNS or Lotto. Only bitsharesME can probably be released earlier and even that needs a proper working and clearly chosen PTS-chain.

According to Stan, you are wrong about PTS being fixed prior to any release. XT will be released and then PTS will switch over to DPOS.
See below.

I have altered my stance a tad.

If you guys can release BTS-x or one of the other DAC's before updating PTS, I will have no problem if Invictus gets more money.  At that point it will be clearer to gauge the risk involved.  As of now it is very hard to justify a risk of Invictus taking a 14% chunk of PTS-whatever, a secondary offering lets say, with zero results to back it thus far.

I deleted a damning post because I see this as a possible compromise. That is if you are truly looking for community thought and input.

Thanks. 

That is indeed what we are saying - "after XT is released we will turn our attention to PTS upgrade".
My original expectation was that we would get a flood of excited ideas for how to attract new demand and then pick a consensus best of the best and go execute it. 

Hard for me to grasp the concept that there is any risk to Invictus serving as a temporary custodian charged with executing an agreed upon plan as a faithful servant ... but I guess the world is a suspicious place. 

 :)

If this happens, I am completely fine with them snatching the rest of PTS up for marketing. At that point we will know whether this thing called Bitshares will boom or bust.

Just remember that if Invictus does take the remaining PTS, hey will control a huge amount of each DAC. Most likely upwards of 25% of each BTS, then about 2.5% of any DAC that honors the 10/10% share honor. Knowing someone or entity will be getting such huge chunks of a DAC might alter peoples intention to release their DAC to PTS/AGS holders. It might also help a DAC justify giving themselves a huge "premine", knowing that Invictus gets a huge share and that all the PTS and AGS might overlook a premine for self interest/preservation of their free shares. Similar to what FreeTrade tried to pull with MMC.

Offline Simeon II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
How many PTS do we need in the new snapshot to get a ride in Stan's Bentley ?

Edit - BOOTH BABES !!!! Yea thats the ticket.  1 million worth of booth babes at the next major conference !!

I prefer Dan's gadgets...   :P :)



How is that funny...

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Sorry to jump in to the discussion late, but I think this discussion of the 15% unmined PTS is absurd (mathematically, economically, and morally). The inflation of PTS to account for this 15% would normally occur logarithmically over a period of YEARS and has not yet taken place. If I were to sell my shares now, these non-existent PTS would have no inflationary impact on my coins. Furthermore, the amortization schedule of the 15% is fixed. You are now proposing to frontload all of that into a marketing fund and to allocate it to I3. Guess what happens when you do that? I incur ~5-10 years of monetary inflation from you overnight. This may be overshadowed by the price bump of a working DPOS release, but that is irrelevant.

The idea that AGS holders should be compensated for the PTS upgrade is also bogus, and here is why:

1) The holders of AGS knew that the PTS chain would be upgraded to the finalized I3 protocol prior to their investment in AGS.
2) The license agreement of AGS investment was for the development of future DACs, not for the application of the protocol to PTS.

There should be a snapshot of PTS and we should transition to DPOS with a 1:1 mapping of PTS1 -> PTS2. What you guys are doing here does not inspire confidence.

Offline liondani

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3737
  • Inch by inch, play by play
    • View Profile
    • My detailed info
  • BitShares: liondani
  • GitHub: liondani
How many PTS do we need in the new snapshot to get a ride in Stan's Bentley ?

Edit - BOOTH BABES !!!! Yea thats the ticket.  1 million worth of booth babes at the next major conference !!

I prefer Dan's gadgets...   :P :)


Offline Simeon II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
I just get frustrated with people who can't understand what's going on and accuse I3 of acting like scammers when we are not.

Maybe you are right that the market won't like us to use the PTS as a community fund for marketing, give aways, or promotion.  But maybe they will love it and we can find a way to spend it to drive lots of new people to bitshares.

Stan has already said if there is conflict and the forum is split, the PTS will most likely be burned/mapped out of PTS2.  They were treating these as community funds; they solicited the community for input on how to spend them to drive value for everyone. Instead people called us scammers and people are acting like Stan wants to sell them and get a Bentley.

If we burn them we burn them, and if you think this gives you the best ROI than make that case and tell us why.  But if you think I3 is dishonest why are you even invested at all?

Perhaps burning them gives you the best ROI, perhaps it's a missed opportunity and it will cost you.  That is the decision here.  And we are all in the same boat!  We sink or soar as a community.

Ok, maybe there is a small difference between those who are primarily in AGS vs PTS but for the most part we are all in the same boat and I3 is in the boat with us, and they built the boat, we all want this to be huge.

Full disclosure, I don't have much sympathy for people in PTS freaking out about not getting a 15% bump in stake when they can go get a much larger return by donating to AGS.

I agree that if we don't use them carefully they would be better off burned.  But I also have an open mind to the possibilities

The above is not the original quote!!!! 

Changes were made by a 'sockpuppet’ Simeon II' to reflect what 'sockpuppet’ Agent86 wanted to actually say.

P.S.

I just  need a simple gesture to believe you ‘I3 puppet’!!!

I want I3 to donate equal share of  Invictus holdings (AGS and PTS) in this marketing effort, and I will  leave you to do whatever you choose  with the 15% of my money!!!!

