Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?  (Read 582 times)

Offline bobb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« on: October 22, 2014, 12:57:24 PM »

Hey Guys/Hey Bytemaster,

I guess there is a lot of discussions happening if vesting is a good idea and AGS/PTS are treated fairly.
I also bought some PTS and I think a 10% cut is not that bad if we want Bitshares to thrive.

But I haven't heard a single valid argument why DNS is treated differently.
So maybe somebody is able to help me understand.

Dan argued that DNS's marked cap can not be treated equally because it lacks liquidity and kept telling that $10K figure.
That figure is just not true as it was just pulled from bter and the most volume and liquidity is available at btc38.

Another problem I have  with that argument is that with the proposal in the wild everyone was pulling their bids.
The liquidity established again at the new market price which was a result of the announcement.
So it is a slight stunt to first scare away/down the liquidity and than later start arguing there was none.

Look at the liquidity and volume at the new market price:
http://www.btc38.com/trade.html?btc38_trade_coin_name=dns [nofollow]
http://www.btc38.com/trade.html?mk_type=btc&btc38_trade_coin_name=dns [nofollow]
The volume on btc38 in the last 24h was about 600.000.000 DNS alone. Thats almost close to the volume of BTSX.
(I know volume is != liquidity but still, the liquidity was just shifted to the new 'announced value')
If liquidity is a reason to devalue the market cap, why wasn't this equally applied for PTS and DNS?

DNS/KeyID  was already trading live. It was pushed to exchanges. Features were announced, etc.
Additionally shareholders have been told by the core team that the invested funds will be preserved.

Do you still think this is balanced? Look at the markets:

BTSX +20%
PTS    -10%
DNS   -50% (at least)

It just feels as you have the least skin in the game at the DNS/KeyID DAC. Is that correct?

For this thread I have one wish. please stay on topic and be nice to each other. I welcome any valid argument :)

I think this merger is a good idea, but if we do so why at 7% AGS/PTS and 3% DNS?

DNS brings a lot to the table, which also BTSX benefits from.
BTSX+DNS would be great. But screwing the DNS investors that hard?
Please look at the markets and tell me what I am missing here.

tl;dr

Why was it announced (in the beginning) that this will be based on market cap (Dan)?
Why did toast tell everyone that invested funds will be preserved?
Why are the DACs (PTS/DNS) treated differently regarding their market cap/liquidity? 


Thanks again for everyone's time. Let's sort this and move on!

Offline bytemaster

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #1 on: October 22, 2014, 01:30:15 PM »
Thanks... DNS was a very hard call and it all depends upon which perspective one wishes to take:

From a BTS perspective the options are:  to buy or not to buy?   The consideration is how much of a "threat" is DNS as a competitor to BTS assuming DNS would have BitAssets as well to buy domains.  In this case DNS would be confusing the market with DNS-USD.    The technology behind DNS wasn't really much of a consideration, it was open source and BTS will make improvements upon the work that DNS has made.   The alternative to BTSX buying DNS is for BTSX to compete with DNS.    To compete with DNS means duplicate work, fractioned market, etc but how much would that really cost?

So from BTS perspective the question of what kind of bid to place on DNS is the question.   If DNS holders don't like they bid they can take the free funds and compete.  If they don't think they can compete then it was a good bid for them. 

The other aspect of this is that the only reason for including DNS at all is to gain some support from those that bought DNS... so for the sake of information, could someone post the total "unclaimed DNS"?  We wanted to make sure that PTS holders who held at the snapshot date of DNS and then sold got something for the fall in price of PTS after the snapshot.

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 biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 774
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
  • BTS: zebulon
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2014, 01:35:09 PM »
Unclaimed DNS is quite high; somewhere around 3.6 billion last I checked.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


Offline bytemaster

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #3 on: October 22, 2014, 01:38:33 PM »
Unclaimed DNS is quite high; somewhere around 3.6 billion last I checked.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

So it is 90% AGS/PTS... so we are really only talking about the last 10% who may have lost something?   Of those 10% that have "touched it" many of the claimed stake may just be voting and remain in the same hands...
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 toast

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #4 on: October 22, 2014, 01:45:34 PM »
If the price doubled since launch you can't argue that the claimed stake "probably mostly hasn't changed hands".

