Author Topic: AGS to be allocated 10% in PLAY Dac.  (Read 6310 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile

Everyone has interests. De-legitimatizing them this way is not helpful. It is better to acknowledge the fact that everyone has interests and making them transparent and putting forward arguments everyone can agree with than demonizing them this way.


Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
If PTS + AGS got 20% then they shouldn't be airdropped half a billion BTS.  So 10% is reasonable.
AGS/PTS got 7% in BTS, that is 7% of the 35% of BTS in PLAY which is negligible...
For all AGS donators (= post and pre Feb28th) that makes it about 12.3% in PLAY in total.

Considering that all DACS besides BTSX, which back then was already considered the major DAC, was thought to be allocated to AGS-after-Feb28th-donators and PTS holders (at the respective Snapshot date post Feb28th), 12,3% is a disappointment.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 10:24:49 am by delulo »

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
If PTS + AGS got 20% then they shouldn't be airdropped half a billion BTS.  So 10% is reasonable.

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
Hackfisher seems to think that PTS and AGS are being eliminated and so 10% is fair.

I don't know if this is considered to be fair by the community, but I find it absurd. Post Feb. 28 donors are continually getting the short end of the stick. While bearing a significant portion of the risk. I have a position in BTS and PTS as well, but the AGS donations are what has brought us this far, and it seems like that's not being recognized here.

35% BTS
10% PTS
10% AGS
20% Crowd sale
15% Marketing
10% Reserve

I agree that it should be more. I don't see why BTS should get 35% as that seems ridiculous. I think PTS and AGS should get 20%.

What is the point of 10% reserve? Reserve for what?
+5%
I completely agree with luckybit and the OP.
Some here do not see that there is a difference in honoring AGS/PTS through BTSX/BTS since those are only the pre Feb28 holders/donatores.
I also have donated more post feb28 to AGS since I thought the consensus was that this is the best way to get into DACS like Music, PLAY etc...
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 08:25:37 am by delulo »

sumantso

  • Guest
If what funds were used is the question, then only AGS would get it - not even PTS. So make it 55% AGS and be done with it ;D

If the reserve can be removed and BTS made 45%, that would mean PTS and AGS effectively get 15% each. Or it can be made 15% each directly, and use a pre-merger snapshot or only drop on non-vested BTS.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Early adopters? You have seen nothing yet!
In a surprising twist of events they will get all their PTS back! Just watch! ;D

Yes.

It is ridiculous for any early AGS/PTS adopters to complain in any way about the events that have occurred.  They made out so well in the deal, and yet they still bitch about 'the loss of the social contract'. 


At this point, what we need is for BTS to go back up, so that everyone will be making money again and we can get past the hurt feelings. :)

I don't think you can say early adopters gained so much when everyone posting here is still an early adopter. What exactly was gained when the only successful DAC so far is Bitshares X?

Bitshares PLAY isn't released yet. Bitshares VOTE isn't released yet. Bitshares DNS/KeyID and all these other DACs haven't proven themselves yet. So at this point everyone here is taking a lot of risk without any guarantee of success.

You could say people who donated AGS has got an equal amount of value back but it's not like it just happened overnight either. It took almost a year in time to go from where it was to where it is now. You have to factor in opportunity cost as people held AGS which in my opinion had to be quite high.

I think while it is important to satisfy the new comers I don't think it should be at the expense of the people who were a part of the community class of 2013. I think the conflict comes when you benefit the present class at the expense of the previous class. While you do need to offer enough incentive to the present class to get them to give the same or even better effort than the community class of 2013 I also think you should make sure the community class of 2013 has a sense that they will be okay.

The current price volatility and downward pressure is the main reason there are these sorts of conflicts. It's also a problem because all the DACs you talk about which got funded by AGS aren't actually being released yet. If Bitshares PLAY were released and AGS patrons were made whole then I don't think there would be any complaining but because it's not released and the numbers keep changing this presents the wrong sort of uncertainty.

I would say put a little bit more into PTS/AGS. Maybe take 10% from BTS so that BTS is 25% and take the 10% in reserve and give that to PTS/AGS.

PTS/AGS should be 20% each. No reserve and 25% for BTS. I think those changes would make everyone feel a bit more secure and happy. I think mainly because there isn't a reason to have a reserve which has not been justified. BTS can be justified as being worth more than PTS though so I can understand giving 25% to BTS.
I agree that it should be more. I don't see why BTS should get 35% as that seems ridiculous. I think PTS and AGS should get 20%.

