VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0

[fluxer555]

lol, yeah fork all the dacs, run all of them on one blockchain, all issuing bitassets in a global mega-dac and take over the world.

So, Ethereum?

[nomoreheroes7]

Please correct me again, but I think VOTE snapshot was already taken the same day as DNS. VOTE shares have been already allocated and distributed. Correct?

Why are we having a discussion about VOTE shares to be airdropped to BTSX? BM says that VOTE just got more interesting because he has something in mind. This is irrelevant to BTSX. VOTE will just help BTSX adoption.

Although comments like "VOTE will surpass BTSX" are not doing very good at the moment I think. People can't trade VOTE, don't know what's all that about and comments like that make people think "I will sell BTSX now, get bitusd and when VOTE is out I will buy more VOTE". Comments like that create confusion and fear about BTSX future from a DAC that is not launched yet and hurt the BTSX confidence ihmo..

Finally, why the discussions about diluting BTSX by increasing the supply? Some people invested in BTSX due to the fixed supply. If you want just create BTSY with the right to increase unlimited the supply of shares and snapshot those shares to BTSX shareholders. People will then be able to choose whichever model they like, keep both of them for diversification or dump everything and go back to bitcoin..

Vote shares have been allocated, but to my knowledge not yet distributed as there is no way to claim them. When Vote was snapshotted, its focus appears to have been completely different from what it essentially might now be -- a BTSX competitor.

We're having a discussion about airdropping to BTSX because presumably Vote is about to steal BTSX's thunder, and apparently BTSX's killer app BitUSD. It's not good to dilute the focus of BitShares across so many ventures when its main baby is still being nurtured. I believe the current market price is reflecting this sentiment.

Creating BTSY just to have dilutable shares is an absolutely terrible idea. Everything about BTSX is already considered to be way too complex/confusing, and further diluting the brand into even more paths is about the worst idea possible at this point in time IMHO. As has been said before, the shareholders should decide whether diluting BTSX is worth the costs/benefits.

[kisa]

thanks mf-tzo for formulating clear questions 
thanks xeroc for bringing some clarity 

[xeroc]

Please correct me again, but I think VOTE snapshot was already taken the same
day as DNS. VOTE shares have been already allocated and distributed.
Correct?

correct!

Why are we having a discussion about VOTE shares to be airdropped to BTSX? BM
says that VOTE just got more interesting because he has something in mind. This
is irrelevant to BTSX. VOTE will just help BTSX adoption.

*agreed*

Although comments like "VOTE will surpass BTSX" are not doing very good at the
moment I think. People can't trade VOTE, don't know what's all that about and
comments like that make people think "I will sell BTSX now, get bitusd and when
VOTE is out I will buy more VOTE". Comments like that create confusion and fear
about BTSX future from a DAC that is not launched yet and hurt the BTSX
confidence ihmo..

Hehe .. it's called FUD

People still not grasp the bigger picture and start to interpret on things they
cannot possibly understand as a total as there is just to few information
available. period! I'd call for "weak hands" and those that spread FUD to
further strengthen their position.

Finally, why the discussions about diluting BTSX by increasing the supply? Some
people invested in BTSX due to the fixed supply. If you want just create BTSY
with the right to increase unlimited the supply of shares and snapshot those
shares to BTSX shareholders. People will then be able to choose whichever model
they like, keep both of them for diversification or dump everything and go back
to bitcoin..

BM stated that BTSX will not be deluted .. period!
Alternatively, a second chain could be launched by a competitor deluting their
base token. BTSX will certainly not do that.

[mf-tzo]

Please correct me again, but I think VOTE snapshot was already taken the same day as DNS. VOTE shares have been already allocated and distributed. Correct?

Why are we having a discussion about VOTE shares to be airdropped to BTSX? BM says that VOTE just got more interesting because he has something in mind. This is irrelevant to BTSX. VOTE will just help BTSX adoption.

Although comments like "VOTE will surpass BTSX" are not doing very good at the moment I think. People can't trade VOTE, don't know what's all that about and comments like that make people think "I will sell BTSX now, get bitusd and when VOTE is out I will buy more VOTE". Comments like that create confusion and fear about BTSX future from a DAC that is not launched yet and hurt the BTSX confidence ihmo..

Finally, why the discussions about diluting BTSX by increasing the supply? Some people invested in BTSX due to the fixed supply. If you want just create BTSY with the right to increase unlimited the supply of shares and snapshot those shares to BTSX shareholders. People will then be able to choose whichever model they like, keep both of them for diversification or dump everything and go back to bitcoin..

[oco101]

What if I launched a ratty arse dac with 5% collateral (vs BTSXs 200%) and issued bitUSD, can that then be 'atomically cross chain traded' and exchanged for BTSX? 

