Poll

What do you think of this idea for Angelshares?

I like the idea as it is
18 (35.3%)
I like the idea but posted things I think should be different
6 (11.8%)
I don't like the idea, Invictus should not raise more money
5 (9.8%)
I don't like the idea, Invictus should only sell PTS or Bitshares
22 (43.1%)

Total Members Voted: 49

Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: [POLL] Setting another 10% Bitshares as "Angelshares" to fundraise for DACS  (Read 2637 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)

Ok, so there's been a conversation going on about how to fund the creation of future DACs as there are far more opportunities than funds.  I believe the proposal put forward by Bytemaster to have 100% of Bitshares represented by angelshares and protoshares is a non-starter because it means that all coins that will potentially be created will be owned only by people able to contribute in Bitcoin, when the perception of PTS currently (as a "CPU MINABLE COIN" is that you don't need to do that.   I believe even if the vast majority of mining being performed by participants on the network is done by botnets or cloud miners, the initial marketing of Protoshares makes it untenable to change the social contract in any way that is not optional on a investor by investor basis.

With that in mind, I think we all recognize the value of having sufficient funds devoted to the creation of DACs and I for one have no problem putting my money where my mouth is. 

I would encourage the creation of PTS 2.0 (Angelcoins) that would be another 10% of Bitshares's 21 million, so 20% of total Bitshares would be claimed at the beginning through these two rounds of "venture".

Instead of the validated mining plan that turns Invictus into a central point of failure, Invictus should set up weekly or monthly "Exodus Addresses" and replicate Mastercoin, people send BTC or PTS to "Angel" addresses and at the end of that round whatever the allocation is, is divided evenly between the people who sent value on a proportional basis.   These funds should be clearly labeled with regard to how each % will be spent.

The exodus address would be transparent, so if people see that not many have invested they will want to invest becaues they will get more value for their value.   Invictus controls the address, but each distribution basically results in a large block that issues shares to all investors in the last round.   If I were you I would accept both Bitcoin and PTS in these angel rounds, and accept PTS at a premium to Bitcoin.

2.1 million would be  21 months @ 100k Angelcoins per month - The deal stays the same with Protosharesholders, you get to raise a shitload of money to finance multiple DACs at once and try your new mechanism.  The miners still working on PTS get to keep working, and you don't have to do anything.

Most importantly, Invictus hasn't committed to what they'll do with the other 80%, so when they really solve the problem and have the RIGHT idea their won't have tied yourself down.

What do you think?
Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
It was pointed out in the other thread that Bitshares is supposed to be out sooner than in 21 months, I think it is still appropriate to target this number of months because things don't always go to plan and as a startup you want to have "a long runway" so that even if it takes a few extra months you can not need to raise funds in a time of weakness where you might be compelled to take a bad deal because you have few options.

I believe Invictus should be able to essentially presell another 10% of Bitshares to fund its creation, but I disagree with them taking more than 25% in this way.   If that was the dicision that was to be made, they needed to do it before the first set of promises were made. 
Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline Gekko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Lunch is for wimps........ Greed is good.
    • View Profile
Keeping PTS "1.0" as they are is necessary and good. Even if mining doesn't pay at current rates / difficulty, but no one knows where PTS will be in 2014.

As for Angelshares/coins I'm not sure how they could be evenly/fair divided. Angelshares without mining would mean already rich people will get even richer by being able to invest more BTC into Angelshares right from the beginning. By mining poorer people would be able to get a good amount of "coins" while difficulty is low. - If Invictus wants to avoid mining they should think about mechanisms to give poorer investors a chance of getting lots of Angel"coins" by being fast/early/whatever. Just being rich shouldn't give anybody such a huge advantage at the start of a new "investment round".
« Last Edit: December 15, 2013, 10:05:57 PM by Gekko »

Offline Mrrr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
I am not so sure about the whole 'exodus address' concept. Sounds to much like 'Mastercoin' to me. Drop a BTC and get 10X returns in two weeks at no other price than a mouse click. The point of mining in this regard is that it serves as a tool to make a somewhat even distribution of wealth possible based on the effort and time people are willing to put into something, as opposed to a system where capital the only motor.

