Author Topic: [VIDEO] I3 Handling the Merger...  (Read 2416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bitmeat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
    • View Profile
I3 cannot decide anything. Only delegates choose if a hard fork should be implemented. They have literally built the system exactly so they do not control it. If 51% of stakeholders are against this proposal, it is impossible for them to implement it, no matter what they do.

That's only in theory. But in any case, have a sense of humor. There is no way to make such a transition painless. :)

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
I3 cannot decide anything. Only delegates choose if a hard fork should be implemented. They have literally built the system exactly so they do not control it. If 51% of stakeholders are against this proposal, it is impossible for them to implement it, no matter what they do.

Offline bitmeat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
    • View Profile
Chainsaw everything... :)

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
That video was great  +5%

EDIT: and holy shit thats Taco from the League....how did I not know about this?
BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
That video was great  +5%
BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
There is a proposal, minority against it but majority like it.

For the record, I am for the merger. I strongly believe that the vesting mechanics are idiotic. If 25% of your stake vests and you sell it, you lose the other 75%. Is that fair?

EDIT: To prove that the above is idiotic, consider this: Exchange such as BTER holds PTS and let's say that is now 20,000,000 BTS but is not yet vested. How will they allow each user to vest differently? (If they allow that at all)

This has been addressed now, thank goodness:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10353.0;topicseen
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
:) :) :)

...And Fuck
I did not even like the stuff that I like ...
lol ... nice rap :)

Offline bitmeat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
    • View Profile
There is a proposal, minority against it but majority like it.

For the record, I am for the merger. I strongly believe that the vesting mechanics are idiotic. If 25% of your stake vests and you sell it, you lose the other 75%. Is that fair?

EDIT: To prove that the above is idiotic, consider this: Exchange such as BTER holds PTS and let's say that is now 20,000,000 BTS but is not yet vested. How will they allow each user to vest differently? (If they allow that at all)
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 08:55:19 am by bitmeat »

Offline joele

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
There is a proposal, minority against it but majority like it.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
 :) :) :)

...And Fuck
I did not even like the stuff that I like ...
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 08:36:56 am by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline bitmeat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
    • View Profile
Here is a video of Bytemaster himself, and how he decided the fate of AGS/PTS holders:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulIOrQasR18

What is a DAC? A is for autonomous. Meaning all decisions need to be vetted by the stakeholders NOT I3.

There is nothing "autonomous" about how any of this is handled. So I turn to humor at this point.