Author Topic: PTS - the insane gift that keeps on giving!  (Read 26629 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nomoreheroes7

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • King of all the land
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nomoreheroes7
Well said rune. It's pretty shocking to me that the devs still haven't realized just how bad of an idea sharedropping DVS to them really was. What can you do except vote against it I guess, but I doubt that'll have an impact at this point.

Sometimes it truly does feel like the devs don't have the full interests of BTS in mind...as matt608 put it, they're freelancing to help competitor chains -- PTS in this instance.

What a joke.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2014, 02:33:49 pm by nomoreheroes7 »

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Anyway there's no reason to panic about this. PTS isn't a big deal, and I personally don't believe in the idea that separate DACS have any advantage (beyond DVS), so sharedrops will likely not mean much in the future. I guess the fact that DVS is the only viable separate DAC is why it's actually pretty damn annoying that PTS and AGS got DVS sharedropped.

Maybe we should demand that our delegates only use a new 100% BTS sharedropped testnet for testing. They do work for us after all. 3rd party devs are free to use whichever testnet they prefer then, the current PTS/AGS testnet already exists and won't go away.

Offline islandking

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • The king of the island
    • View Profile
To give an example of how negative it is for our community that PTS continues existing, the chinese translation of the official newsletter has decided to completely censor this because they know how terrible PR it is that circumstances once again are going to change.

The new PTS is a competitor to the bitshares community itself. It's not like PLAY or MUSIC, it is like NXT. It should not gain any official recognition or support by bitshares delegates, just like NXT doesn't get this.

There's no evidence that PTS gives good PR to BTS. On the contrary it's pretty clear that it's a sore thumb that pisses off a lot of people in this community, and once again, shouldn't be recognized the same way NXT recognized.

Sharedropping DVS to PTS/AGS post-buyout was just a terrible idea that was obviously bad for bitshares and i wish the bitshares delegates in charge of that decision will assure the community bad decisions like that won't happen again.


 +5% Well said. PTS is a threat to the BTS brand and is causing brand confusion. It is splitting up our community and dividing our network effect between 2 DPOS systems. Investors are ticked off on how much special treatment PTS is getting even though we already bought them out!
I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. - Satoshi

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
To give an example of how negative it is for our community that PTS continues existing, the chinese translation of the official newsletter has decided to completely censor this because they know how terrible PR it is that circumstances once again are going to change.

The new PTS is a competitor to the bitshares community itself. It's not like PLAY or MUSIC, it is like NXT. It should not gain any official recognition or support by bitshares delegates, just like NXT doesn't get this.

There's no evidence that PTS gives good PR to BTS. On the contrary it's pretty clear that it's a sore thumb that pisses off a lot of people in this community, and once again, shouldn't be recognized the same way NXT isn't recognized.

Sharedropping DVS to PTS/AGS post-buyout was just a terrible idea that was obviously bad for bitshares and i wish the bitshares delegates in charge of that decision will assure the community bad decisions like that won't happen again.

« Last Edit: December 24, 2014, 01:38:40 pm by Rune »

Offline BTSdac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: K1
We decided to kill PTS and integrate the value of PTS into BTS, and now you told us that you support the reborn PTS just as you support PLAY and MUSIC? Funny...

Please post a link to where we decided any such thing.

The concept of merging PTS and AGS was brought up as a proposal for discussion but the idea of such a merger did not reach consensus.  The whole discussion lasted but a few days and the idea was abandoned, as many are after strongly opposing community input.  Several other ideas were vigorously discussed.

After another week of consideration, the final official decision was to do a slightly unusual sharedrop on PTS/AGS as described in the October newsletter which documented that decision and explained our reasoning.  We indicated at that time that PTS and AGS would remain unchanged by us and might have utility for third party developers.  Our exact words were: 

"They also remain compelling demographics for third party developers to target in their share drops."

The net affect was that BM would henceforth be free to meet his duty to produce value for holders of PTS and AGS by focusing on growing BTS.  That was the reason for honoring the PTS and AGS demographics who had acquired their positions with expectations of participating in all future BM efforts.

Meanwhile, BM has indicated a desire to make DevShares a test bed useful for a wide cross-section of DPOS developers.  Hence, we chose to honor the wider group of demographics to maximize the number of people with a stake in its success

This is the main essential purpose of a share drop.  "Fairness" ends when a group gets their 10%.  After that, it's all about maximizing the union of all relevant demographics.