Invictus did a very good job at that. They put Protoshares in the market and it required nothing else than time invested. Mastercoin* in my opionion is a school example of the deranged capitalist paradigm in which only the rich get richer; the exact same paradigm that sparked my interest in crypto in the first place. On a sidenote: Memorycoin 2.0 launched a couple of hours ago and is already struggling with god knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of rented servers thrown at it.

*where as the name already made me vomit the part where the devs spoke of a 'group of Chinese investors' expressing interest made me want to eat my vomit and regurgitate.

Offline threepoint14

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
I am not so sure about the whole 'exodus address' concept. Sounds to much like 'Mastercoin' to me. Drop a BTC and get 10X returns in two weeks at no other price than a mouse click. The point of mining in this regard is that it serves as a tool to make a somewhat even distribution of wealth possible based on the effort and time people are willing to put into something, as opposed to a system where capital the only motor.

Invictus did a very good job at that. They put Protoshares in the market and it required nothing else than time invested. Mastercoin* in my opionion is a school example of the deranged capitalist paradigm in which only the rich get richer; the exact same paradigm that sparked my interest in crypto in the first place. On a sidenote: Memorycoin 2.0 launched a couple of hours ago and is already struggling with god knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of rented servers thrown at it.

*where as the name already made me vomit the part where the devs spoke of a 'group of Chinese investors' expressing interest made me want to eat my vomit and regurgitate.


Offline 8bit

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
I'm not sure if I understand what's being discussed. Did I miss something from bytemaster? Does he want to create a PTS2.0 or something?
Code: [Select]
wallet_approve_delegate eightbitA VOTE FOR EIGHTBIT IS A VOTE FOR CRUDE DICK ART

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
I'm not sure if I understand what's being discussed. Did I miss something from bytemaster? Does he want to create a PTS2.0 or something?

Yes, although he has walked back from the idea now
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1397.0
Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
Also, to the guys at Invictus - If you have investors who have a large amount they want to invest with you, and they want to do it over multiple weekly investment periods you can offer to take all their funds up front and invest them proportionally over any number of weeks for a small fee as a convenience.
Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Keeping PTS "1.0" as they are is necessary and good. Even if mining doesn't pay at current rates / difficulty, but no one knows where PTS will be in 2014.

As for Angelshares/coins I'm not sure how they could be evenly/fair divided. Angelshares without mining would mean already rich people will get even richer by being able to invest more BTC into Angelshares right from the beginning. By mining poorer people would be able to get a good amount of "coins" while difficulty is low. - If Invictus wants to avoid mining they should think about mechanisms to give poorer investors a chance of getting lots of Angel"coins" by being fast/early/whatever. Just being rich shouldn't give anybody such a huge advantage at the start of a new "investment round".

Well yes with Angelshares people that are rich will get even richer, but at least the founds coming from them  we'll be used in developing new DAC's and everybody that it is putting money in, they will want that all Invictus project succeed as opposed with protoshared where most of the powerful once(bot nets, supercomputer)they don't give a shit about the long term or the project.

Rich people will get even richer it is happening right now with protoshare rich people could buy a lot more protoshares so they are getting richer without much benefit for the Invictus community.
Not sure there is a way to geting around "rich people will get even richer" and in some way we need reach people to be involved I guess.
 

« Last Edit: December 16, 2013, 04:42:46 AM by oco101 »

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
Keeping PTS "1.0" as they are is necessary and good. Even if mining doesn't pay at current rates / difficulty, but no one knows where PTS will be in 2014.

As for Angelshares/coins I'm not sure how they could be evenly/fair divided. Angelshares without mining would mean already rich people will get even richer by being able to invest more BTC into Angelshares right from the beginning. By mining poorer people would be able to get a good amount of "coins" while difficulty is low. - If Invictus wants to avoid mining they should think about mechanisms to give poorer investors a chance of getting lots of Angel"coins" by being fast/early/whatever. Just being rich shouldn't give anybody such a huge advantage at the start of a new "investment round".

