The worth of Stan's contribution to BitShares

[eagleeye]

Anyways maybe this is not a sad circumstance and I believe I should be targetted next on the forum for my opinions/comments/responses and sadly my disrespectful interruptions on the last mumble server.  If you want to target me, go for it but I will be honest with you the post will be spammed, I have a lot of time on my hand and I will respond to many of the opinions meaning I am going to make multiple back to back posts because I am not so computer literate and dont know how to multi-quote, stupid hu?  I know its so fucking stupid, fuck!  If you want to guide me to how to multi-quote do back to back quotes so I can put multiple quotes in 1 post im up for it I will listen not just hear.

Right click on "insert quote" and choose open link in a new tab. Open up all the quotes you want to quote in new tabs. Then, copy/paste each of them into the actual post. When you are finished, click Preview to make sure it looks right, then click Post.

If the quotes you want to quote are visible below when you click reply, you can just click 'insert quote' for anyone you want and it will add it to your reply.

Perfect bitsharesmarket, you rock, this is like a small lifehack, just opening up tabs, never thought about it, thank you very much will help

[ebit]

I trust stan.
May be we can more public developers reporting on activities report in monthly report(newsletter).
The newsletter is should placed in a prominent location in the Bitshares Forum and http://bitshares.org/.

[mint chocolate chip]

Anyways maybe this is not a sad circumstance and I believe I should be targetted next on the forum for my opinions/comments/responses and sadly my disrespectful interruptions on the last mumble server.  If you want to target me, go for it but I will be honest with you the post will be spammed, I have a lot of time on my hand and I will respond to many of the opinions meaning I am going to make multiple back to back posts because I am not so computer literate and dont know how to multi-quote, stupid hu?  I know its so fucking stupid, fuck!  If you want to guide me to how to multi-quote do back to back quotes so I can put multiple quotes in 1 post im up for it I will listen not just hear.

Right click on "insert quote" and choose open link in a new tab. Open up all the quotes you want to quote in new tabs. Then, copy/paste each of them into the actual post. When you are finished, click Preview to make sure it looks right, then click Post.

If the quotes you want to quote are visible below when you click reply, you can just click 'insert quote' for anyone you want and it will add it to your reply.

[eagleeye]

Thanks for all your kind words. 

My role on BitShares over the past 18 months has actually been quite modest. 

I work mostly behind the scenes.  My job involves dealing with business operations and other gatekeeper duties typically associated with a chief of staff role. I pay most of the crypto bills. I handle financial, legal and accounting interfaces, written communication functions, partnership negotiations and support, and helping people see the bright side whenever I can. 

Generally I try to take everything I can off Bytemaster’s hands
so he can focus on things that only he can do. 

Someday Bytemaster will find someone else he trusts to do those duties and I will be able to retire.  But it is hard to find someone you can trust to have your back in all situations, especially on the financial and legal fronts.  Until then, if I don’t do these functions he will have to find time to do them himself. 

If I’m the only one he trusts to walk his dog,
then by walking his dog I generate more Bytemaster time for the ecosystem. 

Thus, the value of my contribution is pretty much just the value of Bytemaster’s time saved for things that only he can do. 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

Sadly Stan has had to waste his time in this backlash why am I pointing this out because I talked to Stan prior to the mumble session (and for the first time ill be honest) and he said the exact same thing and that is what COOs do (Chief Operations Officers) they get off the load for the CEO (Chief Executive Officer).  I wouldnt even consider Dan in Stans esteem as CEO I would consider him a Chairman which is the highest position in an organization as it guides the highest direction of the organization, the organizations vision, as Stan (I know im going to be a dick saying this) may not have ever been in contact with a Chairman of this sorts and because Dans role may have changed now to Chairman and maybe Chairman/CEO position (a person can have 2 positions in management as the Chairman is on the board of directors and not really an active role in the company, as I said the main purpose of the Chairman is vision, and that is exactly what Dan Bytemaster is doing)

Anyways maybe this is not a sad circumstance and I believe I should be targetted next on the forum for my opinions/comments/responses and sadly my disrespectful interruptions on the last mumble server.  If you want to target me, go for it but I will be honest with you the post will be spammed, I have a lot of time on my hand and I will respond to many of the opinions meaning I am going to make multiple back to back posts because I am not so computer literate and dont know how to multi-quote, stupid hu?  I know its so fucking stupid, fuck!  If you want to guide me to how to multi-quote do back to back quotes so I can put multiple quotes in 1 post im up for it I will listen not just hear.

