When you make a deal, keep your word. No other option
Agreed.
It has been hard to keep track of the various permutations of what is being proposed, but I think it reduces to the basics of Inviticus effectively wants a hard fork of PS1 to gain all future PTS mined so that they can use that value to support DACs. I know it hasn't been stated that way, but that is what is seems to boil down to. The AngelShares seem to be some complicated way to keep track of the PTS that Inviticus has appropriated by these means, and was originally envisioned as a way to materially diminish the long term investment value of existing PTS ownership (which of course risks major lawsuits years later). I think bytemaster is now renewing his promise not to devalue PTS by expanding the 2 million limit.
The AngelShares abstraction seems somewhat useless except perhaps as some form of voting for how funds are allocated. AngelShares would be an Inviticus DAC, and therefore owners of PTS start with 10% at genesis. Inviticus' ownership of PTS would grow to over 50% with PTS2 over a one year period. That is a lot of PTS for them to control the market with. One should consider if AngelShare distributions are an event that preceeds every DAC being formed rather than a one time event. The important thing is that PTS not get devalued over time beyond the 2 million lifetime supply, and that ownership of PTS is used to determine your initial proportional ownership in future DACs. Consider a DAC that is formed with PTS ownership that is then traded in a closed market (between only the original PTS owners) until the DAC goes public. A market value can be approached before true market conditions reward accordingly.
The difficult part of a hard fork is getting miners to accept it. ProtoShares mining is not profitable. PS1 mining gives determined individuals an opportunity to pay a premium to acquire a small amount of PTS. It is faster and less expensive to purchase PTS at market prices. Replacing mining with incremental distributions to Inviticus (up to the 2 million PTS limit) is not destructive to our current PTS investment; in fact, the elimination of mining would increase existing PTS value. A PTS2 fork may not be hard to sell in this way.
I don't consider a change in PS2 mining rules to be a material breach of contract like a change in supply rate or quantity would undermine PTS value. It is somewhat concerning that Inviticus would have a significant stake in PTS due to rule changes, but I'd like to believe it is all in our interest to allow this. It would be nice if Inviticus would agree to never own more than x percentage of all PTS. Ownership above that percentage should be sold at market prices so that others may participate. Inviticus would keep the proceeds of that sale or be obligated to use it for DAC funding.
The way I've just described it may actually seem more generous to Inviticus than what bytemaster claimed he was going for. I suspect this grants him control he desires without undermining existing investment value. I'm trying to find a win-win scenario here, and this seemed a better start to finding that.
[edit] Upon reflection, I think it is dangerous for Inviticus to own more than even 20% of PTS because they could then dictate whatever change they wanted and the entire economy might become subject to how a government can pressure Inviticus alone.