What Coins are worth DAC Air Drops?

[fuzzy]

As for being against Invictus doing DAC Air Drops on other cryptos (like, say, DomainShares Air Dropping to Namecoin), I cannot see why investors would not want this.  Most investors are intelligent enough to at least somewhat diversify...and the bitshares community will gain a great deal of press for initiatives like these.  I am just trying to see the downside(s).  All ears on that

I think the downside is that to date, any attempts at significant airdrops, even to targeted communities and that don't have any personal financial investment in the new coin have resulted in 99%+ losses from shareholders from the highs, which is pretty epic.

These figures are a few months old but -

SiliconValleyCoin achieved a high of $20 million and is now $1650 (99.9%+ Shareholder loss)
AuroraCoin achieved a high of $800 million and is now $1 million... (99%+ Shareholder loss)
SpainCoin achieved a high of $80 million and is now $20 000...  (99.9% Shareholder loss)
MazaCoin achieved a high of $6 million and is now $200 000...  (96% Shareholder loss)

However DomainShares to Namecoin or DogeLotto to Dogecoin should have more success. I still think the short term effect will be price negative but perhaps the overall marketing value will offset it. I think it's a good idea to test the best Airdrop strategy with a non-core DAC and gauge the results from that.

Exactly !  With numbers to back it up.  I came to this thread to read the new posts and add my additional 2 cents, but have a similar opinion.

I think most airdrops will end up with people who just dump their shares.  The airdrop needs an additional component that at least differentiates the people who care vs the people who will auto-dump.  If 80% of the people dump their shares, has the DAC gained value ? (rhetorical question)  At first I was more for the idea but as time has went on I've changed my opinion.  I like the idea of a random chance, but not one tied into purchases.  If there would be a way for a person to have to check to see fi they have received shares and not have them by default.  (That means they're at least slightly more motivated given that they're doing something with a possible outcome of 0..  vs guaranteed money given a typical airdrop) 

So Luckybit's suggestion is good in that it differentiates people who care, but it also is just another way of purchasing shares with a random component.  If you could find a way to actually discern motivated investors vs people who will just immediately dump then we'd have a solution.


After reading the faucet idea I'm far more interested in that.  We really want people who are motivated to use the DAC.  DNS/Namecoin is an obvious fit, but what outside of that fits ?  Will Namecoin people dump their shares because they want to protect Namecoin?  Lots of unknowns on the behavior end of things.

Perhaps a faucet that is tied into the addresses of other coins.  Then from there add a few other parameters to keep people from spreading their money out into different addresses.  Then you have a hybrid faucet and airdrop !

They download the DAC, get an address for receiving their shares.  Then if there was a standard way for us to verify they were in control of certain addresses of the airdropped coin, they put that in there.  The address would likely need a certain sized balance at a certain date, or the person could just move the money and use the faucet again.  There are lots of combinations of verification parameters but I suspect this idea might be the best way to "airdrop".

But then I ask myself why bother even having the airdrop to a certain coin?  A public faucet would be better.  Perhaps the airdrop-faucet could reward slightly higher amounts ?  Or at least make a certain coin feel more involved if there was a faucet exclusive to certain coins ?

Anyway.. just my rambling 2 cents.

These terrible numbers do not reflect the lack of value in the coin due to the drop, necessarily.  It could also be a function of the fact that there are literally almost no services tied to the accepting of these coins.  For instance, if "sharedropped" on mazacoin, the bitshares Lotto would be working with a demographic outside normal gambling laws (which means they have fewer legal concerns with respect to running a Lotto DAC Delegates).  It might also mean that the incentive for cash to crypto services through Mazacoin (and perhaps even bitshares for being an "ally") in these areas as it would be in their benefit.  They are primed for combustion if the right alliances are made between Dev teams working on similar problems that would make them perfect candidates to supplement the bitshares ecosystem as it grows up itself.  These services that could be launched, and strategically placed demographics with certain attributes will fill gaps in the ecosystem and create a flowing economy...then the value rises for all boats.

[Empirical1]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

  I was thinking if we did sharedrops, that rather than giving them away they'd have to complete a marketing task and your suggestion sounds great.

If there was a way to make them Add/Promote Bitshares on Twitter, or Facebook etc. that could be good too.

I also like Sharedrops instead of airdrops.

I also like the Easter egg idea, like every Xth download has a much larger amount that gets split between the person that downloaded it and person that referred them.

Sharedrops are cool.  Now let's talk Dynamicly Adaptive Sharedrops!  (Anyone who captures a Delegate spot captures an income "spigot" they can choose to redirect in a thousand different ways ... whatever it takes to capture and retain votes.  (So we have created "smart spigots" (controlled by the best and brightest human promoters selected in a Darwinian competition to attract new voters (bitshareholders)))). 

These "smart spigots" will naturally adapt over time to do what the industry consensus demands.  So developers don't really have to brilliantly cast the ideal sharedrop into the genesis block.  They just need to make it sufficiently profitable to be a delegate that the best 101 smart spigots just naturally appear.

  Yes that all sounds good. I really like it.
It will be very interesting to watch how the theory plays out in practice.

[Stan]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

  I was thinking if we did sharedrops, that rather than giving them away they'd have to complete a marketing task and your suggestion sounds great.

If there was a way to make them Add/Promote Bitshares on Twitter, or Facebook etc. that could be good too.

I also like Sharedrops instead of airdrops.

I also like the Easter egg idea, like every Xth download has a much larger amount that gets split between the person that downloaded it and person that referred them.

Sharedrops are cool.  Now let's talk Dynamicly Adaptive Sharedrops!  (Anyone who captures a Delegate spot captures an income "spigot" they can choose to redirect in a thousand different ways ... whatever it takes to capture and retain votes.  (So we have created "smart spigots" (controlled by the best and brightest human promoters selected in a Darwinian competition to attract new voters (bitshareholders)))). 

These "smart spigots" will naturally adapt over time to do what the industry consensus demands.  So developers don't really have to brilliantly cast the ideal sharedrop into the genesis block.  They just need to make it sufficiently profitable to be a delegate that the best 101 smart spigots just naturally appear.

[Empirical1]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

  I was thinking if we did sharedrops, that rather than giving them away they'd have to complete a marketing task and your suggestion sounds great.

If there was a way to make them Add/Promote Bitshares on Twitter, or Facebook etc. that could be good too.

I also like Sharedrops instead of airdrops.

I also like the Easter egg idea, like every Xth download has a much larger amount that gets split between the person that downloaded it and person that referred them. 

[CLains]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

A month ago I might have paused at this, and said something about promotional value, but since then pretty much all of the airdrops have failed in proportion to the amounts it has given away freely.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Something like this. 

[luckybit]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

In that case, could we just pre-load the wallet or Keyhotee with something? Anyone interested enough to download it would be rewarded. That also might help protect against people doing this multiple times using multiple addresses, e-mails, or whatever you are using to track them. I love referral bonuses; as far as I'm concerned you could go wildly viral that way. Would it be possible to build some standard code for that which DACs could apply?

Wasn't this how Elon Musk made PayPal go viral?
http://www.quora.com/PayPal/How-did-PayPals-early-viral-growth-work

Google's Gmail too. As well as every successful video game system that I can remember. Even the PC had software included which was valuable. 

How about some eastereggs too?  Willy Wonka's golden ticket? There are ways to do this where the participants wouldn't know about these surprises in advance. The only way to have a chance would be to continue participating. The way you participate could improve your chances too because how people participate reveals a lot about what they are interested in.

[Stan]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

In that case, could we just pre-load the wallet or Keyhotee with something? Anyone interested enough to download it would be rewarded. That also might help protect against people doing this multiple times using multiple addresses, e-mails, or whatever you are using to track them. I love referral bonuses; as far as I'm concerned you could go wildly viral that way. Would it be possible to build some standard code for that which DACs could apply?

Wasn't this how Elon Musk made PayPal go viral?
http://www.quora.com/PayPal/How-did-PayPals-early-viral-growth-work

[Stan]

You guys are making great contributions to BitShares Airdrop Theory.  What would you add to the brief summary of key concepts I just published here?

http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

Perhaps labeling it "Sharedrops" would be more marketable than Airdrops.
Just a suggestion.

Airdrop is good for explaining the overall general concept but drop what? Currency? Or shares?

From here you would have different types such as coordinated, targeted, randomized, conditional, etc.

That name is so good, I'm going to change the article now. 

[donkeypong]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

In that case, could we just pre-load the wallet or Keyhotee with something? Anyone interested enough to download it would be rewarded. That also might help protect against people doing this multiple times using multiple addresses, e-mails, or whatever you are using to track them. I love referral bonuses; as far as I'm concerned you could go wildly viral that way. Would it be possible to build some standard code for that which DACs could apply?

[Troglodactyl]

...

I think most airdrops will end up with people who just dump their shares.  The airdrop needs an additional component that at least differentiates the people who care vs the people who will auto-dump.  If 80% of the people dump their shares, has the DAC gained value ? (rhetorical question)  At first I was more for the idea but as time has went on I've changed my opinion.  I like the idea of a random chance, but not one tied into purchases.  If there would be a way for a person to have to check to see fi they have received shares and not have them by default.  (That means they're at least slightly more motivated given that they're doing something with a possible outcome of 0..  vs guaranteed money given a typical airdrop) 

So Luckybit's suggestion is good in that it differentiates people who care, but it also is just another way of purchasing shares with a random component.  If you could find a way to actually discern motivated investors vs people who will just immediately dump then we'd have a solution.
...

I think elsewhere I suggested snapshots onto vanity-gen'd addresses that say "BTS" or some other recognizable marketing label.  That way the stake airdropped is proportional to the amount of the target token symbolically used to advertise for us, which is at least a slight test of interest/commitment.

[luckybit]

You guys are making great contributions to BitShares Airdrop Theory.  What would you add to the brief summary of key concepts I just published here?

http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

Perhaps labeling it "Sharedrops" would be more marketable than Airdrops.
Just a suggestion.

Airdrop is good for explaining the overall general concept but drop what? Currency? Or shares?

