Author Topic: [ANN] MaxPWR Petitions to Sanction User Newmine  (Read 17204 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline seraphim

While I can't say anything about the amount of coins FreeTrade is holding, and what he is planning to do with them, I still disagree that the payout for the officers is too high. It is just a question what is being done for the money.
The high reward is thought as an incentive for people to get involved. While it could be enough (just for example) for a professional ad agency to apply as CMO this unfortunately didn't happen yet. But that's neither the fault of FreeTrade nor the other officers.

Compared to other alt coins, MMC already got a lot of infrastructure built around for the short time of its existence. Could be more with better candidates, but we wouldn't be where we are now without the grants.
I believe that FreeTrade thought there'd be a lot more competition for the offices. Seems like the reward is not high enough for professionals to get involved. Reducing the grants to 1/10th wouldn't make that situation better...
Meet you on STEEM

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
According to this page: http://memorycoin.org/foundation/
M9rJudKWdiE4dQd2K6DD9bLtkviKwnhNZG is "Clearing" and
MHodpHe3qVMzGKtgcrjwRQdvUTEyaXfHPE is "Main".
These 2 total 250k MMCs
If these don't belong to a person, why the hell are these 2 voting for candidates?
Good point. Who owns that addresses?
well whatever the case, they're amounting to about 45k in votes
and according to the site
MCF is funded through the MemoryCoin grant award system. Its funds are currently administered by the coin’s founder and chief developer, FreeTrade. To avoid a conflict of interest, MCF does not provide grants or payments to its administrator.

So perhaps FreeTrade could answer that for us
Ok, so since there's no "Official" explanation here, I will allow myself to write my speculation:
These wallets, from MMC1, were community wallets to be used for bounties and development.
Since, as Freetrade threatened numerous times in the MMC1 thread linked to by Newmine: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=267522.msg3143884#msg3143884 (for the lazy ones, I'll sum it up: It's something like "If someone takes control of the 'grant' I will dim this coin as a failure and will burn it alive"), something didn't work for his liking, he killed the old coin and created a new one where every "old" coin is equal to a "new" coin.
BUT THAT'S NOT ALL! Since we had a grant which is now useless, who would better take hold of these coins if not the great Freetrade.
So now the situation is that Mr. Freetrade has something between 300,000 - 400,000 coins (and probably more, depending on the amount of Protoshares he has + the amount he got from holding 2 positions for almost a month in MMC2), where 250k of them should have been part of a bounty wallet and definitely not owned by him.
That's my assumption.
This coin is a money generator for Mr. Freetrade and (a far smaller one, but still huge) the other officers.
Can't wait for it to be traded on Cryptsy, where I will sell my 7600 coins for ~7.6 Bitcoins and move on.

Good luck to you all.

That's about my read of the situation too,  lacking information from the people involved.  I hope FreeTrade can shed some light, and I hope this isn't something that's only a gaping question to just a few of us. 
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline itsik78

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
According to this page: http://memorycoin.org/foundation/
M9rJudKWdiE4dQd2K6DD9bLtkviKwnhNZG is "Clearing" and
MHodpHe3qVMzGKtgcrjwRQdvUTEyaXfHPE is "Main".
These 2 total 250k MMCs
If these don't belong to a person, why the hell are these 2 voting for candidates?
Good point. Who owns that addresses?
well whatever the case, they're amounting to about 45k in votes
and according to the site
MCF is funded through the MemoryCoin grant award system. Its funds are currently administered by the coin’s founder and chief developer, FreeTrade. To avoid a conflict of interest, MCF does not provide grants or payments to its administrator.

So perhaps FreeTrade could answer that for us
Ok, so since there's no "Official" explanation here, I will allow myself to write my speculation:
These wallets, from MMC1, were community wallets to be used for bounties and development.
Since, as Freetrade threatened numerous times in the MMC1 thread linked to by Newmine: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=267522.msg3143884#msg3143884 (for the lazy ones, I'll sum it up: It's something like "If someone takes control of the 'grant' I will dim this coin as a failure and will burn it alive"), something didn't work for his liking, he killed the old coin and created a new one where every "old" coin is equal to a "new" coin.
BUT THAT'S NOT ALL! Since we had a grant which is now useless, who would better take hold of these coins if not the great Freetrade.
So now the situation is that Mr. Freetrade has something between 300,000 - 400,000 coins (and probably more, depending on the amount of Protoshares he has + the amount he got from holding 2 positions for almost a month in MMC2), where 250k of them should have been part of a bounty wallet and definitely not owned by him.
That's my assumption.
This coin is a money generator for Mr. Freetrade and (a far smaller one, but still huge) the other officers.
Can't wait for it to be traded on Cryptsy, where I will sell my 7600 coins for ~7.6 Bitcoins and move on.

Good luck to you all.