Why are you trading then if you don't trust the other chain ? Please don't confuse trading with transfer.
If you trade bitUSDbtsx for bitUSD5% it means you have an account on the 5% chain to begin with. Don't trust don't trade.

[xeroc]

This introduces many significant problems.

Relevant reading.

Wise words over there!

[zerosum]

All of you guys are doing great!  I am extremely proud of the collective reasoning powers of this forum.

Keep on following all this thread to its only possible Darwinian conclusion...

 

Yee, my Darwinian conclusion is that if VOTE is a mutation of BTSX, that is more fit for survival; it should inherit more (like 99%) of the genes of the original BTSX... and basically be snapshotted from BTSX and not from some random initial distribution that gives 40% of the stake to some entity with unknown purpose.

Or at least something like 10%/10%/80% - AGS/PTS/BTSX

This. I hope something is considered for BTSXers. Not all of us were fortunate enough to grab a foothold in the ecosystem in the pre-BTSX days...

I guess the next step in evolution would be to fork VOTE, with a distribution that would satisfy/compensate BTSX holders

No need for that. From the current description it has almost nothing to do with the initial idea of the VOTE DAC. It should be called something simple like  BitshareXEthereum OpenGraphium Bazarium.

[xeroc]

Different dacs could have different collateralization rules could't they? And
varying quality of dev teams, varying strength of DPOS etc.  So 1 bitUSD backed
by BTSX is different to 1 bitUSD backed by vote.  Because what gives bitUSD is
value is its redeem-ability for BTSX,

No .. every bitUSD is redeemable for any base asset on other DACs .. the price
bitUSD/BTSX and the price bitUSD/VOTE will differ over time. but the price
bitUSD/bitUSD and bitUsD/USD will always be 1.0 (+-spread)

and what gives BTSX its value is
investors faith in the project as a whole, which will be different for every
dac.  Another DAC issuing bitUSD exposes BTSX holders to risk, what if that dac
collapses and the good name of bitUSD is tarnished?  They're pretending it's
the same product when it's not.

Investors faith in the project (i.e. DAC) is what makes the value of the DAC
(i.e. the value of it's base asset) worth more. .. so the price of BTSX against
bitUSD rises .. not the value of a bitUSD in any DAC!!!!!

Another point, bitUSD is a great name, shouldn't other dacs call their currency
something else?  It's pretty cheeky to fork someone's product and name it the
exact same thing isn't it? (unless it's somehow mutually beneficial, I'm still
trying to figure out if it is or not).  But if they name it
something else how can it remain market pegged as the name is the key for that
working?

bitUSD is indeed a great name .. but what would you price a bitUSD-A in?
A bitUSD is worth a USD .. no matter where you trade it .. only differences
between DACs are the spread (read, time you need to buy/sell a considerable
amount) .. and the collateralization, which IMHO is priced into the
baseToken/bitUSD price and not in the bitUSD price itself .. because that one
is simpley $1!

What if I launched a ratty arse dac with 5% collateral (vs BTSXs 200%) and
issued bitUSD, can that then be 'atomically cross chain traded' and exchanged
for BTSX? 

If you wanted to trade with that DAC it's your own fault .. all bitUSD in BTSX
will always be backed by at least 150% BTSX. If you want to give them away for
bitUSD in a different chain that are backed by less.. then it's you own fault!

This leads to the conclusion that bitUSD is only as strong as it's weakest
issuing dac, and it's weakest dac can be made deliberately weak as an attack
vector.  Unless the bitUSD all being joined up via acct means it wouldn't
collapse in the event of a black swan on one of the dacs, maybe it would
actually be stronger.

Why would the bitUSD in BTSX collapse because some other DAC's base token is
beein worthless (which wouldn't harm their peg, btw).. or the other DAC uses
the wrong collateralization (which is just stupid)?

It is not that you can 'transfer' a "vote-bitusd" into the "btsx-bitUSD" ...
you will always have to trade 1:1 (or close to)

ALL BITUSD IN BTSX WILL ALWAYS BE BACKED BY BTSX!!! USING AT LEAST 150% COLLATERAL! .. PERIOD!

sorry for crying that out loud

Either way it the competing bitUSD of VOTE is a very harmful force for BTSX.  BTSXers should be snapshotted in imo.

I just fail to get the issue

This is a bit over my head so I could be getting this all wrong.

may be .. future will tell!



//edit: I apologize if parts of this post sound rude

[arhag]

lol, yeah fork all the dacs, run all of them on one blockchain, all issuing bitassets in a global mega-dac and take over the world.  Shareholders could vote on whether to inflate the supply to fund the development of a new business to run on the dac.  There's gotta be 100 different ways of selling bitUSD.  Just do them all on one chain via 100 different businesses.

This introduces many significant problems.

Relevant reading.

