Author Topic: The worth of Stan's contribution to BitShares  (Read 11307 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: 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.  :D
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 Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
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.

Offline kao

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
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.

Offline pal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
    • Become Lifetime Member
  • BitShares: 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.
Become Lifetime Member:
https://bitshares.openledger.info?r=pal

Offline 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.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: 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.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 10:40:01 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

sumantso

  • Guest
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.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: 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.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 10:20:48 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline .yoshi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 82
    • View Profile
What hurdles has Stan guided Bitshares through??

Offline .yoshi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 82
    • View Profile
Quote
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.

Offline 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.

Offline BTS007

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • View Profile
BTS ID:bts007

Offline lovejoy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
    • View Profile
    • Cryptofresh
  • BitShares: 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. 


Offline hpenvy2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
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.

Offline lovejoy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
    • View Profile
    • Cryptofresh
  • BitShares: 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.