Offline phrozenspite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
According to this page: http://memorycoin.org/foundation/
M9rJudKWdiE4dQd2K6DD9bLtkviKwnhNZG is "Clearing" and
MHodpHe3qVMzGKtgcrjwRQdvUTEyaXfHPE is "Main".
These 2 total 250k MMCs
If these don't belong to a person, why the hell are these 2 voting for candidates?
Good point. Who owns that addresses?
well whatever the case, they're amounting to about 45k in votes
and according to the site
MCF is funded through the MemoryCoin grant award system. Its funds are currently administered by the coin’s founder and chief developer, FreeTrade. To avoid a conflict of interest, MCF does not provide grants or payments to its administrator.

So perhaps FreeTrade could answer that for us
supporting Newmine for a fair Memorycoin
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=389386.0

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
According to this page: http://memorycoin.org/foundation/
M9rJudKWdiE4dQd2K6DD9bLtkviKwnhNZG is "Clearing" and
MHodpHe3qVMzGKtgcrjwRQdvUTEyaXfHPE is "Main".
These 2 total 250k MMCs
If these don't belong to a person, why the hell are these 2 voting for candidates?
Good point. Who owns that addresses?

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Are we on MemorycoinTalk?

Nope.   Lots of people here have MMC and not many of them bought it.

I understand why Miners want to mine something that is profitable - MMC Makes sense for them

I understand why ground-level adopters who want something they got for cheap to be valued at more than what they paid - MMC makes sense for them.

I understand why FreeTrade wants this, he has a ton of MMC from the last version and basically just needed to launch this to give it an initial valuation, at which point he comes out with a big financial win no matter what.  Who cares if you only get .00005BTC per coin when you give them to yourself for free, even at that price that 250,000MMC is worth more than 10kUSD for... exactly what?     Obviously it's better for Freetrade if it goes to .01BTC because then that $10k becomes $2.5 million, but the point is that even now if you got something for free that's a pretty good deal.  Heads you win, tails you win more.

So why does anybody else want to use MMC, and why does devoting 5% of the total money supply to five positions of dubious value as a salary paid in advance for work that will be done in the future.


I believe the president of the US makes about 400k per year for what is inarguably a more than full time job.  Compared to the money supply of the US (M1) at 3109895 million USD or 310,989,500,000.   If we paid the president the same way Memorycoin pays its executive board, the presidents salary would be 3,109,895,000 over a long period of time.  There have been what, 44 presidencies?  That brings the presidential salary under a MMC paradigm to $70,679,431 each.  This is obviously simplified.

Point is, the numbers are wrong wrong wrong, there is no oversight or ability to have meaningful oversight, and there is no actual reason to do anything other than collect your MMC paycheck and do the minimal work neccesary.  If MMC succeeds, you win big.  If MMC fails, didn't cost you anything but convincing some folks who desperately want to believe your promises about making the thing they own some of worth more.

Results are all that matter, so long as your system picks who won the prize before the game even starts means all the important work happens before the beginning of the game.   I'm all in favor of innovation, and named positions that are votable makes a ton of sense to me... But this coin sadly does not.   I keep asking why anyone would want to hold this coin if they don't get it for cheap or free, still waiting for an answer on that.
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

emre

  • Guest

If anything kills MMC it'll be the way MMC is set up.


I realy don't get it. you imply people who invested in mmc didn't read the structure of mmc before investing it. Voting system and salaries is one of the biggest difference of mmc. You should read the rules first if you put money/effort on something.

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
I just wanted to point out that a lot of people seem to not care about what's getting done, while they complain that the cXo get too many coins.

You think too naive :)

It's not about that cXo's deserve the salary they get or the justice. If that was the case, there are unspendable addresses to vote.

it's about beeing greedy and thinking in short-term. compromising these positions will break mmc sadly. And I don't really understand why actually mmc holders want to kill mmc in the first place?

If anything kills MMC it'll be the way MMC is set up.  The community is trying to deal with the decision that was made to give department-level budgets as personal salary at initial prices with no accountability or expectation for how those funds are used.

The fact that the cXo are such large recipients of new money supply just emphasizes that the people building this coin did not believe it would be valuable or else they wouldn't allocate 1% of the TOTAL MONEY SUPPLY to executive positions.   
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

emre

  • Guest
I just wanted to point out that a lot of people seem to not care about what's getting done, while they complain that the cXo get too many coins.

You think too naive :)

It's not about that cXos deserve the salary they get or the justice. If that was the case, there are unspendable addresses to vote.

it's about beeing greedy and thinking in short-term. compromising these positions will kill mmc sadly. And I don't really understand why actually mmc holders want to kill mmc in the first place.






« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 06:26:59 pm by emre »

Offline itsik78

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
The problem is that people in cXo positions have a no-lose situation.  Maybe the social contract for Memorycoin should be you use 80% as your operating budget and 20% as your take-home pay, but right now anyone who has achieved that role does so with the support of a few large voters, and even at the just-launched-no-uses price it has now are taking home 100k per year, which just like bitcoin will multiply up if they are successful.   But given that they are already recieving 100k per year at current prices, why not collect the 100k then do the minimal amount of work to keep the role (look busy), and by the time somebody figures out you're spending all your time doing something else who cares?  Free money for just enough work to keep up appearances.


If you want people to look at the situation and say "Yeah, that seems to make sense" you should cut all the numbers by 90% and make the position one only people who are really motivated and believe in the coin to take the job.  If they are successful and the price targets of .01btc are hit, that's more than 200 Bitcoins per year.  If Memorycoin can reach .1 that's 2000BTC per year.


I dislike this current model for the same reason I hated JR Willets putting like 40% of the funding (and getting 40% of the tokens) from the Mastercoin fundraiser.  Since at the time he was going to be paid from those raised funds, it meant he was basically being the biggest stakeholder by taking money out of one of his pockets and putting it into another.   In order for people to work, they need to have skin in the game and that means a downside comes paired with the upside instead of only upside as I see in this circumstance.

Best of luck ;)
+1
I'll shut up and let you do the talking.
Still hoping for a reply on my recent query ^^

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
The problem is that people in cXo positions have a no-lose situation.  Maybe the social contract for Memorycoin should be you use 80% as your operating budget and 20% as your take-home pay, but right now anyone who has achieved that role does so with the support of a few large voters, and even at the just-launched-no-uses price it has now are taking home 100k per year, which just like bitcoin will multiply up if they are successful.   But given that they are already recieving 100k per year at current prices, why not collect the 100k then do the minimal amount of work to keep the role (look busy), and by the time somebody figures out you're spending all your time doing something else who cares?  Free money for just enough work to keep up appearances.


If you want people to look at the situation and say "Yeah, that seems to make sense" you should cut all the numbers by 90% and make the position one only people who are really motivated and believe in the coin to take the job.  If they are successful and the price targets of .01btc are hit, that's more than 200 Bitcoins per year.  If Memorycoin can reach .1 that's 2000BTC per year.


I dislike this current model for the same reason I hated JR Willets putting like 40% of the funding (and getting 40% of the tokens) from the Mastercoin fundraiser.  Since at the time he was going to be paid from those raised funds, it meant he was basically being the biggest stakeholder by taking money out of one of his pockets and putting it into another.   In order for people to work, they need to have skin in the game and that means a downside comes paired with the upside instead of only upside as I see in this circumstance.

Best of luck ;)
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline itsik78

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
Seraphim, I agree that paying this amount to a TEAM (of >= 5 people) is a great idea and I applaud you for that.
I'm sorry if I offended you and hope you're using the salary well.

On another note.
I need to understand something here as it puzzles me...
According to this page: http://memorycoin.org/foundation/
M9rJudKWdiE4dQd2K6DD9bLtkviKwnhNZG is "Clearing" and
MHodpHe3qVMzGKtgcrjwRQdvUTEyaXfHPE is "Main".
These 2 total 250k MMCs
If these don't belong to a person, why the hell are these 2 voting for candidates?
Either I'm missing something here or something really wrong is going on.


Offline seraphim

No, that's nothing we should discuss here ;-) I just wanted to point out that a lot of people seem to not care about what's getting done, while they complain that the cXo get too many coins.
Meet you on STEEM

emre

  • Guest
Quote
The shortly-compromised CNO is one of the examples of hard-working officers, and definitely not the one who should have been or should be kicked first.

yeah, that's a good idea. let's discuss who should be kicked first.

this all thread is nonsense. if the majority of the people decide to vote for a chain of happiness instead of a real candidate, that's okay for me.  consequences of this will be terrible but who cares, that's the bad thing about voting system in the first place. you can't stop the majority even if they do it wrong.

these people just don't want to see these coins paid to anyone. It's not about cXo's doing something good or bad for the coin/community. there is a money oppurtunity in here, and they just want to grab it. short-term money always feels good.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 05:39:03 pm by emre »

Offline seraphim

While I agree that the payout is pretty high, I think it's pretty unfair to lump together the efforts of all candidates.

Repeating that support does nothing but hanging around on the forums all the time doesn't come up with the things we really do - most work is done on memorycoin.org at the moment, as we want to reach a greater audience than forum people.
I applied to share the incoming coins, so more work could get done than a single person would ever be able to do. This works out pretty well for now.

The shortly-compromised CNO is one of the examples of hard-working officers, and definitely not the one who should have been or should be kicked first.

Maybe the other officers will also use parts of the income to find still more ways to help MMC getting forward, maybe others have to apply for that, or it will go on like it is, I don't know. But please consider having a closer look at what's happening before you support people who just negate other's efforts.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 05:27:55 pm by seraphim »
Meet you on STEEM