Author Topic: Consensus reached on Mumble session regarding BM's "Fix-all" proposal  (Read 18738 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
PTS and AGS will be folded into BTS (AGS and PTS will receive shares in BTS) and DACs will be all "divisions" BTS.
I need to catch up on all the developments that have been happening, but why should we dilute the bts/btsx for AGS/PTS holders when they have already been rewarded for holding AGS/PTS with the initial btsx snapshot? I think a bitasset would be far more preferable than to dilute btsx.
This is my biggest concern too.  Although if I understand correctly there is $2million dollars in assets(dev funds) that btsx "purchases" when they purchase those DAC's(?)  Again a clear list of pros and cons for each participant would be great.
This "many functions into BTSX" proposal is not primarely about the un-necessity to continue PTS. The reason to give PTS and "AGS after Feb28th donators" a stake in BTSX is that those PTS and AGS investors did except to get the stake in the Vote DAC, the ME DAC and so on as a result from their investment. Now that the plan is to include many of these features into BTSX those investors have to be rewarded by giving them a stake in BTSX. The idea here is that the loss of value due to the capital infusion (giving BTSX stake to AGS after 2/28 / PTS) equals the increase in value due to the added functionalities those investors expected. I guess the value of BTSX will be bigger because of the added advantages described in my longer post above (network effect, marketing simplification etc.) and also because PTS is probably undervalued.
...thats at least how I read it all...

@bytemaster, is it possible to clarify which DACs/funtionalities would be included into BTSX?

Offline bytemaster

Whatever is to happen to PTS needs to be resolved quickly. I wonder spawning a new asset would be safer and simpler for the value of BTSX. That would allow a simple confident statement asap on the value of BTSX not being affected in anything but a positive way by any other changes mooted.

Right now I suspect the slide we see in price is simply the more cautious and short term are moving to places of safety and that will only continue while there is uncertainty. Turn this to a positive and perhaps we'll see a prompt reversal, especially in key populations of interest, like the Chinese.

I think you are still missing the point...  if PTS continues as a separate asset then people have expectation of competing DACs that don't honor BTS. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
4. By the way. Handled properly this is a great PR stunt and campaign.  "The worlds first DAC acquisition."  More excuses to teach people about the DAC analogy of bitshares.
I like the way you think!

Offline davidpbrown

Whatever is to happen to PTS needs to be resolved quickly. I wonder spawning a new asset would be safer and simpler for the value of BTSX. That would allow a simple confident statement asap on the value of BTSX not being affected in anything but a positive way by any other changes mooted.

Right now I suspect the slide we see in price is simply the more cautious and short term are moving to places of safety and that will only continue while there is uncertainty. Turn this to a positive and perhaps we'll see a prompt reversal, especially in key populations of interest, like the Chinese.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline bytemaster

PTS and AGS will be folded into BTS (AGS and PTS will receive shares in BTS) and DACs will be all "divisions" BTS.
I need to catch up on all the developments that have been happening, but why should we dilute the bts/btsx for AGS/PTS holders when they have already been rewarded for holding AGS/PTS with the initial btsx snapshot? I think a bitasset would be far more preferable than to dilute btsx.
This is my biggest concern too.  Although if I understand correctly there is $2million dollars in assets(dev funds) that btsx "purchases" when they purchase those DAC's(?)  Again a clear list of pros and cons for each participant would be great.

Very few cons... biggest con "changing things"

Everything else is a "merger" win/win value for value.  BTSX cap should grow by value of PTS + value of clearer message.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline bitmarket

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
    • BitShares TV
PTS and AGS will be folded into BTS (AGS and PTS will receive shares in BTS) and DACs will be all "divisions" BTS.
I need to catch up on all the developments that have been happening, but why should we dilute the bts/btsx for AGS/PTS holders when they have already been rewarded for holding AGS/PTS with the initial btsx snapshot? I think a bitasset would be far more preferable than to dilute btsx.
This is my biggest concern too.  Although if I understand correctly there is $2million dollars in assets(dev funds) that btsx "purchases" when they purchase those DAC's(?)  Again a clear list of pros and cons for each participant would be great.
Host of BitShares.TV and Author of BitShares 101

Offline bitmarket

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
    • BitShares TV
Thoughts.

1. The hard fork voting solution is an important step for this type of panic to never happen again. It also makes "asset infusion" a less scary concept.  Once it is understood dilution cannot happen without voter approval, then most people are humble enough to be not terrified by an idea that many other share holders have voted for.   I for one would  think "I am probably missing something and this will be a good idea if a majority has voted for it." (Unless I had extreme research and due diligence on the topic)   It also becomes understood at a fundamental, cryptographically provable level that BM is not a dictator of BTSX which would give solace to people half a world a way who have never had the pleasure of meeting him AND dont speak his language.   I think we can all agree its pretty hard to trust anyone under those conditions.

2. A recorded call for big announcements like this in the future is a good idea.

3. I still would like to see a list of pro and cons for this deal for each group of actors. btsx holders, ags holders, pts holders, etc. just some bullet points under each one would be fine, but it would make it clear to everyone how they benefit out of the deal.  ( I actually still can't say if I am for or against it until I see this. Although I trust BM and the whole gang a lot so I don't really need much convincing.)