[jsidhu]

Stan has been a pleasant person to work with as a dev so far

[jamesc]

 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

I recommend the all loving Poodle...

It was an easy decision to vote for Stan and Dan. 

[BitshatKing]

Yes!  King Stan IS GREAT LEADER!

[Riverhead]

I briefly managed a team of 18 devs. My primary role could be described as removing barriers to productivity. In a way I worked for them.

However as much work as this was it was often hard to quantify at the end of a day.

The worth of Stan and Pam can be measured in dev productivity versus dealing with the larger issues of running an enterprise.

Keep it up Stan and Pam.

Sent from my Timex Sinclair

[charleshoskinson]

Stan is a founder of this project that has been critical to its inception and survival.

Being an I3 founder doesn't offer much protection.

This aside, Stan came up with the term DAC, has performed incredibly well under a lot of pressure, came up with the concept of protoshares will me back in 2013, and made countless other contributions. He's worth the money in my unsolicited opinion. Also Stan has a strong moral core that very few people in this space possess. Working with him for the brief time I was in Virgina was a tremendously fun and productive.

[merockstar]

I always assumed Stan was part of the brain trust that winds up bytemaster and makes him go. How do you quantify the value of his contribution to bytemaster's solutions over the past 1.5 years? Impossible to calculate, I think. Stan is a founder. How can you quibble with the salary of a foundational contributor that made this project happen in the first place? Not a productive or enlightening OP, in my opinion.

I disagree. Questions like this need to be asked, and I think the OP, Stan, and Dan all handled this thread well.

[GaltReport]

Thanks for all your kind words. 

My role on BitShares over the past 18 months has actually been quite modest. 

I work mostly behind the scenes.  My job involves dealing with business operations and other gatekeeper duties typically associated with a chief of staff role. I pay most of the crypto bills. I handle financial, legal and accounting interfaces, written communication functions, partnership negotiations and support, and helping people see the bright side whenever I can. 

Generally I try to take everything I can off Bytemaster’s hands
so he can focus on things that only he can do. 

Someday Bytemaster will find someone else he trusts to do those duties and I will be able to retire.  But it is hard to find someone you can trust to have your back in all situations, especially on the financial and legal fronts.  Until then, if I don’t do these functions he will have to find time to do them himself. 

If I’m the only one he trusts to walk his dog,
then by walking his dog I generate more Bytemaster time for the ecosystem. 

Thus, the value of my contribution is pretty much just the value of Bytemaster’s time saved for things that only he can do. 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

This is pretty much what I expected Stan was doing but it's good to see it stated clearly.  I think the confusion is only in lumping him in with developers rather than explaining his role in more detail.  He is more like a chief of staff and the compensation seems fair for that role.

[liondani]

it is not necessary to show our support here...  the best prove is how much votes he gets isn't it?  If you think he is worth, you already have vote for him...  His delegates place speaks for itself...  (and don't bring the argument he has bm votes because all active delegates have them too... so if you would subtract from all delegates his support, he would still stand on the first delegate spots ...)

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 997D

[pc]

Thank you Dan and Stan. This was the response that we all needed.

[fluxer555]

Thank you Dan and Stan. This was the response that we all needed.

[.yoshi]

Thank you both for the well reasoned responses. I have to admit I was expecting a gratuitous amounts of handwaving, as was nearly always the case when people would call out Brian Page, so forgive me for being skeptical. I am pleasantly surprised.

All paid delegates are going to have to get used to the fact they need to be more transparent in what they are specifically developing and the value they are adding to the network going forward.

This. So hard.

