Thank you bytemaster, I3, and everyone involved for doing this. I just can't commend you enough for this. Hopefully these words of praise from a very skeptical and somewhat ornery guy are enough to convey the point. 

What am I dreaming ?? 

I'm impressed.

You guys have come up with even more good reasons to do this than we did.

(But by remaining silent we get to take credit for them all.)

 

This speaks to one of the great reasons I3, and BitShares in general, have been and will continue to be successful. A depth and breadth of varying talents. Clearly they have benefited from your corporate experience.

Thank you bytemaster, I3, and everyone involved for doing this. I just can't commend you enough for this. Hopefully these words of praise from a very skeptical and somewhat ornery guy are enough to convey the point. 

Quote from: tonyk2 on November 13, 2014, 12:19:07 am

Reading this makes me very unoptimistic about the mankind's future .... and present. The only purpose of the society, in its current form, is to stay on the way or twist the natural selections that otherwise would exist.

That posting may have been from a real person. But it was just painful enough to read that it made me question its source. I'm not dismissing newbies if that person really exists and has those questions. But I think sometimes there are community members who get their kicks from two-timing the forum and trivializing the counter-arguments in a way that makes them seem fairly laughable. You wouldn't know anything about that, would you?

And often times, a user will never post until they absolutely have to, or there is a final straw.  I'm not saying I agree with what the user said, but I am disappointed in the way that this announcement was made.  How can you be surprised at people questioning I3's motives when none are given?  Can we please have an official explanation? Every thing that's been said here is speculation.

I'm impressed.

You guys have come up with even more good reasons to do this than we did.

(But by remaining silent we get to take credit for them all.)

priceless, and great management.

I fail  to see how  returning all PTS to donators, can benefit in anyway I3. also I can't understand how can someone  find anything malicious in this act. But hey, it looks that anything is possible .....
So let me see !! Keeping the PTS is alright but given them back is bad I'm not saying that every I3 decision was genius, but common what the heck is wrong with giving PTS back ? You do whatever you want with your money. I3 they do whatever they want with their PTS.
Before, because they have so many, was already bad for some, had they  burn it it would have been bad, now they give them back is bad. Am  I missing something or what ??

Quote from: biophil on November 12, 2014, 11:27:44 pm

aaaaand cue the FUD.

That is a rather cheap counterargument. Why not give a rational explanation instead of unfounded accusation?

Oh, that wasn't meant as a counterargument. I said that because the accusatory content of your comment made it sound like you had already decided exactly what you thought and that you wouldn't be interested in argument. If I interpreted your comment incorrectly, please accept my apologies for my rude reply.

Compare two scenarios: in scenario A, Invictus keeps all the donated PTS, severely hampering the efforts of those who want to upgrade it to DPOS (it would be effectively impossible to perform this upgrade and maintain the integrity of PTS if only one entity holds such a large fraction of the total coins).

In scenario B, Invictus returns all PTS to the original donators. Now PTS can gracefully upgrade to PTS with a fair distribution, and the community largely supports the move.

Now, which scenario is better? I think it's pretty obvious that B is better, even before we consider all the other benefits (taxes, SEC compliance, etc etc). So why are you so critical of this move? Who does it harm? AGS donators? No, since they got all their snapshots and now they're getting their donations back. Invictus? No, since PTS currently has very little market value and so it's better to return the funds for the sake of PR than to let them gather dust.

Now, think back to the beginning of the AGS donation campaign. What were donators told? That they would get a snapshot of all Invictus projects. They were told that their donation addresses would be forever enshrined in the AGS list. So based on those 2 things, people donated PTS. Note that Invictus delivered completely on those two things. Now, without revoking either of those two privileges, Invictus announces today that AGS donators get a third benefit: they get their PTS back! This third benefit detracts nothing from the other two!

Another argument you make is that Invictus is just doing all this to accumulate funds. If that's the case, why are they still around? It's not a scam if the scammer does what he said he was going to do. You seem to think it's unfair somehow that Invictus gets to keep all the BTS that was snapshotted from the AGS PTS. That's an opinion you're allowed to have, but you express it as though they're doing it in secret. Nothing could be further from the truth! They've been very open about this from the start.

So those are a few of the reasons I liked BM's proposal to return the PTS. I've been active on this forum for a long time; I am used to forming opinions quickly. So please be more careful to discern the difference between blind acceptance and rapid, thought-out acceptance.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

Again, please provide the correct information if you will.
There is no need to suspect my motives as they are obvious. I invested in BTSX and the continous dubious behaviour of ever changing plans and my aforementioned little analysis ( I don't claim 100% accuracy, so please correct misunderstood parts) has me highly alert.

On the contrary I find the blind acceptance on this forum dangerous and frankly not very intelligent. BM surprisingly states an important development with nebulous implications and everybody here is happily blinded by profit that nobody questions why he did not even state the slightes of reasons.

Its not blind acceptance.

Its that we actually understand what the changes are.