People who held DNS but sold their PTS should not be treated as PTS holders.

People who bought DNS solely for DNS and who don't care about PTS also exist.

There was clearly some miscommunication because I am super angry at the result...
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 bytemaster

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #5 on: October 22, 2014, 01:49:27 PM »
If the price doubled since launch you can't argue that the claimed stake "probably mostly hasn't changed hands".

People who held DNS but sold their PTS should not be treated as PTS holders.

People who bought DNS solely for DNS and who don't care about PTS also exist.

There was clearly some miscommunication because I am super angry at the result...

For sure we will talk when I get to the office today.  I just want to say that I *thought* I was giving a better deal to DNS than what I *thought* Toast and I had discussed.   Obviously, I did not want to piss off Toast or DNS holders.
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 biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 774
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
  • BTS: zebulon
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2014, 01:52:35 PM »

There was clearly some miscommunication because I am super angry at the result...

Interesting... do you have a counter-offer? Are you considering going off on your own and maintaining DNS as a stand-alone DAC?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


Offline bobb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2014, 01:55:31 PM »
You are arguing solely from the BTSX point of view.
You personally advertised DNS/KeyID as one of the core DACs before.
Toast was maintaining it, he contacted exchanges to start trading.
You explicitly mentioned on the forum that the DACs will be valued according to their market cap.
Toast assured anyone that the funds will be preserved!

And your argument is that you could have copied toast work anyway and "DNS" should  be lucky that you didn't do that.
I guess my main point is that I think you also have a responsibility for DNS as people invested in it because it was part of your vision.
You can not let people believe that they invest in a DAC which you are also behind and then tell them later screw you I could have copied that anyway.

Let me know if I missed something here.
Thanks for all your efforts! I appreciate it.

Offline xman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2014, 01:58:29 PM »
If the price doubled since launch you can't argue that the claimed stake "probably mostly hasn't changed hands".

People who held DNS but sold their PTS should not be treated as PTS holders.

People who bought DNS solely for DNS and who don't care about PTS also exist.

There was clearly some miscommunication because I am super angry at the result...

+1

Offline d3adh3ad

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2014, 02:13:46 PM »
This is a shit show.

Offline bytemaster

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2014, 02:14:48 PM »
You are arguing solely from the BTSX point of view.
You personally advertised DNS/KeyID as one of the core DACs before.
Toast was maintaining it, he contacted exchanges to start trading.
You explicitly mentioned on the forum that the DACs will be valued according to their market cap.
Toast assured anyone that the funds will be preserved!

And your argument is that you could have copied toast work anyway and "DNS" should  be lucky that you didn't do that.
I guess my main point is that I think you also have a responsibility for DNS as people invested in it because it was part of your vision.
You can not let people believe that they invest in a DAC which you are also behind and then tell them later screw you I could have copied that anyway.

Let me know if I missed something here.
Thanks for all your efforts! I appreciate it.

It is very challenging for people to put themselves in other peoples shoes.... especially when people have competing interest. 

1) I put my hat on as a DNS holder and asked... would I abandon the project at X price?
2) I put my hat on as a BTSX holder and asked... would I buy the project at X price?
3) I then put my hat on as someone in our ecosystem....

When I put on my BTSX hat I say, implement everything and compete with our larger network effect... don't buyout anyone, just add dilution to pay for work.. I probably wouldn't pay more than 1%
When I put on my DNS hat I say.... can I compete with BTSX and if so how...  I probably could, but I was just share dropped BTS and must decide whether I think I can grow DNS faster or BTS faster and devote my time and energy accordingly.    I could probably be bought out for less than 3%

When I put on my "individual hat" I say... "every other project is so young that they get a combined 20% in the larger pie" because none of them had their primary features implemented yet.