[werneo]

I always assumed Stan was part of the brain trust that winds up bytemaster and makes him go. How do you quantify the value of his contribution to bytemaster's solutions over the past 1.5 years? Impossible to calculate, I think. Stan is a founder. How can you quibble with the salary of a foundational contributor that made this project happen in the first place? Not a productive or enlightening OP, in my opinion.

[Overthetop]

I support Stan and Dan personally, just because  they are willing to take the risks to make the BTS vision become reality. and just this point is beyond measure with money.

[Empirical1.1]

Thanks for all your kind words. 

My role on BitShares over the past 18 months has actually been quite modest. 

I work mostly behind the scenes.  My job involves dealing with business operations and other gatekeeper duties typically associated with a chief of staff role. I pay most of the crypto bills. I handle financial, legal and accounting interfaces, written communication functions, partnership negotiations and support, and helping people see the bright side whenever I can. 

Generally I try to take everything I can off Bytemaster’s hands
so he can focus on things that only he can do. 

Someday Bytemaster will find someone else he trusts to do those duties and I will be able to retire.  But it is hard to find someone you can trust to have your back in all situations, especially on the financial and legal fronts.  Until then, if I don’t do these functions he will have to find time to do them himself. 

If I’m the only one he trusts to walk his dog,
then by walking his dog I generate more Bytemaster time for the ecosystem. 

Thus, the value of my contribution is pretty much just the value of Bytemaster’s time saved for things that only he can do. 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

Stan (and my mother, Pam) have been so critical for my own sanity that BitShares wouldn't be where it is today without them.   Most of their effort is behind the scenes, but if I had to sum it up in a single sentence:
   
  Their job is to keep me out of jail.   

How do they do this?   Careful accounting and hours and hours with lawyers and tax advisors.   

There is NO ONE ELSE at greater legal risk than Stan and Pam because they handle all of our books and Stan is actually an ACTIVE board member / officer of I3.   All of the developers are mere employees or contractors and are shielded from the huge legal risks associated with this industry.   Someone has to bear the risk and right now it falls on Stan & I.

Stan & Pam have been essential in providing necessary liquidity when there were delays converting BTC to USD or unexpected USD bills.  They lent I3 money on several occasions to get through small cash flow issues.   

Stan has done more to free up my time than any other developer.
Stan has also been paid the LEAST salary of every developer.
Stan has also accepted BTS as payment without intent to sell.
Stan has also purchased a large stakes in BTS on top of it all.

In short money cannot buy what Stan & Pam have provided to me and thus BitShares.    At the end of the day Stan was the LEAST compensated of everyone. 

The bonus paid to Stan was really a combined bonus for Pam & Stan.

That makes sense Much love

Thanks to the OP for giving us the chance to get clear about this. Nothing worse than suppressed concerns / feelings of injustice.

 

[santaclause102]

Thanks for all your kind words. 

My role on BitShares over the past 18 months has actually been quite modest. 

I work mostly behind the scenes.  My job involves dealing with business operations and other gatekeeper duties typically associated with a chief of staff role. I pay most of the crypto bills. I handle financial, legal and accounting interfaces, written communication functions, partnership negotiations and support, and helping people see the bright side whenever I can. 

Generally I try to take everything I can off Bytemaster’s hands
so he can focus on things that only he can do. 

Someday Bytemaster will find someone else he trusts to do those duties and I will be able to retire.  But it is hard to find someone you can trust to have your back in all situations, especially on the financial and legal fronts.  Until then, if I don’t do these functions he will have to find time to do them himself. 

If I’m the only one he trusts to walk his dog,
then by walking his dog I generate more Bytemaster time for the ecosystem. 

Thus, the value of my contribution is pretty much just the value of Bytemaster’s time saved for things that only he can do. 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

Stan (and my mother, Pam) have been so critical for my own sanity that BitShares wouldn't be where it is today without them.   Most of their effort is behind the scenes, but if I had to sum it up in a single sentence:
   
  Their job is to keep me out of jail.   

How do they do this?   Careful accounting and hours and hours with lawyers and tax advisors.   

There is NO ONE ELSE at greater legal risk than Stan and Pam because they handle all of our books and Stan is actually an ACTIVE board member / officer of I3.   All of the developers are mere employees or contractors and are shielded from the huge legal risks associated with this industry.   Someone has to bear the risk and right now it falls on Stan & I.

Stan & Pam have been essential in providing necessary liquidity when there were delays converting BTC to USD or unexpected USD bills.  They lent I3 money on several occasions to get through small cash flow issues.   

Stan has done more to free up my time than any other developer.
Stan has also been paid the LEAST salary of every developer.
Stan has also accepted BTS as payment without intent to sell.
Stan has also purchased a large stakes in BTS on top of it all.

In short money cannot buy what Stan & Pam have provided to me and thus BitShares.    At the end of the day Stan was the LEAST compensated of everyone. 

The bonus paid to Stan was really a combined bonus for Pam & Stan.

That makes sense Much love

Thanks to the OP for giving us the chance to get clear about this. Nothing worse than suppressed concerns / feelings of injustice. 

[Stan]

One question I've not seen answered is whether we are expecting to stick to 'only' 101 delegates. Surely that limited number is a liability for any attack.. and inversely might not be enough to include everyone that might be due support. For example, if BitShares goes large, are you really limited to only a handful of people in every quarter of the globe, or to those hiring others directly? With more delegates, 100% would be a smaller fraction too. Given that running a delegate is trivial, perhaps it's worth considering delegates and payments separately.

This is a good question that sort of got lost in this thread.  Let me take a shot at it:

Bytemaster did an analysis of what the right number of delegates should be.  His argument was that going from one delegate to two doubles the security, going from 100 to 101 increases it by less than one percent.

But the increase in cost of each delegate is linear.  So it is a simple matter of diminishing returns - from a security standpoint.

Also, since there are always many other candidates waiting to fill a slot, attacking any one delegate has little effect.  Someone else will pop up to take her place. So the actual number of people defending against attacks is much higher than 101. We have engineered a global whack-a-mole system where delegates will tend to pop up in whatever jurisdictions are friendly to them.

Another consideration was the size of burden placed on the shareholder to determine who gets their votes.  The primary voting task is to determine who should be trusted.  Once that is done, we trust those people with "trivial" tasks like selecting the correct delegate software and running it reliably.  In the future, we will tend to elect trusted managers who can oversee multi-person projects, one task of which is running the correct delegate software reliability.

So, doubling the number of people to assess for trustworthiness would demand an impossible task from everyone.  We would all defer to some small number of consumer advocate delegates to tell us who to vote for.  And thus, not really generate any more decentralization for the delta cost.

Seems like 101 is challenging enough.  So it was chosen as the "sweet spot".

[CalabiYau]

Stan is a founder of this project that has been critical to its inception and survival.

 

[bytemaster]

Thanks for all your kind words. 

My role on BitShares over the past 18 months has actually been quite modest. 

I work mostly behind the scenes.  My job involves dealing with business operations and other gatekeeper duties typically associated with a chief of staff role. I pay most of the crypto bills. I handle financial, legal and accounting interfaces, written communication functions, partnership negotiations and support, and helping people see the bright side whenever I can. 

Generally I try to take everything I can off Bytemaster’s hands
so he can focus on things that only he can do. 

Someday Bytemaster will find someone else he trusts to do those duties and I will be able to retire.  But it is hard to find someone you can trust to have your back in all situations, especially on the financial and legal fronts.  Until then, if I don’t do these functions he will have to find time to do them himself. 

If I’m the only one he trusts to walk his dog,
then by walking his dog I generate more Bytemaster time for the ecosystem. 

Thus, the value of my contribution is pretty much just the value of Bytemaster’s time saved for things that only he can do. 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

Stan (and my mother, Pam) have been so critical for my own sanity that BitShares wouldn't be where it is today without them.   Most of their effort is behind the scenes, but if I had to sum it up in a single sentence:
   
  Their job is to keep me out of jail.   

How do they do this?   Careful accounting and hours and hours with lawyers and tax advisors.   

There is NO ONE ELSE at greater legal risk than Stan and Pam because they handle all of our books and Stan is actually an ACTIVE board member / officer of I3.   All of the developers are mere employees or contractors and are shielded from the huge legal risks associated with this industry.   Someone has to bear the risk and right now it falls on Stan & I.

Stan & Pam have been essential in providing necessary liquidity when there were delays converting BTC to USD or unexpected USD bills.  They lent I3 money on several occasions to get through small cash flow issues.   

Stan has done more to free up my time than any other developer.
Stan has also been paid the LEAST salary of every developer.
Stan has also accepted BTS as payment without intent to sell.
Stan has also purchased a large stakes in BTS on top of it all.

In short money cannot buy what Stan & Pam have provided to me and thus BitShares.    At the end of the day Stan was the LEAST compensated of everyone. 

The bonus paid to Stan was really a combined bonus for Pam & Stan.

[kisa]

Stan for Prime Minister!

[Stan]

Remember the epic assault?hahahahahahahahaha.
bullshit artist——Stan.

It's only BS if you don't really believe it. 

[vegolino]

Stan is a founder of this project that has been critical to its inception and survival.

 

[busygin]

Stan is a founder of this project that has been critical to its inception and survival.

[bitcoinba]

Stan is a founder of this project that has been critical to its inception and survival.

[kao]

BitShares Reloaded

Now that the enabling technology behind BitShares is proven and we have settled in to a comfortable pre-launch point at Number 4 on the charts, it is time to Reimagine Everything as we approach next month’s epic assault on Number 2.  Everything about BitShares has been

80% impossible.

83.7% of all people believe in the correctness of numbers if they are made up quickly enough!

Welp, next month is already almost over with, and we're quite a ways from epically assaulting number 2 (grin). When does the epic assault commence? Can we hit a $330 million market cap in the next 4 days? lol that would be awesome...

Remember the epic assault?hahahahahahahahaha.
bullshit artist——Stan.

[bubble789]

Keep up the good work Stan!

[Ben Mason]

Thank you Stan.

[Stan]

Thanks for all your kind words. 

My role on BitShares over the past 18 months has actually been quite modest. 

I work mostly behind the scenes.  My job involves dealing with business operations and other gatekeeper duties typically associated with a chief of staff role. I pay most of the crypto bills. I handle financial, legal and accounting interfaces, written communication functions, partnership negotiations and support, and helping people see the bright side whenever I can. 

Generally I try to take everything I can off Bytemaster’s hands
so he can focus on things that only he can do. 

Someday Bytemaster will find someone else he trusts to do those duties and I will be able to retire.  But it is hard to find someone you can trust to have your back in all situations, especially on the financial and legal fronts.  Until then, if I don’t do these functions he will have to find time to do them himself. 

If I’m the only one he trusts to walk his dog,
then by walking his dog I generate more Bytemaster time for the ecosystem. 

Thus, the value of my contribution is pretty much just the value of Bytemaster’s time saved for things that only he can do. 

**Full disclosure, BM does not own a dog.  I'm using another metaphor. 

[Rune]

Just consider all compensation to Stan to actually be extra compensation to BM. Then think about the probability of Stan dumping his shares in the short or medium term. His delegate is probably not creating any sell pressure now, and probably won't for the next several years.

But like with everything else, transparency is very important in order for our community to be able to trust itself. It really needs to become default that all paid delegates do things like weekly/monthly reports or blogs detailing their work, and are available for regular hangouts or similar shareholder Q&A's. All shareholders need to have the ability to publicly evaluate each delegate individually, or the entire point of DPOS disappears and bitshares becomes a failed experiment.

[kao]

Stan最大的贡献就是生了BM.
除此之外，他也就是一个会发点心灵鸡汤与MEME的渣渣老头.

[pal]

In my view, it was one time compensation to early founders. Not big one. From now on those who deliver - will be paid. Pretty harsh, but after a year or so no one would complain about fair distribution of shares.

[davidpbrown]

> How much is too much?

I'm not sure that it matters that those core to the project get 'too much'. If they are motivated and care enough, then they will likely also be the ones who spend on related efforts and directly hiring those who help support other efforts.

It's too easy to be critical. That said, if BTS price does take off then 100% might be too much, even for devs.