From here you would have different types such as coordinated, targeted, randomized, conditional, etc.

[bytemaster]

A thought on airdrops...  don't give money away, just make it easy to get.

For example: if you 'airdropped' $1 million it helps those who got it, but no one else.

Instead you should give a free sample to everyone who asks.  Then give them a bonus for everyone they refer who also collects a free sample.

Now those who work hard can earn more and bring in NEW people without limit. 

I think that an airdrop only makes sense for those who have already contributed to the cause: AGS / PTS

[Stan]

You guys are making great contributions to BitShares Airdrop Theory.  What would you add to the brief summary of key concepts I just published here?

http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

[donkeypong]

As for being against Invictus doing DAC Air Drops on other cryptos (like, say, DomainShares Air Dropping to Namecoin), I cannot see why investors would not want this.  Most investors are intelligent enough to at least somewhat diversify...and the bitshares community will gain a great deal of press for initiatives like these.  I am just trying to see the downside(s).  All ears on that

I think the downside is that to date, any attempts at significant airdrops, even to targeted communities and that don't have any personal financial investment in the new coin have resulted in 99%+ losses from shareholders from the highs, which is pretty epic.

These figures are a few months old but -

SiliconValleyCoin achieved a high of $20 million and is now $1650 (99.9%+ Shareholder loss)
AuroraCoin achieved a high of $800 million and is now $1 million... (99%+ Shareholder loss)
SpainCoin achieved a high of $80 million and is now $20 000...  (99.9% Shareholder loss)
MazaCoin achieved a high of $6 million and is now $200 000...  (96% Shareholder loss)

However DomainShares to Namecoin or DogeLotto to Dogecoin should have more success. I still think the short term effect will be price negative but perhaps the overall marketing value will offset it. I think it's a good idea to test the best Airdrop strategy with a non-core DAC and gauge the results from that.

Yes, those were drops to the general population of a region, which has no coin savvy. You are correct that a coin-targeted air drop would be much more effective.

[gamey]

As for being against Invictus doing DAC Air Drops on other cryptos (like, say, DomainShares Air Dropping to Namecoin), I cannot see why investors would not want this.  Most investors are intelligent enough to at least somewhat diversify...and the bitshares community will gain a great deal of press for initiatives like these.  I am just trying to see the downside(s).  All ears on that

I think the downside is that to date, any attempts at significant airdrops, even to targeted communities and that don't have any personal financial investment in the new coin have resulted in 99%+ losses from shareholders from the highs, which is pretty epic.

These figures are a few months old but -

SiliconValleyCoin achieved a high of $20 million and is now $1650 (99.9%+ Shareholder loss)
AuroraCoin achieved a high of $800 million and is now $1 million... (99%+ Shareholder loss)
SpainCoin achieved a high of $80 million and is now $20 000...  (99.9% Shareholder loss)
MazaCoin achieved a high of $6 million and is now $200 000...  (96% Shareholder loss)

However DomainShares to Namecoin or DogeLotto to Dogecoin should have more success. I still think the short term effect will be price negative but perhaps the overall marketing value will offset it. I think it's a good idea to test the best Airdrop strategy with a non-core DAC and gauge the results from that.

Exactly !  With numbers to back it up.  I came to this thread to read the new posts and add my additional 2 cents, but have a similar opinion.

I think most airdrops will end up with people who just dump their shares.  The airdrop needs an additional component that at least differentiates the people who care vs the people who will auto-dump.  If 80% of the people dump their shares, has the DAC gained value ? (rhetorical question)  At first I was more for the idea but as time has went on I've changed my opinion.  I like the idea of a random chance, but not one tied into purchases.  If there would be a way for a person to have to check to see fi they have received shares and not have them by default.  (That means they're at least slightly more motivated given that they're doing something with a possible outcome of 0..  vs guaranteed money given a typical airdrop) 

So Luckybit's suggestion is good in that it differentiates people who care, but it also is just another way of purchasing shares with a random component.  If you could find a way to actually discern motivated investors vs people who will just immediately dump then we'd have a solution.


After reading the faucet idea I'm far more interested in that.  We really want people who are motivated to use the DAC.  DNS/Namecoin is an obvious fit, but what outside of that fits ?  Will Namecoin people dump their shares because they want to protect Namecoin?  Lots of unknowns on the behavior end of things.

Perhaps a faucet that is tied into the addresses of other coins.  Then from there add a few other parameters to keep people from spreading their money out into different addresses.  Then you have a hybrid faucet and airdrop !

They download the DAC, get an address for receiving their shares.  Then if there was a standard way for us to verify they were in control of certain addresses of the airdropped coin, they put that in there.  The address would likely need a certain sized balance at a certain date, or the person could just move the money and use the faucet again.  There are lots of combinations of verification parameters but I suspect this idea might be the best way to "airdrop".

But then I ask myself why bother even having the airdrop to a certain coin?  A public faucet would be better.  Perhaps the airdrop-faucet could reward slightly higher amounts ?  Or at least make a certain coin feel more involved if there was a faucet exclusive to certain coins ?

Anyway.. just my rambling 2 cents.