Airdrop concerns with Lottoshares

[Empirical1]

I think Bitshares should promote 2/3 classes of DAC's.

1) I3 Core
2) Endorsed
3) Wild West

I3 Core DAC's are released and worked on in some capacity by key employees at I3 and are expected to conform to high levels of fairness, quality, transparency, distribution, maintenance  etc.

The key issue with Lottoshares and with what was previously ZenithMusic was the implications bad DAC's could have on the Bitshares Brand especially in the early stages. By clearly separating them from the key I3 DAC's with a title that also indicates their potential riskiness it should eliminate alot of these debates.

Anybody should be encouraged to create Wild West DAC's, regardless of their real/perceived past, if 9/10 fail or are even dubious in some way, then that's fine, it's the Wild West, may fortunes be made and lost may new empires rise and fall! (The Bitshares Brand will be largely shielded from any scandals or issues arising from these DAC's.)

Then we only need to worry about the history of people and details of DAC's that are I3 Core or are looking for some sort of formal endorsement of quality from I3 & or the community.

[gyhy]

 

[liondani]

Again with the lies, Newmine.

Points have all been addressed repeatedly.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2288.0

This would be a perfect opportunity for Freetrade and Newmine to join a Mumble Session so they can get feedback from the community on record.  Anyone in attendance could ask questions and could record the session to propagate as they see fit.  The more avenues made available the better in my opinion. 

Personally, I would gladly set this up and run it since Freetrade will honor PTS/AGS. 

Please let me know if you are both interested in discussing this topic, clarifying any misconceptions, and learning the value of the community even at this early stage of Beyond Bitcoin.

Buzz like never before for the crypto community !!!
Seems promissing!!!

[xeroc]

This would be a perfect opportunity for Freetrade and Newmine to join a Mumble Session so they can get feedback from the community on record.  Anyone in attendance could ask questions and could record the session to propagate as they see fit.  The more avenues made available the better in my opinion. 

Personally, I would gladly set this up and run it since Freetrade will honor PTS/AGS. 

Please let me know if you are both interested in discussing this topic, clarifying any misconceptions, and learning the value of the community even at this early stage of Beyond Bitcoin.

Personally, I see FreeTrade as a honorable member of this community and love the idea of a mumble session for this. I'd like to participate to the next session, but I am afraid I wont have time again (private business) :-(
Will listen to the recordings though!

[fuzzy]

Again with the lies, Newmine.

Points have all been addressed repeatedly.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2288.0

This would be a perfect opportunity for Freetrade and Newmine to join a Mumble Session so they can get feedback from the community on record.  Anyone in attendance could ask questions and could record the session to propagate as they see fit.  The more avenues made available the better in my opinion. 

Personally, I would gladly set this up and run it since Freetrade will honor PTS/AGS. 

Please let me know if you are both interested in discussing this topic, clarifying any misconceptions, and learning the value of the community even at this early stage of Beyond Bitcoin.   

[NewMine]

Again with the lies, Newmine.

Points have all been addressed repeatedly.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2288.0

Katie: But you told Bter to de-list MemoryCoin?
FreeTrade: No. There's something called a trading halt - that's when something big is about to happen to a stock and trading is stopped to allow people to absorb the news. I told them they should probably suspend trading for a while because there was big news. But I don't get to tell exchanges what to list and de-list. Believe me, I've tried!

Katie: What was your stake in the original coin that was forked into the new coin?
I had a 1.6% stake, so I got about 160,000 coins. At the current price, that's under $50,000. Some people will say that is excessive but I've worked very hard at it and that's not really very much for the skills I have and there's a lot of risk of ending up with nothing at all.
I also control something called the Memory Coin Foundation which gives out tips and grants and that got 47,000 coins.  From the earliest days I've explained those are not mine and I'm continuing to give those away to people helping the project.