I just want to you (Invictus) to be partially invested (so hopefully you care), not spend this money like what they really are as of now - are stolen or fee money!!!!
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 09:42:46 pm by Simeon II »

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Quote from: gamey
Also, give some of the money to the guys who have been mining PTS at a loss while keeping the network slowly moving along.  They if anyone clearly deserve some portion of this 300k odd PTS.
Thanks for the support gamey and I am indeed losing money in electricity to keep up 1.2 - 2.4% of the network (hashpower estimate swings around wildy).
  I think you guys are the #1 group that should unequivocally get some portion of the extra money. I have never mined a PTS share ever, so I am not suggesting this to get paid.  All my miners have pointed at multipools and these days I barely find them worth their heat + upkeep. 

Although I would get them up and running for the 3 day PTS bonanza period when the diff changes again. lololol.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline JoeyD

FundShares distribution of PTS + AGS should be equal, ie: 8 million of FundShares = 4 million PTS + 4 million AGS.

It would be better if we actually had some sort of product released instead of trying to rename and redistribute things..
Did you not realize it is the exact same thing? For the release of the products we need a proper functioning PTS, because that is part of the deal. The renaming and redistribution is for the product to be released. Hard-forking or replacing PTS with DPoS is faster than the release of bitsharesXT or DNS or Lotto. Only bitsharesME can probably be released earlier and even that needs a proper working and clearly chosen PTS-chain.

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
FundShares distribution of PTS + AGS should be equal, ie: 8 million of FundShares = 4 million PTS + 4 million AGS.

It would be better if we actually had some sort of product released instead of trying to rename and redistribute things..
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline JoeyD

Wow, I wonder why PTS is up 31.6% on coinmarketcap.com?

Back in the Top Ten!

Any theories?

Maybe because Bitcoin and just about everything else on coinmarketcap has gone up?
Maybe, some people having to pay some ridiculous tax on expected interest on savings(that they already have had to pay a heavy tax on in the first place), many times higher than what banks actually pay in interest, which is already way below inflation, meaning they are effectively not being taxed a percentage of the interest but a multiple factor of the actual interest on top of losing money to inflation?  Or is that not a big enough target audience to explain the rise in crypto? If not, then it's probably due to the weather.


Just abandon PTS in its mining form.  Talk to the pools, have them shutdown.  Officially drop all support for the POW PTS.  It will no longer be a Bitshares product.  By adding yet ANOTHER currency all you've done is made even more for people to keep up with and comprehend.  That is already part of I3s problem. BitsharesME, BTS X, AGS, PTS, etc.  Now we get FounderShares !?  Why not just keep protoshares ?  By renaming it to Foundershares you've just added confusion and kept the window open for someone to go around hustling the old PTS chain to rubes.  You will have that problem regardless, but you can mitigate as strongly as possible if you get 1 I3 employee with a high visibility go to every exchange that has PTS and every mining pool and explain to them the hard fork going on. 

People in the cryptoworld have been burned by hard forks before.  This is nothing new.  If I want to use an old client I can generate orphaned blocks all day on numerous currencies. 

PTS1 and PTS2 is the same as renaming it Foundershares.  Just a bad idea.  Keep it simple.  By renaming it you leave ambiguity towards the original PTS.  THis is nothing more than a hard fork and has been done countless times elsewhere.  Don't reinvent the wheel on this process.  Please.

Also, give some of the money to the guys who have been mining PTS at a loss while keeping the network slowly moving along.  They if anyone clearly deserve some portion of this 300k odd PTS.
Thanks for the support gamey and I am indeed losing money in electricity to keep up 1.2 - 2.4% of the network (hashpower estimate swings around wildy).
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 07:45:07 pm by JoeyD »

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile

Just abandon PTS in its mining form.  Talk to the pools, have them shutdown.  Officially drop all support for the POW PTS.  It will no longer be a Bitshares product.  By adding yet ANOTHER currency all you've done is made even more for people to keep up with and comprehend.  That is already part of I3s problem. BitsharesME, BTS X, AGS, PTS, etc.  Now we get FounderShares !?  Why not just keep protoshares ?  By renaming it to Foundershares you've just added confusion and kept the window open for someone to go around hustling the old PTS chain to rubes.  You will have that problem regardless, but you can mitigate as strongly as possible if you get 1 I3 employee with a high visibility go to every exchange that has PTS and every mining pool and explain to them the hard fork going on. 

People in the cryptoworld have been burned by hard forks before.  This is nothing new.  If I want to use an old client I can generate orphaned blocks all day on numerous currencies. 

PTS1 and PTS2 is the same as renaming it Foundershares.  Just a bad idea.  Keep it simple.  By renaming it you leave ambiguity towards the original PTS.  THis is nothing more than a hard fork and has been done countless times elsewhere.  Don't reinvent the wheel on this process.  Please.

Also, give some of the money to the guys who have been mining PTS at a loss while keeping the network slowly moving along.  They if anyone clearly deserve some portion of this 300k odd PTS.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
Wow, I wonder why PTS is up 31.6% on coinmarketcap.com?

Back in the Top Ten!

Any theories?

Maybe because Bitcoin and just about everything else on coinmarketcap has gone up?
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials