Delegate Sponsorships

[fuzzy]

Oh and to Julian.  The Server costs (currently) are minimal (though over the past year I have likely paid enough to almost buy another 21551.7241 BTS (approx 1/12th my current holdings)), but will grow when more people are joining and being more active.  This will happen as the community grows (which I have no doubt it will if what I am hearing about the marketing push is legitimate). 

It is not only about the server fees, however...it is also about the time it has taken and the fact that this can be a very stressful job (I won't get into why because those who have been around long enough know very well why). 

I am very glad for the open discussion and even for the points that others make with which I am in currently 100% disagreement--it helps us grow and recognize the landscape--and potentially even makes a point that changes my outlook completely.  I have not seen any of those arguments yet. 

However, I really hope people will stop saying I am a thief...or that I am enabling a thief.  This is simply ridiculous.  If you know me, you know that when I perceive corruption coming to my doorstep I get out a fucking shotgun.  How valuable is that worth?  I do not know.  If it isn't worth much, perhaps the community should band together and do something similar without me because that means I am spending enough time doing something lacking value that my time would be best spent elsewhere.

I have no problems with that if people honestly think it is the best route....because I'll just go get the job I turned down and pump a 1000 extra bucks a month into investing in crypto I believe in (without having to prove why I should be paid, keeping books and having to deal with crazy IRS shit that will likely require I pay out half my pay to tax specialists).

If these are donations...many of these issues go away.  Like it or not...there IS a case for what I am proposing.

DPOS----the only Truly political blockchain tech.  Gotta love it!

[fuzzy]

I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK

OMG...tonyK , you still on this topic ?

I hate to break this to you , even if the original plan wasn't going to give share to the Long and Short orders , the 35% for BTS is still the same , just divided by different BTSer . So , if you think someone's benefiting from the original plan , it wasn't fuzz , it was the other BTSer who didn't long and short . The 35% for BTS is still the same amount no matter the plan allocate the 35% to whom.

If somehow it was stealing (which it wasn't) , it was one BTSer to another BTSer , not to fuzz .

So , would you please let Fuzz off the hook ?

Right WildPid,
It is still the same:

Great believers: 0%
Average holders: +500%

AS long as those 2 categories add up to 100% we are fine? NO?

OK if not the stolen funds (or at least 1% of them are donated to fuzz to make this allocation sound GREAAAAT)

PS
Do not play dump WildPig, you know full well what is going on.

Since this is apparently important enough to Tony to hijack this thread with something that is not even on point, let me clear this up. 

The funds I was "given" are specifically for a tournament that provides rewards for users to do outreach (aka work) outside our community to build their own team.  This means they have to recruit (aka work) and practice playing a game to have a chance at the final pot. 

These funds were Designated for this kind of thing...so it is not "stealing" from you.  Out of all people, Tony, it is actually getting frustrating for you to use that word with me.  I have stolen nothing from you---in fact I have worked my ass off for a total of 15 hours already just editing the 2 hangouts between Hackfisher and the community (and been paid nothing for it).  It will also require me to likely make a website, embed a twitch.tv stream among other things (all coming out of pocket) to allow people to watch.  There is far more to this than meets the eye...so please, please stop calling this stealing or I might actually---finally get pissed off and start using similar wording with you.

P.S.  If you would like to work for a chance at receiving some of these "stolen" funds, please do so and I will gladly help you out.  I will also make sure keep the record of events open and transparent for all involved.   I will likely be working too much on the behind the scenes to have this opportunity myself, unfortunately, so I suppose those stolen funds will not benefit me in any significant way... :/  Damn I am a bad thief...

ok  , dig dirt is a strong word ....It'ts better called "tough audit".

Tough audits are fine. What I'm worried about is seeing a lot of baseless or irrelevant accusations made that waste a lot of time for people. aka politics.

Politics is a central aspect of this system.  We either choose that or Rule by Machine.  I choose to let it get dirty and force people to evolve to the changing environment as opposed to giving them more of a reason to be "apathetic"...

We have a choice moving forward into the future with this technology---are people going to control it or is it going to control people?  I choose the first option.

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

If I turn around and unfairly stick up for a person, that doesn't keep anyone else from standing up and stating their points...or giving facts that prove me wrong.  In fact, the Mumble Server is probably one of the BEST places in this entire ecosystem to bring this stuff up because you can be certain it is me and not some shell account. 

Though I understand everyone's concern...these delegate slates are eventually going to give kickbacks (read incentives) anyway---but most likely they will not be transparent as I am trying to be.

I do NOT have the time to run a damned delegate.  I do not have the technical expertise to run it at scale.  If I focus my efforts on this, I lose time to do the other stuff I and my team are providing the community--and have been providing since before most people even arrived here. 

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

so , we can change the slate to a different dynamic .
The slate act like a media , no bias what so ever , just take donation , and promote the ideas of the delegates . If a delegate Toast wants to promote , the slate can help him ; If another delegate wants to dig dirt on Toast , the slate can help him to gather down votes to kick Toast out thus the delegate can be moved up by default .

Is this better ? just like all the televisions in political elections .

I don't think you are following the conversation in the same way I am.  Tony is arguing against paying people for spots on their slate.  Fuz has a point that this will happen behind the scenes anyway in the longrun, so his transparent uhh donation requests do nothing harmful.  Everyone else is disliking the precedent set by this which appears to be in agreement with you.

It's easy to solve this problem ... multiple slates , people can choose what slate they want to follow , the one slate owner can be bought and paid for ,  but there are 50,100+ different slate owners , there will be competition amount slates , force most of the slate owners to do the right thing .

Just like media competition , do you even worry about some "good guy" they said on TV isn't that good at all ? No worries , if the guy wasn't good , other TV media would dig that to make their news .

This is exactly my point right...here ^

However...in order to do this, we need to make it COMPLETELY accessible for anyone to have a delegate slate set up and easily put into their forum signature or embedded on their personal websites.

I recently read a thread on voter apathy: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=11379.0 

This is precisely the kind of thing that will fix that.  We can even have delegate hangouts and enable people like TonyK to do hit-pieces on people (and even get paid for it if community members believe what he is saying is easily backed up by facts!)

But the fact remains.  People do not have to vote for this slate...having a slate diversifies my risk while making it so I do not have to depend on any single person to run a delegate for me (which could also put me in a very bad position), or choose to step away completely (because without doing what I am currently doing, I will have no chance of getting in a delegate spot anyway). 

Of course, this does not mean that people HAVE to "pay me" to be on the Mumble Delegate Slot, but if they are genuinely ethical individuals (Riverhead comes to mind) and want their delegate to be seen as one of the EPIC Foundational delegates that supported the open Town Hall format discussions and the vast (freely available--to anyone) Historical Archive of our open source revolution that it will someday represent, then it is a very good investment to donate to the project.

The "tipping" model doesn't work (if you have tipped me, please let me know because I am only aware of 3-4 people over the past year), and the current voting model does not work.  I recently turned down a job making twice as much as I currently make but I turned it down because it would leave a pretty terrible void with the current absense of marketing (which is why the Mumble was brought online in the first place---for those who were not here at the time).  I love this community and want to help it in any way I can, but I do need to keep the beasts at home at bay and prove that all this effort has started bearing fruit (at some point in the next couple months). 

I see no difference in letting someone run a delegate for me or having people donate a slight amount every month (which will likely give me LESS than running my own delegate overall, mind you) and having a delegate slate that rewards those who pass the community's smell test. 

If people dislike one of the choices, I have no doubt they will rake and claw against the audio recorder during mumble sessions until they are heard.  They will be able to give their reasons (facts) and the community can choose to openly say "i am going to downvote that person".  I assure you if this happens and I receive a great deal of this kind of input, then the person will quickly be taken off the slate (why the hell would I keep them on if their being there destroys the trust I have gained?)

[FreeTrade]

ok  , dig dirt is a strong word ....It'ts better called "tough audit".

Tough audits are fine. What I'm worried about is seeing a lot of baseless or irrelevant accusations made that waste a lot of time for people. aka politics.

[btswildpig]

hmm.... I was planing running a media empire in the BTS world .....
I can accept donations to dig dirt on any delegates to offset those who promote them   

This is likely to become a thing. It'll be very distracting for devs and other people creating value.

To minimize this, I'm recommending we keep the politics at the slate publisher (director) level. That way we'll have directors to keep each other accountable, but we won't have the unedifying spectacle of devs sniping at each other.
 
Proposed model is - Devs to convince directors and directors to convince shareholders. Doesn't require any code/protocol changes, but default GUI should be changed to reflect it.

ok  , dig dirt is a strong word ....It'ts better called "tough audit".

[FreeTrade]

hmm.... I was planing running a media empire in the BTS world .....
I can accept donations to dig dirt on any delegates to offset those who promote them   

This is likely to become a thing. It'll be very distracting for devs and other people creating value.

To minimize this, I'm recommending we keep the politics at the slate publisher (director) level. That way we'll have directors to keep each other accountable, but we won't have the unedifying spectacle of devs sniping at each other.
 
Proposed model is - Devs to convince directors and directors to convince shareholders. Doesn't require any code/protocol changes, but default GUI should be changed to reflect it.

[zerosum]

Fuz, no kickbacks.

Fuz, make your delegate and promote it on the mumble server, people will support you as you are the mumble server and beyond bitcoin x.

I will probably spend months kicking my butt for this but,   eagleeye.
Eagleeye is right on this rare occasion.

[btswildpig]

It's easy to solve this problem ... multiple slates , people can choose what slate they want to follow , the one slate owner can be bought and paid for ,  but there are 50,100+ different slate owners , there will be competition amount slates , force most of the slate owners to do the right thing .

Just like media competition , do you even worry about some "good guy" they said on TV isn't that good at all ? No worries , if the guy wasn't good , other TV media would dig that to make their news .

Sure, but that doesn't mean people won't or shouldn't complain about the process until it comes to the conclusion you give.

hmm.... I was planing running a media empire in the BTS world .....
I can accept donations to dig dirt on any delegates to offset those who promote them   

[eagleeye]

Fuz, no kickbacks.

Fuz, make your delegate and promote it on the mumble server, people will support you as you are the mumble server and beyond bitcoin x.

Fuz, make a delegate slate and get people to donate based on what spot they get, not an ongoing percentage of income, but you get paid if they take first spot.  In the future we vote in which spots which delegates get based on technology (I know how to do this, and you with/orwithout me will be able to know how to do this)

Fuz, make it completely democratic but remember mumble is like TV people must pay you to be promoted on it.  Just remember your avenue will stay up as long as you stay uncorrupt.  If you take a percentage of delegates you will open yourself up to corruption.

Fuz, you rock.  End of story.

[zerosum]

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

so , we can change the slate to a different dynamic .
The slate act like a media , no bias what so ever , just take donation , and promote the ideas of the delegates . If a delegate Toast wants to promote , the slate can help him ; If another delegate wants to dig dirt on Toast , the slate can help him to gather down votes to kick Toast out thus the delegate can be moved up by default .

Is this better ? just like all the televisions in political elections .

I don't think you are following the conversation in the same way I am.  Tony is arguing against paying people for spots on their slate.  Fuz has a point that this will happen behind the scenes anyway in the longrun, so his transparent uhh donation requests do nothing harmful.  Everyone else is disliking the precedent set by this which appears to be in agreement with you.

edit - So in Tony's example as to why this might be a bad idea, he took the moment to bring out his feeling of being wronged by hackfisher.  I think Tony is in a pretty grumpy mood tonight.   I would prefer he didn't say scam either, because that implies someone is being misled/cheated.

Gamey decide to bring in what mood I am tonight. (I will decide  if this is a good argument or not... tomorrow).

I've preferred, I did not use the word scam... I should have used 'lazy' or 'incompetent' instead... I only chose scammer as it seams easier to defend...



And on the 'pay for slate' issue - I do not believe I will change my opinion anytime soon...

"It is a laughable idea!"    Giving PLAYS [stolen from me] will make you included in the slate but...

[gamey]

It's easy to solve this problem ... multiple slates , people can choose what slate they want to follow , the one slate owner can be bought and paid for ,  but there are 50,100+ different slate owners , there will be competition amount slates , force most of the slate owners to do the right thing .

Just like media competition , do you even worry about some "good guy" they said on TV isn't that good at all ? No worries , if the guy wasn't good , other TV media would dig that to make their news .

Sure, but that doesn't mean people won't or shouldn't complain about the process until it comes to the conclusion you give.