 :)
keep thing simple ,investor does not like complicated thing with so many change
github.com :pureland
BTS2.0 API :ws://139.196.37.179:8091
BTS2.0 API 数据源ws://139.196.37.179:8091

Offline Agent86

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • BTSX: agent86
    • View Profile
You just hit on maybe the Very Best Reason (that is, if I had actually been the one to think of it.  :) )

Every time a sharedrop on PTS happens it jumps significantly higher on coinmarketcap.
Big assets with lots of market cap inertia can't do that.

It's like running up a flag on the CMC front page that something has been announced.
Free advertising - everyone on CMC checks to see what new DAC is being born.
And the developer who made the announcement has a chance to invest early and benefit from the bounce as a small vote of confidence - if she has a good case.

There is no better way in the world for her to get such an effect.
And that is probably why smart developers will consider PTS as a useful tool for a long time to come.

Disclaimer:  This is not a promotion of PTS.  This is me contributing to further development of BitShares Sharedrop Theory.    Gotta call it like I see it.
I don't know if I'm following this new "sharedrop theory" Stan.  I think the "advertisement" from a jump in PTS price is short-lived and devs are allowed to give themselves stake if they want, rather than buying into PTS and then sharedropping on PTS.

Reviewing sharedrop theory:

Allocations are not selected to be "fair", they are selected to attract the greatest amount of interest possible to a new offering.

You get share-dropped on in proportion to the perceived value of the demographic your coin represents.  It's the developer's choice.  It would be just as legitimate to do 10/10/10/10/10/10...10 and attract 10 diverse demographics, seven of which "deserve" nothing.

The simplest logic is to treat all three groups the same because they overlap anyway. This minimizes (obviously it does not eliminate) arguments about percentages.  All three groups get more than they "deserve".  :)

If you still want to argue, argue why your favorite demographic would give a bigger boost to the new DAC if its share of that DAC was somehow just a bit bigger.
I also have to disagree about "Allocations are not selected to be "fair""

I think fairness and/or perceived fairness are very important.  I think we need to do a better job of clearly communicating the logic behind these things, otherwise no one will take any sort of social consensus seriously.

If this was the Devshares distribution thought to "minimize arguing" then I think we are not paying close enough attention.  This push-back was not a surprise to me and I made the exact same arguments against a big AGS/PTS drop that matt608 has been making and I said that this would be the reaction.  I just think it's being "tone-deaf" to how people interpret things or sloppy communication.  I also think these decisions related to allocations seem to be "spur of the moment" when they are reasonably important decisions and can have a big affect on how people feel about a project.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
You just hit on maybe the Very Best Reason (that is, if I had actually been the one to think of it.  :) )

Every time a sharedrop on PTS happens it jumps significantly higher on coinmarketcap.
Big assets with lots of market cap inertia can't do that.

It's like running up a flag on the CMC front page that something has been announced.
Free advertising - everyone on CMC checks to see what new DAC is being born.
And the developer who made the announcement has a chance to invest early and benefit from the bounce as a small vote of confidence - if she has a good case.

There is no better way in the world for her to get such an effect.
And that is probably why smart developers will consider PTS as a useful tool for a long time to come.

Disclaimer:  This is not a promotion of PTS.  This is me contributing to further development of BitShares Sharedrop Theory.    Gotta call it like I see it.

Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
I own PTS as I really like the concept of a no inflation crypto-currency even though I expect PTS will struggle without direct funding and support.

I don't know how many independent 3rd parties will want to drop on either, but from a cynical perspective, whenever  a developer announces a sharedrop allocation they have a form of inside information, and therefore an opportunity to profit.

If you are going to announce a DAC distribution for something you think the market will give a reasonable value, then you can be reasonably confident that a <$5 million DAC will respond positively to the news vs. a large DAC who's overall value may not move noticeably.

Devs can also acquire a larger % long term stake for less by share dropping on a lower stake coin.

Therefore it's very likely some developers will continue to sharedrop on DAC supportive lower CAP coins too. PTS will be the market leader in that price range as it has proven to be a market acceptable sharedrop token.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2014, 11:20:44 pm by Empirical1.1 »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
We decided to kill PTS and integrate the value of PTS into BTS, and now you told us that you support the reborn PTS just as you support PLAY and MUSIC? Funny...

Please post a link to where we decided any such thing.

The concept of merging PTS and AGS was brought up as a proposal for discussion but the idea of such a merger did not reach consensus.  The whole discussion lasted but a few days and the idea was abandoned, as many are after strongly opposing community input.  Several other ideas were vigorously discussed.

After another week of consideration, the final official decision was to do a slightly unusual sharedrop on PTS/AGS as described in the October newsletter which documented that decision and explained our reasoning.  We indicated at that time that PTS and AGS would remain unchanged by us and might have utility for third party developers.  Our exact words were: 

"They also remain compelling demographics for third party developers to target in their share drops."