So it was really about dividing that 20% between AGS/PTS/DNS/VOTE as far as I was concerned.  Recognizing that 90% of the stakeholders in these 4 are identical... the remaining stake holders are arguing over who gets what stake of 1.8% of $51M which is less than $1M in valuation that could potentially be balanced wrong.   That is a *ROUNDING ERROR* in the grand scheme of things.  That is with the margin of volatility / spread in the markets estimation of the value of all systems.   
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 bytemaster

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2014, 02:19:13 PM »
You are arguing solely from the BTSX point of view.
You personally advertised DNS/KeyID as one of the core DACs before.
Toast was maintaining it, he contacted exchanges to start trading.
You explicitly mentioned on the forum that the DACs will be valued according to their market cap.
Toast assured anyone that the funds will be preserved!

And your argument is that you could have copied toast work anyway and "DNS" should  be lucky that you didn't do that.
I guess my main point is that I think you also have a responsibility for DNS as people invested in it because it was part of your vision.
You can not let people believe that they invest in a DAC which you are also behind and then tell them later screw you I could have copied that anyway.

Let me know if I missed something here.
Thanks for all your efforts! I appreciate it.

It is very challenging for people to put themselves in other peoples shoes.... especially when people have competing interest. 

1) I put my hat on as a DNS holder and asked... would I abandon the project at X price?
2) I put my hat on as a BTSX holder and asked... would I buy the project at X price?
3) I then put my hat on as someone in our ecosystem....

When I put on my BTSX hat I say, implement everything and compete with our larger network effect... don't buyout anyone, just add dilution to pay for work.. I probably wouldn't pay more than 1%
When I put on my DNS hat I say.... can I compete with BTSX and if so how...  I probably could, but I was just share dropped BTS and must decide whether I think I can grow DNS faster or BTS faster and devote my time and energy accordingly.    I could probably be bought out for less than 3%

When I put on my "individual hat" I say... "every other project is so young that they get a combined 20% in the larger pie" because none of them had their primary features implemented yet.

So it was really about dividing that 20% between AGS/PTS/DNS/VOTE as far as I was concerned.  Recognizing that 90% of the stakeholders in these 4 are identical... the remaining stake holders are arguing over who gets what stake of 1.8% of $51M which is less than $1M in valuation that could potentially be balanced wrong.   That is a *ROUNDING ERROR* in the grand scheme of things.  That is with the margin of volatility / spread in the markets estimation of the value of all systems.

I would like to refine that by saying that $1M is the amount in dispute... assuming DNS price fall of 50% hurt those players... then that value was reallocated to PTS/AGS holders who sold DNS.  That means we are talking about $333,000 worth of value total that was lost to DNS holders in this deal.   

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 GaltReport

Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2014, 02:21:18 PM »
You are arguing solely from the BTSX point of view.
You personally advertised DNS/KeyID as one of the core DACs before.
Toast was maintaining it, he contacted exchanges to start trading.
You explicitly mentioned on the forum that the DACs will be valued according to their market cap.
Toast assured anyone that the funds will be preserved!

And your argument is that you could have copied toast work anyway and "DNS" should  be lucky that you didn't do that.
I guess my main point is that I think you also have a responsibility for DNS as people invested in it because it was part of your vision.
You can not let people believe that they invest in a DAC which you are also behind and then tell them later screw you I could have copied that anyway.

Let me know if I missed something here.
Thanks for all your efforts! I appreciate it.

It is very challenging for people to put themselves in other peoples shoes.... especially when people have competing interest. 

1) I put my hat on as a DNS holder and asked... would I abandon the project at X price?
2) I put my hat on as a BTSX holder and asked... would I buy the project at X price?
3) I then put my hat on as someone in our ecosystem....

When I put on my BTSX hat I say, implement everything and compete with our larger network effect... don't buyout anyone, just add dilution to pay for work.. I probably wouldn't pay more than 1%
When I put on my DNS hat I say.... can I compete with BTSX and if so how...  I probably could, but I was just share dropped BTS and must decide whether I think I can grow DNS faster or BTS faster and devote my time and energy accordingly.    I could probably be bought out for less than 3%

When I put on my "individual hat" I say... "every other project is so young that they get a combined 20% in the larger pie" because none of them had their primary features implemented yet.

So it was really about dividing that 20% between AGS/PTS/DNS/VOTE as far as I was concerned.  Recognizing that 90% of the stakeholders in these 4 are identical... the remaining stake holders are arguing over who gets what stake of 1.8% of $51M which is less than $1M in valuation that could potentially be balanced wrong.   That is a *ROUNDING ERROR* in the grand scheme of things.  That is with the margin of volatility / spread in the markets estimation of the value of all systems.