[matt608]

I guess the next step in evolution would be to fork VOTE, with a distribution that would satisfy/compensate BTSX holders

lol, yeah fork all the dacs, run all of them on one blockchain, all issuing bitassets in a global mega-dac and take over the world.  Shareholders could vote on whether to inflate the supply to fund the development of a new business to run on the dac.  There's gotta be 100 different ways of selling bitUSD.  Just do them all on one chain via 100 different businesses. 

[graffenwalder]

All of you guys are doing great!  I am extremely proud of the collective reasoning powers of this forum.

Keep on following all this thread to its only possible Darwinian conclusion...

 

Yee, my Darwinian conclusion is that if VOTE is a mutation of BTSX, that is more fit for survival; it should inherit more (like 99%) of the genes of the original BTSX... and basically be snapshotted from BTSX and not from some random initial distribution that gives 40% of the stake to some entity with unknown purpose.

Or at least something like 10%/10%/80% - AGS/PTS/BTSX

This. I hope something is considered for BTSXers. Not all of us were fortunate enough to grab a foothold in the ecosystem in the pre-BTSX days...

I guess the next step in evolution would be to fork VOTE, with a distribution that would satisfy/compensate BTSX holders

[nomoreheroes7]

All of you guys are doing great!  I am extremely proud of the collective reasoning powers of this forum.

Keep on following all this thread to its only possible Darwinian conclusion...

 

Yee, my Darwinian conclusion is that if VOTE is a mutation of BTSX, that is more fit for survival; it should inherit more (like 99%) of the genes of the original BTSX... and basically be snapshotted from BTSX and not from some random initial distribution that gives 40% of the stake to some entity with unknown purpose.

Or at least something like 10%/10%/80% - AGS/PTS/BTSX

This. I hope something is considered for BTSXers. Not all of us were fortunate enough to grab a foothold in the ecosystem in the pre-BTSX days...

[matt608]

how will the outside world identify all kinds of BitUSD ?

A:Do you have a account that accepts BitUSD ?
B:Of course.here,XYZ. (BTSX-wallet)
A:(using VOTE wallet to send BitUSD to XYZ).....Failed.
B:What's wrong?Why can't you send BitUSD to me?Oh,yours is vote-usd。。。。。you need to use ACCT to turn your BitUSD on vote into BitUSD on BTSX and then transfer to me ?

Why are people so panicking!? you are cross chain trading all the time when you do a wire transfer from your local bank account to another bank account
or transfer funds to you credit card ...

A:Do you have a account that accepts BitUSD ?
B:Of course.here,XYZ. (BTSX-wallet)
A:(because there is no way to send to bitUSD to a diffrent chain without ACCT by default, this type of transfer, will be ACCT ) using VOTE wallet to send BitUSD to XYZ ... Success

Different dacs could have different collateralization rules could't they? And varying quality of dev teams, varying strength of DPOS etc.  So 1 bitUSD backed by BTSX is different to 1 bitUSD backed by vote.  Because what gives bitUSD is value is its redeem-ability for BTSX, and what gives BTSX its value is investors faith in the project as a whole, which will be different for every dac.  Another DAC issuing bitUSD exposes BTSX holders to risk, what if that dac collapses and the good name of bitUSD is tarnished?  They're pretending it's the same product when it's not.

Another point, bitUSD is a great name, shouldn't other dacs call their currency something else?  It's pretty cheeky to fork someone's product and name it the exact same thing isn't it? (unless it's somehow mutually beneficial, I'm still trying to figure out if it is or not).  But if they name it something else how can it remain market pegged as the name is the key for that working?

What if I launched a ratty arse dac with 5% collateral (vs BTSXs 200%) and issued bitUSD, can that then be 'atomically cross chain traded' and exchanged for BTSX? 

This leads to the conclusion that bitUSD is only as strong as it's weakest issuing dac, and it's weakest dac can be made deliberately weak as an attack vector.  Unless the bitUSD all being joined up via acct means it wouldn't collapse in the event of a black swan on one of the dacs, maybe it would actually be stronger.

Either way it the competing bitUSD of VOTE is a very harmful force for BTSX.  BTSXers should be snapshotted in imo.

This is a bit over my head so I could be getting this all wrong. 

[xeroc]

A:Do you have a account that accepts BitUSD ?
B:Of course.here,XYZ. (BTSX-wallet)
A:(because there is no way to send to bitUSD to a diffrent chain without ACCT by default, this type of transfer, will be ACCT ) using VOTE wallet to send BitUSD to XYZ ... Success

Lol .. nice way of saying the same as I did ...
It's basically I wire transfer to a different bank which already use to take some extra time ...

I can see a flourishing arbitrage market between chains .. with maybe a few cents profit per trade .. (surely, ACCT might cost some extra tx fees)