One question I've not seen answered is whether we are expecting to stick to 'only' 101 delegates. Surely that limited number is a liability for any attack.. and inversely might not be enough to include everyone that might be due support. For example, if BitShares goes large, are you really limited to only a handful of people in every quarter of the globe, or to those hiring others directly? With more delegates, 100% would be a smaller fraction too. Given that running a delegate is trivial, perhaps it's worth considering delegates and payments separately.

[luckybit]

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/bitcoin-and-the-three-laws-of-robotics/

One of the most important communications which introduced people to what Bitshares is. It was that article that got many excited about Protoshares.

No one else could have communicated it the way Stan does.  If in the future there are more complex concepts which need to be broken down Stan is the person traditionally given the task.

His contributions have been critical. He's as important to Bitshares as Dan Larimer. How could anyone question that?

If not for Stan most people wouldn't have understood what Bitshares was in the very beginning.

I think a lot of people questioning Stan's contributions were not involved with the community in 2013 when things first started. Stan brought the community together with his communications.

The issue is not what he has done, but what he is doing right now. Recently he is coming across as quite tetchy and condescending, not to mention retaining a suspiciously strong interest in PTS.

I think its a reasonable request, all he has to say what he is doing and it will be fine. Even if we are told that he is there only to carry Dan's bags or feed him on time, I will happily accept it as Dan's time is of biggest importance, and I feel if he (Dan) had managed some time put in marketing we would've been much better off (I was initially sold on this vision by Dan's simple videos, considerably better than the long, boring ones being made now).

.... and I have been here for 14 months.

Think about it like this, would you want to see Stan doing communications and newsletters for Ethereum? Not saying Stan would go so far as to do this but it does make sense that he would be made into one of the largest stakeholders because he's the main guy on the Bitshares team with communication skills.

What is the worst scenario likely to happen? Stan could simply sit back and not do anything else. But if that happens who is going to handle communications going into the future?  Also who is going to rally the community in the future the way Stan did?

I do see your point that maybe he's being paid quite a bit but many of you thought it was fair to give developers full market salaries. If developers are going to get full market salaries then the communications director should as well.

I don't know how much $300 a day you say he's getting? $108,000 a year.  Do you think the communications director should be paid less?

By the way with all due respect to Dan I don't think marketing is his specialty. I think Dan should focus on technical matters and on doing the sort of deep thinking that only he can do. I think marketing should be handled by people who are good at marketing. I think communications should be handled by people who are good at communications. Everyone should be in their role and play their position on the team.

I can only speak for myself but Stan popularized the concept of the DAC to people who would never have understood what it is on a technical level. Also you have Stan who explained Protoshares as well. I think Stan has earned his salary at least for right now.

If in the future we find someone better at communications or if Stan is no longer effective then we can have this talk. I don't think micromanagement this early on is helpful. Let them build the dang 1.0 and get reputation management built in before we go onto this.

[sumantso]

His contributions have been critical. He's as important to Bitshares as Dan Larimer. How could anyone question that?

If not for Stan most people wouldn't have understood what Bitshares was in the very beginning.

I think a lot of people questioning Stan's contributions were not involved with the community in 2013 when things first started. Stan brought the community together with his communications.

The issue is not what he has done, but what he is doing right now. Recently he is coming across as quite tetchy and condescending, not to mention retaining a suspiciously strong interest in PTS.

I think its a reasonable request, all he has to say what he is doing and it will be fine. Even if we are told that he is there only to carry Dan's bags or feed him on time, I will happily accept it as Dan's time is of biggest importance, and I feel if he (Dan) had managed some time put in marketing we would've been much better off (I was initially sold on this vision by Dan's simple videos, considerably better than the long, boring ones being made now).

.... and I have been here for 14 months.

[luckybit]

It has been brought to attention in numerous other threads that it seems that Stan is being overcompensated for his contributions. I am starting this thread so that Stan, the devs, and shareholders can share their opinions, and their interpretation of the facts.

Now let me be clear, I love Stan. What mainly concerns me is that Stan is getting paid as much as a full-time dev. He was even listed in the same group, as if he was in fact a dev:

(Thread titled 'Year End Developer Bonuses')

Toast, Nathan, Valentine, Vikram, Stan, and James Caffe, Dan N.  (all of whom have 100% pay delegates) have received 3M BTS severance / bonus from Invictus

This is not meant to be an attack, but rather an opportunity for shareholders and employees to discuss fair compensation.