[btswildpig]

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

so , we can change the slate to a different dynamic .
The slate act like a media , no bias what so ever , just take donation , and promote the ideas of the delegates . If a delegate Toast wants to promote , the slate can help him ; If another delegate wants to dig dirt on Toast , the slate can help him to gather down votes to kick Toast out thus the delegate can be moved up by default .

Is this better ? just like all the televisions in political elections .

I don't think you are following the conversation in the same way I am.  Tony is arguing against paying people for spots on their slate.  Fuz has a point that this will happen behind the scenes anyway in the longrun, so his transparent uhh donation requests do nothing harmful.  Everyone else is disliking the precedent set by this which appears to be in agreement with you.

It's easy to solve this problem ... multiple slates , people can choose what slate they want to follow , the one slate owner can be bought and paid for ,  but there are 50,100+ different slate owners , there will be competition amount slates , force most of the slate owners to do the right thing .

Just like media competition , do you even worry about some "good guy" they said on TV isn't that good at all ? No worries , if the guy wasn't good , other TV media would dig that to make their news .

[gamey]

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

so , we can change the slate to a different dynamic .
The slate act like a media , no bias what so ever , just take donation , and promote the ideas of the delegates . If a delegate Toast wants to promote , the slate can help him ; If another delegate wants to dig dirt on Toast , the slate can help him to gather down votes to kick Toast out thus the delegate can be moved up by default .

Is this better ? just like all the televisions in political elections .

I don't think you are following the conversation in the same way I am.  Tony is arguing against paying people for spots on their slate.  Fuz has a point that this will happen behind the scenes anyway in the longrun, so his transparent uhh donation requests do nothing harmful.  Everyone else is disliking the precedent set by this which appears to be in agreement with you.

edit - So in Tony's example as to why this might be a bad idea, he took the moment to bring out his feeling of being wronged by hackfisher.  I think Tony is in a pretty grumpy mood tonight.   I would prefer he didn't say scam either, because that implies someone is being misled/cheated.

[btswildpig]

Something feels wrong is far different from a scam .

Of course , now that I see your words and reactions for a simple allocation plan that nearly cost you nothing in the first place , do any of the western people wonder why the Chinese are so furious about the big changes cost them a great lost and even performed some personal attacks on the developers ?

Just so you're clear , when you accused some project was a scam , you were essentially accusing the other supporter for the project being scammers .

End of discussion with you .... No point in that anymore . By your standard , I think I've been scammed so many times that I can't even remember. The Bitcoin mining allocation with low difficulty in the beginning is the most scam of all time . 

I agree Tony shouldn't use the word scam in a general sense but you also shouldn't think that "western people" are all thinking in some specific way and are happy to have lost money.  That is silly.. possibly racist.. and not productive on any level.  I can speak for this western person and I'm not happy having lost money either.

I still think inflation increases longterm chances of success.  99% of the community seems to think people will just volunteer to build out ecosystem and their initial investment should cover it.

Ok , maybe my English is not that good than I thought ... By "do any of the western people wonder xxxx" , I meant "Do any of them don't understand the Chinese's irrational posts last month" , I was pointing out those who don't understand (the word any is for this kind of grammar right ?)should take TonyK's reaction as an example ....   so they might understand  .

[zerosum]

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

Yes [or is it 'No, I do not blame fuzz' in English, but anyway], I do not blame fuzz... as in he was the tool in somebody's masterplan.

[btswildpig]

Before this goes further, Tony was using it as an example of what can happen when you do kickbacks and how things can be misconstrued.

If someone gives Fuzz 1 million play shares (even if fuz turns around and gives them all away) then there is a problem that Fuzz might unfairly stick up for this person.  Tony used a real life example I think, but I don't think he is blaming Fuzz for anything directly.  It is all an attack on Hackfisher's decision on the nature of the BTS drop.

so , we can change the slate to a different dynamic .
The slate act like a media , no bias what so ever , just take donation , and promote the ideas of the delegates . If a delegate Toast wants to promote , the slate can help him ; If another delegate wants to dig dirt on Toast , the slate can help him to gather down votes to kick Toast out thus the delegate can be moved up by default .

Is this better ? just like all the televisions in political elections .