I think this is correct on all accounts.

Offline bobb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2014, 02:48:52 PM »
ok, I take back that 'soley from the BTSX point of view'. It just happens to be the best deal for BTSX holders.
And I know how hard it is for people to put themselves into other peoples shoes.

But my arguments are/were:
You personally advertised DNS/KeyID as one of the core DACs before.
Toast was maintaining it, he contacted exchanges to start trading.
You explicitly mentioned on the forum that the DACs will be valued according to their market cap.
Toast assured anyone that the funds will be preserved!

Could you address this? thanks again!



Offline russkroe

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone explain why DNS is treated differently?
« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2014, 03:05:55 PM »
You are arguing solely from the BTSX point of view.
You personally advertised DNS/KeyID as one of the core DACs before.
Toast was maintaining it, he contacted exchanges to start trading.
You explicitly mentioned on the forum that the DACs will be valued according to their market cap.
Toast assured anyone that the funds will be preserved!

And your argument is that you could have copied toast work anyway and "DNS" should  be lucky that you didn't do that.
I guess my main point is that I think you also have a responsibility for DNS as people invested in it because it was part of your vision.
You can not let people believe that they invest in a DAC which you are also behind and then tell them later screw you I could have copied that anyway.

Let me know if I missed something here.
Thanks for all your efforts! I appreciate it.

It is very challenging for people to put themselves in other peoples shoes.... especially when people have competing interest. 

1) I put my hat on as a DNS holder and asked... would I abandon the project at X price?
2) I put my hat on as a BTSX holder and asked... would I buy the project at X price?
3) I then put my hat on as someone in our ecosystem....

When I put on my BTSX hat I say, implement everything and compete with our larger network effect... don't buyout anyone, just add dilution to pay for work.. I probably wouldn't pay more than 1%
When I put on my DNS hat I say.... can I compete with BTSX and if so how...  I probably could, but I was just share dropped BTS and must decide whether I think I can grow DNS faster or BTS faster and devote my time and energy accordingly.    I could probably be bought out for less than 3%

When I put on my "individual hat" I say... "every other project is so young that they get a combined 20% in the larger pie" because none of them had their primary features implemented yet.

So it was really about dividing that 20% between AGS/PTS/DNS/VOTE as far as I was concerned.  Recognizing that 90% of the stakeholders in these 4 are identical... the remaining stake holders are arguing over who gets what stake of 1.8% of $51M which is less than $1M in valuation that could potentially be balanced wrong.   That is a *ROUNDING ERROR* in the grand scheme of things.  That is with the margin of volatility / spread in the markets estimation of the value of all systems.

I think this is correct on all accounts.


 +5% +5%

I understand frustration because things do not appear (remember, this allocation is just a proposal) to be playing out the way investors initially thought. But here is my issue with the division this has caused.

1. Plenty of organizations pivot in order to make themselves more profitable in the long run. If you buy shares at an IPO, you are at the mercy of the majority of the other shareholders when they vote on the Board of Directors and how to move forward with company decisions. It is just one of the risks of playing the game.

2. We obviously all got on board cause we believe in Dan and his ability to make difficult decision. Anyone who has followed him closely should trust that he isn't talking about free markets, decentralization, etc. just to blow smoke up our asses then flip things to make a pretty penny for himself and a few larger investors. It is important to keep the bigger picture in mind. We are uniting for a movement that will provide for a crypto ecosystem that BTC was unable to provide. it will be a rocky start, but fighting about this small of a portion of the total pie will not help propel Bitshares to the game changer we know it can be.

It is important to make sure things are as "fair" as possible, but at a certain point we need to come together. As with any investment (equities, fixed income, land, or your personal career), you have to be wiling to endure some setbacks as long as you are monitoring progress and are still moving in the direction of the ultimate goal.

I fully trust Dan and am certain that he has our best interests in mind - if he didn't, he wouldn't risk disclosing Bitshares' next moves on an open forum and he would simply implement them without a care for public opinion. This project is bigger than any one of us and it will not advance if we are unwilling to come to terms with that.

 

Google+