4. By the way. Handled properly this is a great PR stunt and campaign.  "The worlds first DAC acquisition."  More excuses to teach people about the DAC analogy of bitshares.
Host of BitShares.TV and Author of BitShares 101

Offline bytemaster


PTS and AGS will be folded into BTS (AGS and PTS will receive shares in BTS) and DACs will be all "divisions" BTS.
I need to catch up on all the developments that have been happening, but why should we dilute the bts/btsx for AGS/PTS holders when they have already been rewarded for holding AGS/PTS with the initial btsx snapshot? I think a bitasset would be far more preferable than to dilute btsx.

Catch up first.  Pts and ags will end so that I don't have to create and support competing dacs. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline cryptillionaire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
    • View Profile
PTS and AGS will be folded into BTS (AGS and PTS will receive shares in BTS) and DACs will be all "divisions" BTS.
I need to catch up on all the developments that have been happening, but why should we dilute the bts/btsx for AGS/PTS holders when they have already been rewarded for holding AGS/PTS with the initial btsx snapshot? I think a bitasset would be far more preferable than to dilute btsx.

Offline ReWeR

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
I think the biggest threat to bitshares is ethereum, they will lanch around new year.

I fear that etheruem will get a bigger network effect than the bitshares dacs in it's current form.

I think this is a fight about who will get the biggest marketcap the fastest.

I feel like this proposal will make us stronger with a unified front and help us become the winner!

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
I did not want to imply wrongness on any one's part. I just wanted to point out that there is confusion content wise.

Yes.. but it was an interesting prompt to my reflection on how sometimes we forget what others do not understand.. and wonder then at their reactions. :)
I agree with this. An "official" explanation that makes this distinction would (have) help(ed) a lot!

Offline davidpbrown

I did not want to imply wrongness on any one's part. I just wanted to point out that there is confusion content wise.

Yes.. but it was an interesting prompt to my reflection on how sometimes we forget what others do not understand.. and wonder then at their reactions. :)
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
Dilution is misunderstood vastly

It is an error to put the onous on other people. Better to consider that other people do not understand because of you own failing than consider it is their mistake. Not everyone will have time to consider closely all point and if the impression is uncertainty and a cluster of what might be proposals.. but note how proposals can move to become reality, then there is an anxiety created. I see some of this as a natural reaction to change of what had been concrete.

People like certainty. People like certainty so much that they will tolerate certainty that they do not agree with entirely, before ever the risking what they treasure on something that might be good or might be really bad. It's not necessarily a considered reaction but then crowds prehaps dance to a different tune.
I did not want to imply wrongness on any one's part. I just wanted to point out that there is confusion content wise.

Offline davidpbrown

Dilution is misunderstood vastly

It is an error to put the onous on other people. Better to consider that other people do not understand because of you own failing than consider it is their mistake. Not everyone will have time to consider closely all point and if the impression is uncertainty and a cluster of what might be proposals.. but note how proposals can move to become reality, then there is an anxiety created. I see some of this as a natural reaction to change of what had been concrete.

People like certainty. People like certainty so much that they will tolerate certainty that they do not agree with entirely, before ever the risking what they treasure on something that might be good or might be really bad. It's not necessarily a considered reaction but then crowds prehaps dance to a different tune.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
I didn't understand the "panic" / selling in the first place! To me it was:

- A proposal for discussion
- No problem because interests are very well aligned between BM / i3 and all AGS/PTS holders. Our interests are theirs.
- The proposal in itself means change but to me seems to bring a lot of value into BTSX: Adam K. maybe on board, simplifying of marketing message, adding more valuable features to BTSX (!), increased network effect and liqiudity, no need for cross chain trading for now. Those are all major value drivers. I thought the price of BTSX would rather go UP therefore. That it went down might have to do with the need of the (relatively uniformed) market to decide how to react while being in a overall downswing from the first major upswing.
- Dilution is misunderstood vastly! On the one side there is dilution of money which doesnt help the money holders (but can help the overall economy (in the short run)). On the other side there is capital infusion (also called dilution) which is a different thing because in this case shareholders profit because their shares are getting more valuable if the money from the sale of new shares is used to grow the company. We had this discussion before and it is simple too understand if BTSX is not seen as currency units but as shares in the Bitshares(x) company. And it definitely makes sense to see it this way because the BTSX shares will most likely get more valuable through this capital infusion which anyway will only be applied if shareholders think it will increase their share price.
- Capital infusion (often confused as monetary dilution; see above) will only happen if the DAC's shareholders think the capital infusion makes sense in order to grow the value of their shares.
- I more and more treat my stake in BTSX (and the other DACs) as an investment in Dan and the team (like in any other startup; except that the mechanics are based not on enforceable contracts but on social consensus, reputation and network effect). In the long run it will likely be (very) valuable.
- Dan proofed to be great conceptually, a great coder (it seems; can't judge that because not my profession) and seems to have a good sense for business reality (which was my biggest worry initially) and a good speaker http://vimeo.com/user24356268/review/109390470/40926b1e3e. Partnerships are also coming along nicely which I still think are majorly important. i3 is ahead on most of these parameters compared to all the other innovators in the space. So I am long term very bullish.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2014, 02:02:15 pm by delulo »