The net affect was that BM would henceforth be free to meet his duty to produce value for holders of PTS and AGS by focusing on growing BTS.  That was the reason for honoring the PTS and AGS demographics who had acquired their positions with expectations of participating in all future BM efforts.

Meanwhile, BM has indicated a desire to make DevShares a test bed useful for a wide cross-section of DPOS developers.  Hence, we chose to honor the wider group of demographics to maximize the number of people with a stake in its success

This is the main essential purpose of a share drop.  "Fairness" ends when a group gets their 10%.  After that, it's all about maximizing the union of all relevant demographics.

 :)

Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline ripplexiaoshan

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2300
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: jademont
We decided to kill PTS and integrate the value of PTS into BTS, and now you told us that you support the reborn PTS just as you support PLAY and MUSIC? Funny...
BTS committee member:jademont

Offline graffenwalder

Ok, since Stan is already a winner, I'll send your 5 BITUSD to BM payroll.
I don't think your message will fit in the memo though

Offline jshow5555

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
This forum has been very entertaining lately.

And in the Christmas Spirit, I'll be giving away 10 * 5 BITUSD in the next couple of days.

Congratulations jshow5555 you're the first winner. PM me your BTSAccount and I'll send you your price. (If you have one)

I own much of my PTS fortune to 2 people, so send the tip to:

stan.delegate.xeldal or bm.payroll.riverhead with Memo: Thx for all you do for PTS!


PS
 *alphaBar* step up your game! You have huge shoes to fill. We, the PTS community, care about $$$ and $ alone! We are still waiting on the first sharedrop, we are used to huge returns, man!

Offline graffenwalder

This forum has been very entertaining lately.

And in the Christmas Spirit, I'll be giving away 10 * 5 BITUSD in the next couple of days.

Congratulations jshow5555 you're the first winner. PM me your BTSAccount and I'll send you your price. (If you have one)

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
This is a sarcastic attempt at saying PTS is still getting unfair rewards after they diluted BTS 25%.

I fully agree, PTS and AGS should not exist anymore. We paid millions of dollars for their features to be rolled into BTS. Its simply not fair that they continue to get sharedrops, unless we also take the diluted 25% back.

But isn't that exactly the beauty of a free market solution? Third parties are free to allocate in a way that they feel brings the most value for their system. And if that includes AGS/PTS then great, so be it. Why don't you go ahead and invest in PTS then?
And if BTS brings more advantages as an airdrop target than PTS, then free market will figure it out either ways.

My problem is that dan, stan and others who have a fiduciary duty to BTS holders are promoting them, and that this board still has a PTS subforum. In the eyes of BTS holders, PTS should no longer exist. We paid explicitly to buy them out, and they should not get any support from the BTS community. If they still want to be the official bitshares sharedrop DAC, then the 25% dilution of our money that they received should be revoked.

They should rename it ZombieCoin. As far as support, I think the new PTS conveniently solved a key problem for I3. Perhaps it's a 'support and let die' thing. But I fully agree with you. The merger plan dealt with PTS once and for all and that should have been it. We'll see what the market says.

Offline nomoreheroes7

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • King of all the land
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nomoreheroes7

 +5% 

Do we have any volunteer devs to re-start DVS with a new fork with 100% drop on BTS?  That would make it the official BitShares test chain because BTS is BitShares and would have the full support of the BitShares community.

It's a complete fallacy to say that dropping on all 3 is best for DevShares.  Why do we want what is best for DevShares?  If it's not 100% snapshot its a competitor for capital.  It's in the same crypto speculation market.  Some people will buy fewer BitShares to buy DevShares too, or just DevShares.  If Devshare's value to BitShares is divided by 3, then the sharedropping of it over PTS + AGS has to bring a minimum of 3x the value to DevShares that dropping on BitShares alone would do.  Are devs telling me that dropping on PTS + AGS will make DVS 3x more valuable than if it was on just BTS?

I don't think anyone believes that.

The sharedrop on PTS + AGS equates to giving BTS away.  Giving BTS away, is not something the voters have agreed to pay you to do.   

Summary:  Reducing BTS stake in DevShares means PTS + AGS must bring more value to BTS holders than the reduction, which they don't.  Unless the devs aren't working for BTS, and are "freelancers" who work for whatever chain they like, in which case, there's a conflict of interest at the top of BitShares leadership, which I thought we resolved.

This deserves its own thread. It's bad enough that we have to put up with PTS beating its chest that it's now "the official third-party sharedrop instrument of the BitShares community, with full support from the devs!!!", but to see AGS/PTS continue to receive allocations from official BTS DACs...when does the madness end?