Questions:

What contributions has Stan made so far that qualify him to be worth as much as a full-time dev?
What is Stan currently doing that qualifies him to be paid $300 a day?
Is it worth 3 million BTS to incentivize Stan to keep doing whatever it is that he is doing?
What incentives do shareholders have to vote for Stan? (What would we lose if Stan stopped whatever it is that he is doing?)

Shareholders, please ask your questions civilly.
Stan, please provide us with your reasonable answers.
Everyone, let us come to our own informed conclusions and vote accordingly.

His contributions have been critical. He's as important to Bitshares as Dan Larimer. How could anyone question that?

If not for Stan most people wouldn't have understood what Bitshares was in the very beginning.

I think a lot of people questioning Stan's contributions were not involved with the community in 2013 when things first started. Stan brought the community together with his communications.

What hurdles has Stan guided Bitshares through??

Communication hurdles and community building. Stan communicated to the dreamers while Dan communicated technical information. I think Stan was critical to get Bitshares to where it is now.

[.yoshi]

What hurdles has Stan guided Bitshares through??

[.yoshi]

What contributions has Stan made so far that qualify him to be worth as much as a full-time dev?

I would love to see some well reasoned responses to this question from the pro-Stan camp.

In the year and some odd months I've been following these forums, Stan has:

- Thrown together a handful of half baked newsletters, often well past their promised deadlines.
- Performed many PR blunders on the forums, mostly through poor communication. I have seen Stan create several threads where he puts his foot directly in his mouth, only to spend the next 5+ pages of the topic failing to mitigate the damage he's caused.
- Flown to a few conferences

To his credit, he has stopped making empty promises (for the most part) and has restricted himself to the role Forum Cheerleader as of late. No doubt an improvement, but hardly worth a 45k bonus.

Any evidence of Stan's valuable contributions in his "Operations" role would be greatly appreciated and a pleasant surprise, I'm sure, to many readers of this forum.

[onceuponatime]

I'm confused by the reaction. OP asked a legit question in a very professional manner.

"It has been brought to attention in numerous other threads"
 by whom? List them and their contributions to this project.

"He was even listed in the same group, as if he was in fact a dev"
Devs are very skilled and highly valuable persons. So is a leader (CEO). Did you get my reference to Steve Jobs? Do you think he did much coding?

I think you are somehow confusing my statement with the OP. I'm not interesting in playing fallacy bingo. Given the post about the 3M bts bonus, I was simply stating the OP question is legit. You have a shareholder asking about the duties of the project lead, in what alternate universe is that not acceptable?

Look through the threads, countless snide comments about what Stan accomplishes. I'm thankful that the OP asked and Stan can give a solid answer we can all reference in the future. I don't care about philosophical debates about Steve Jobs contribution, I just want to hear the answer to a question that's referenced time and time again. Nothing more, I'm not nearly as emotionally invested as others.

Alright, I think I see your points.

However to me it seems that you are looking for quantifiable and measurable objectives in an area where that is not feasible. How do you objectively measure vision, maturity, guidance, leadership? Shareholders must determine that for themselves. My determination is that Stan has been critical to keeping up enthusiasm and guiding this project over many hurdles. He has also been instrumental in setting the course.

Many shareholders who were hoping for quick gains have become discouraged by the lack of growth in market cap. That will come if we stay the course. It may even come soon, but it will come because we didn't give up.

I voted for Stan's delegate. I am free to withdraw my vote at anytime, as are you and all shareholders. I know that you don't like my reference to Steve Jobs, but that's too bad. I find it appropriate. He was voted out and the company went into a tailspin. When he was brought back, Apple thrived. Jobs was a visionary.

Choose wisely.

[BTS007]

Support Stan！

[lovejoy]

For the record, I'm all for transparency in this, and the OP really was a reasonable request.  For me it's more about the timing, and the context. In kung fu, timing is everything.

In an evening on the forums filled with seemingly endless threads marbled with the toxic veins of scarcity consciousness, it's been pushing the limits of my pitchfork meter, so I reach for levity. 

[hpenvy2]

I'm confused by the reaction. OP asked a legit question in a very professional manner.

"It has been brought to attention in numerous other threads"
 by whom? List them and their contributions to this project.

"He was even listed in the same group, as if he was in fact a dev"
Devs are very skilled and highly valuable persons. So is a leader (CEO). Did you get my reference to Steve Jobs? Do you think he did much coding?

I think you are somehow confusing my statement with the OP. I'm not interesting in playing fallacy bingo. Given the post about the 3M bts bonus, I was simply stating the OP question is legit. You have a shareholder asking about the duties of the project lead, in what alternate universe is that not acceptable?

Look through the threads, countless snide comments about what Stan accomplishes. I'm thankful that the OP asked and Stan can give a solid answer we can all reference in the future. I don't care about philosophical debates about Steve Jobs contribution, I just want to hear the answer to a question that's referenced time and time again. Nothing more, I'm not nearly as emotionally invested as others.

[lovejoy]

What's the worth of Laozi's contribution to the Dao De Jing?

Thirty spokes meet at a nave;
Because of the hole we may use the wheel.
Clay is moulded into a vessel;
Because of the hollow we may use the cup.
Walls are built around a hearth;
Because of the doors we may use the house.
Thus tools come from what exists,
But use from what does not.

[mint chocolate chip]

All paid delegates are going to have to get used to the fact they need to be more transparent in what they are specifically developing and the value they are adding to the network going forward.

[onceuponatime]

I'm confused by the reaction. OP asked a legit question in a very professional manner.

"It has been brought to attention in numerous other threads"
 by whom? List them and their contributions to this project.

"He was even listed in the same group, as if he was in fact a dev"
Devs are very skilled and highly valuable persons. So is a leader (CEO). Did you get my reference to Steve Jobs? Do you think he did much coding?

[graffenwalder]

Maybe I've missed some things lately. But how did you come up with the $300 dollar a day salary?

[hpenvy2]

I'm confused by the reaction. OP asked a legit question in a very professional manner.

[天籁]

Support Stan！

[onceuponatime]

There are a few negative people on this forum bound and determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

This project is a marathon, not a sprint.

Stan is a founder and leader of this project. His leadership has been and continues to be what has driven this project on, overcoming an enormous number of hurdles that we have had to overcome, and encouraging the innovations that have had to be invented and implemented.

Quitters gonna quit. Some people fear success more than failure. I have seen it over and over again in my life.

Leadership is perhaps the essence of a successful project, and without it all of the other contributions come to nothing. Stan fulfills that role, and deserves compensation.

Recall the assholes who drove Steve Jobs out of Apple because they thought they knew better - then after they had run Apple into the ground they had to bring him back because he was the one with vision.  Don't repeat their mistake.

[fluxer555]

It has been brought to attention in numerous other threads that it seems that Stan is being overcompensated for his contributions. I am starting this thread so that Stan, the devs, and shareholders can share their opinions, and their interpretation of the facts.

Now let me be clear, I love Stan. What mainly concerns me is that Stan is getting paid as much as a full-time dev. He was even listed in the same group, as if he was in fact a dev:

(Thread titled 'Year End Developer Bonuses')

Toast, Nathan, Valentine, Vikram, Stan, and James Caffe, Dan N.  (all of whom have 100% pay delegates) have received 3M BTS severance / bonus from Invictus

This is not meant to be an attack, but rather an opportunity for shareholders and employees to discuss fair compensation.

Questions:

What contributions has Stan made so far that qualify him to be worth as much as a full-time dev?
What is Stan currently doing that qualifies him to be paid $300 a day?
Is it worth 3 million BTS to incentivize Stan to keep doing whatever it is that he is doing?
What incentives do shareholders have to vote for Stan? (What would we lose if Stan stopped whatever it is that he is doing?)

Shareholders, please ask your questions civilly.
Stan, please provide us with your reasonable answers.
Everyone, let us come to our own informed conclusions and vote accordingly.