Well yes with Angelshares people that are reach will get even richer, but at list the founds coming from them  we'll be used in developing new DAC's and everybody that it is putting money in, they will want that all Invictus project succeed as opposed with protoshared where most of the powerful once(bot nets, supercomputer)they don't give a shit about the long term or the project.

Rich people will get even richer it is happening right now with protoshare rich people could buy a lot more protoshares so they are getting richer without much benefit for the Invictus community.
Not sure there is a way to geting around "rich people will get even richer" and in some way we need reach people to be involved I guess.

Ultimately rich investors will fund these companys one way or another, and frankly that's better than true venture capital.  I have no problem with Invictus raising funds through something like Angelshares to allow individuals to give them development funds without having to sell equity in the Invictus company itself, that makes a ton of sense to me. 

So don't turn it into an anti-rich thing, it's an anti-stupid thing.  We need to be inclusive of everyone, not only the rich to the exclusion of everyone else but not only anyone else to the exclusion of the "rich" either.

Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline Pocket Sand

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
    • View Profile
Re: [POLL] Setting another 10% Bitshares as "Angelshares" to fundraise for DACS
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2013, 04:48:27 AM »
I really liked Luckybit's suggestion of capping bitshares at 6 million and offering 2 million to Protoshares owners, 2 million to Angel share investors to fund Invictus, and 2 million for hybrid mining. It's a fair way of going about distribution, honors the social contract, and allows for equal opportunity distribution for everyone.

Is there anyone who is specifically against this?

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
Re: [POLL] Setting another 10% Bitshares as "Angelshares" to fundraise for DACS
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2013, 04:50:47 AM »
I really liked Luckybit's suggestion of capping bitshares at 6 million and offering 2 million to Protoshares owners, 2 million to Angel share investors to fund Invictus, and 2 million for hybrid mining. It's a fair way of going about distribution, honors the social contract, and allows for equal opportunity distribution for everyone.

Is there anyone who is specifically against this?

While I do not like the precedent of changing the numerical distribution, I don't have a specific problem with this proposal as it fulfills all the needs.
Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline que23

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
Re: [POLL] Setting another 10% Bitshares as "Angelshares" to fundraise for DACS
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2013, 05:02:10 AM »
I still don't see any need for having miners in the future. If Invictus is moving towards a more Mastercoin like approach, then you have to work for BTC and Angel Shares by doing the bounties, a real service that will benefit the DACs. After PTS, which will always get 10%, there is no more use for mining.
PTS: Pa75dEzGkMcnM85hRMbdKiS1YdF81rnSCF

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
Re: [POLL] Setting another 10% Bitshares as "Angelshares" to fundraise for DACS
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2013, 05:04:02 AM »
I still don't see any need for having miners in the future. If Invictus is moving towards a more Mastercoin like approach, then you have to work for BTC and Angel Shares by doing the bounties, a real service that will benefit the DACs. After PTS, which will always get 10%, there is no more use for mining.

You could just as easily replace mining with educational giveaways and I'd be happy.  The point is a non-monetary way to get invested in the success of the project.
Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline que23

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
Re: [POLL] Setting another 10% Bitshares as "Angelshares" to fundraise for DACS
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2013, 05:10:36 AM »
I still don't see any need for having miners in the future. If Invictus is moving towards a more Mastercoin like approach, then you have to work for BTC and Angel Shares by doing the bounties, a real service that will benefit the DACs. After PTS, which will always get 10%, there is no more use for mining.

You could just as easily replace mining with educational giveaways and I'd be happy.  The point is a non-monetary way to get invested in the success of the project.

How about a pool that people could contribute to, to support educational activities. We could throw a coding contest for middle schoolers. But giving shares away without shareholder consent is a little iffy. I don't have all that many skills either. And I'm not loaded. My only hope now is that we can bring in some real money to grow the project which will greatly benefit my investment and the development of DACs.
PTS: Pa75dEzGkMcnM85hRMbdKiS1YdF81rnSCF

 

Google+