Katie: So you put them the pre-mine?
Well I had a lot of coins too, but the problem I was trying to solve was how do we keep voting  but stop the short-sighted shareholders from taking the salaries and firing the devs?
And the solution I came up with was to fork all the balances from the old coin, but dilute anyone who wasn't voting, or just voting to share the grants out amongst the winning voters. So the fork rewarded people who were really engaged and trying to make the project work, but still kept balances for everyone.

Where am I lying?

Twice you have called me a liar in this thread.

Instead of calling me a liar, point out where I have it wrong.

[FreeTrade]

The word endorse should never be used in these relationships.

I3/Bitshares should not be in the business of endorsing, just supporting the ecosystem which means DACs using the ecosystem.  The support should be seen as technical support and basic announcements, but no value judgement by I3.  They really need to make that clear all over the place. 

I agree. From a dev point of view, I see the 20% distribution as a cost to the rights to use the Bitshares codebase and a way to distribute shares to investors who, by and large, understand what's happening. Wrt Lottoshares, I don't seek nor expect any support from I3 nor PTS/AGS investors except where that is freely given.

[FreeTrade]

Again with the lies, Newmine.

Points have all been addressed repeatedly.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2288.0

[NewMine]

Just my 2 BIP.

The solution can be to start from blank page and not to honor MemoryCoin (MMC) holders. This will solve a historical problems and misunderstandings?

I am not even saying to do that. (Full disclosure, I have zero MMC, so I don't care either way.)


All I am saying is beware and decide for yourself. I think the past speaks for itself. He lost his vote in MEC and then had trading "halted" because he was leaving the coin as the core developer. This effectively killed MEC immediately as no one could trade through an exchange. He then starts a new coin and honors himself with a huge premine that was only disclosed as going to "MEC contributors". 160k coins to his addresses and 47k going to MCF(MemoryCoin Foundation) address which he controlled.  I think he purposely did not disclose that he as developer was granting himself that many coins because it would impede acceptance of the coin. Had he come out and said, "I am giving myself 200,000 coins" for a coin which was built on using coins as votes to elect paid employees, he would have been laughed at all the way home.

If you are okay with what happened at the end of MEC and the genesis of MMC, ignore everything I said.

[Pheonike]

There should be some certification process for new DACs. There should also be some crytographic seal of approval that the DAC can display on their site that proves it has been vetted by the Bitshares.org.

[gamey]

The word endorse should never be used in these relationships.

I3/Bitshares should not be in the business of endorsing, just supporting the ecosystem which means DACs using the ecosystem.  The support should be seen as technical support and basic announcements, but no value judgement by I3.  They really need to make that clear all over the place. 

It is obvious just like s**tcoins there will be s**tdacs.  Buckle up.  Actually, to be fair, DACs have to show their value as a product before shares are sold, so the process will have more transparency and mitigate a lot of fraud.  Which will be nice.

[onceuponatime]

Yes, you've raised the issue appropriately in my opinion.

[FreeTrade]

Also there is a way to make this provably fair, and not have to use his own seed, which he can control. If I was running this coin, that would be my priority.

Yes, having seen ChanceCoin's approach I'm leaning more towards using the NY Lottery data feed for randomness, however it still creates possibilities for cheating by forging blockstamp timestamps. Provable fairness for centralized services is a solved problem, but decentralized provable fairness is proving a very difficult nut to crack. It might be that there will always need to some remnant of centralization to it.

[bitmeat]

Also there is a way to make this provably fair, and not have to use his own seed, which he can control. If I was running this coin, that would be my priority.

[bitmeat]

So if he has 200k MMC that's what now? Out of 6M MMC it's a tiny fraction and out of 10% of that, I don't think this is really anywhere close to the issues MMC had in the beginning. That's 0.3% of LottoShares. Unless I have the numbers wrong. What I do take an issue with is the hastiness, end of May snapshot lockdown. What's the point of that deadline being so soon if most donations will be locked down between 3 and 15 months after the snapshot?