What is the point of 10% reserve? Reserve for what?

Agreed. IMHO, PTS/AGS 15% and BTS 20% seems more fair.

Negotiable but I think because of the risks of the 2013 community being so high (what was the price of Bitcoin when people invested in 2013 compared to people donating now?) there should be some recognition of the risk and the fact that frankly people who had to donate way back then had to wait for many months to get to this point while people who donate today already know Bitshares X is able to work so they don't take the same risk.

Importance shouldn't just be about risk but the amount of risk taken can allow you to measure the commitment. If someone for example donates during a crowd sale then of course they'll be taking less risk now that Bitshares toolkit is written, and Bitshares X is proven. I do think rewarding BTS makes sense when compared to rewarding PTS because a lot of PTS may have been centralized around a small group of elite miners in the end.

The majority of the people who mined PTS will probably be the ones who sell BTS and also if you're intending to help the BTS price rise you would want a more universal distribution of shares across a large population. This means it is better if everyone has a smaller stake than if a few people have very large stakes in terms of volatility and I believe the Gini coefficient is how you can measure that. You want the statistics to look right early on at the foundation so everyone is equally motivated to push the DAC to be a success and it's very difficult to do this when you have PTSers who might have mined in order to pump and dump all DACs.

Reference
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 06:43:19 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
I agree that it should be more. I don't see why BTS should get 35% as that seems ridiculous. I think PTS and AGS should get 20%.

What is the point of 10% reserve? Reserve for what?

Agreed. IMHO, PTS/AGS 15% and BTS 20% seems more fair.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Hackfisher seems to think that PTS and AGS are being eliminated and so 10% is fair.

I don't know if this is considered to be fair by the community, but I find it absurd. Post Feb. 28 donors are continually getting the short end of the stick. While bearing a significant portion of the risk. I have a position in BTS and PTS as well, but the AGS donations are what has brought us this far, and it seems like that's not being recognized here.

35% BTS
10% PTS
10% AGS
20% Crowd sale
15% Marketing
10% Reserve

I agree that it should be more. I don't see why BTS should get 35% as that seems ridiculous. I think PTS and AGS should get 20%.

What is the point of 10% reserve? Reserve for what?
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline HackFisher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
    • View Profile
I think Hackfisher is under the impression that AGS and PTS have been merged and so 10% is more than enough.

I think you are under the impression that the social consensus wasnt actually "10% to PTS and AGS", but was instead "We pretend we only expect 10%, but really we expect like 40% or else we will bitch about it".

And 35% to BTS based on what? Based upon the idea that AGS is being merged?
AGS was never merged and the social consensus was not changed. If 3rd parties are misunderstanding this point is this not relevant? I understand you don't want to address this point. But it remains.

Sorry about the confusion, PLAY honor 35% to BTS because it learn most from BTS team, and very grateful to their contribution to the codebase. And BTS represent their interest/effort directly to some extend.
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 Riverhead

Dude just stop. You guys are lucky to get anything from PTS, as you already have BTS from the last snapshot on the 5th so you are double dipping. You get 10% from PTS AND 35% of your BTS from your last snapshot.

It's not about me. Like I said, I barely had any PTS. I've vented. I feel better...moving on.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
In my opinion, dropping 20% to BTS is the new social contract, and PTS and AGS holders ought receive no more. If they do, then it's a favor they are given. So, you should stop bitching.

Truly, I thought this was a big point of the merger. PTS and AGS were bought out with one final snapshot. Except that maybe it wasn't final.

A consensus about the new Social Consensus would be good. Anyone up for doing a poll?

Offline bytemaster

Dude just stop. You guys are lucky to get anything from PTS, as you already have BTS from the last snapshot on the 5th so you are double dipping. You get 10% from PTS AND 35% of your BTS from your last snapshot.

13.5% is the new total.... if you just consider the most recent snapshot from November 5th.
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 islandking

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • The king of the island
    • View Profile
Dude just stop. You guys are lucky to get anything from PTS, as you already have BTS from the last snapshot on the 5th so you are double dipping. You get 10% from PTS AND 35% of your BTS from your last snapshot.
I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. - Satoshi

Offline Riverhead

I will say this: it's not boring :).

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk