Poll

Better than v2?

Better
7 (46.7%)
Worse
8 (53.3%)

Total Members Voted: 14

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: Allocation proposal v3  (Read 546 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline toast

Allocation proposal v3
« on: August 07, 2014, 05:04:31 PM »

Feedback from last thread:

* 20% each for AGS and PTS might be too much (this is 80% of the initial supply)
* 5% for development might be too little (this is 10% of the initial supply)
* 5% for sharedrops might be too little

New proposal:

* 15% each for AGS and PTS  (this is 60% of initial supply)
* 10% for development  (this is 20% of initial supply)
* 10% for sharedrops  -  not just onto altcoins, but also onto organizations like student bodies or what have you
* Still 50% for delegates
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3309
    • View Profile
Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2014, 05:12:01 PM »
Better

Even better will be:
Good -15% each for AGS and PTS  (this is 60% of initial supply)
More- 10% for development  (this is 20% of initial supply)
Good- 10% for sharedrops  -  not just onto altcoins, but also onto organizations like student bodies or what have you
Less - Still 50% for delegates

Would have voted this proposal of yours perfect, if it not delegate subsidy but 50% for 'workers' - as in Agent86 proposal.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 05:16:14 PM by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline bytemaster

Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2014, 05:15:58 PM »
I think the only delegates that should get subsidy are those with over 25% approval.
I think AGS / PTS allocation should be higher
I think share drops should be eliminated and up to the discretion of delegates / developer fund. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3309
    • View Profile
Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2014, 05:39:09 PM »
I think the only delegates that should get subsidy are those with over 25% approval.

Make it  7/24 (midpoint of 33.3% and 25%) approval and I give:
  +5%

I don`t think playing around with ags and pts allocations after announcing a snapshot is a trusting manner to the BitShares ecosystem.

It can only go up for PTS/AGS %, so I think it is fine!
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 05:42:34 PM by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline sfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
  • 4 Cores CPU+100GB SSD+anti-DDoS Pro
    • View Profile
Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2014, 05:40:36 PM »
New proposal:

* 18% each for AGS and PTS 
* 18% for development 
* 8% for sharedrops  - 
* 38% for delegates
微博:星在飘我在找|BTS X 受托人delegate ID:baidu
中国教育书店合作将20%收入捐献给贫困山区学生。
Cooperating with China Education Bookstore and will donate 20% of delegate income to the poor students

Offline toast

Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2014, 06:08:34 PM »
I don`t think playing around with ags and pts allocations after announcing a snapshot is a trusting manner to the BitShares ecosystem.

The announcement was 10%/10%. Any change is strictly better for AGS and PTS holders. That said, I understand that it's annoying.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline Agent86

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • BTSX: agent86
    • View Profile
Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #6 on: August 07, 2014, 08:29:32 PM »
What specifically do you hope to accomplish by launching a copy of the toolkit and calling it DNS?

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but what exactly has been accomplished toward DNS?  We had a video and short beginning draft of a whitepaper with some auction parameters and those parameters have apparently now been changed in the last month or so, but if there was an announcement I missed it.  I still haven't figured out the purpose of complex one-time auctions.  So now we are acting like we're ready for launch and you want to divvy up the allocation of stake in this well developed project?!  Where's the project?  I don't see it.

A lot of people will need to work hard to get a new DNS to get a network effect and fully reach its potential.  If you don't have a means to compensate that work and allow new people a way in, it won't work and will be overtaken by smarter competition making smarter business decisions IMO.

Offline toast

Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2014, 08:36:04 PM »
What specifically do you hope to accomplish by launching a copy of the toolkit and calling it DNS?

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but what exactly has been accomplished toward DNS?  We had a video and short beginning draft of a whitepaper with some auction parameters and those parameters have apparently now been changed in the last month or so, but if there was an announcement I missed it.  I still haven't figured out the purpose of complex one-time auctions.  So now we are acting like we're ready for launch and you want to divvy up the allocation of stake in this well developed project?!  Where's the project?  I don't see it.

A lot of people will need to work hard to get a new DNS to get a network effect and fully reach its potential.  If you don't have a means to compensate that work and allow new people a way in, it won't work and will be overtaken by smarter competition making smarter business decisions IMO.

Want me to launch a test net? We can auction/buy/sell/transfer domains and set their values. That's all you need to start building the infrastructure around it. I had DNSchain modified and resolving .p2p domains for a previous version, won't take much work to update it. In fact we can hire the guy who originally wrote it for namecoin if we launch.

With delegate dilution + developer allocation we potentially have several million dollars to spend on developing the infrastructure required to actually build DNS resolvers. Without launching we have to go ask for outside money.

What's your smarter business plan? How much money do you need to execute it? We can probably afford it once we launch.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Online Shentist

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1605
    • View Profile
    • metaexchange
  • BTS: shentist
Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #8 on: August 07, 2014, 08:40:31 PM »
please come to a decision toast. for pts holder it is not bearable. how can anyone expect to make an investment decision? i would love to give as much equity to pts and ags holders.

why should 101 delegates hold 50% of the whole equity? did someone explain it already why you choose this approach? or do you plan to increase the delegate base? in the moment i think i am really lacking some critical and impotant points to come to a decision. maybe you can say some more words about your thought and don't shuffle only the numbers around.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 08:42:55 PM by Shentist »

Offline toast

Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #9 on: August 07, 2014, 08:41:17 PM »
What specifically do you hope to accomplish by launching a copy of the toolkit and calling it DNS?

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but what exactly has been accomplished toward DNS?  We had a video and short beginning draft of a whitepaper with some auction parameters and those parameters have apparently now been changed in the last month or so, but if there was an announcement I missed it.  I still haven't figured out the purpose of complex one-time auctions.  So now we are acting like we're ready for launch and you want to divvy up the allocation of stake in this well developed project?!  Where's the project?  I don't see it.

A lot of people will need to work hard to get a new DNS to get a network effect and fully reach its potential.  If you don't have a means to compensate that work and allow new people a way in, it won't work and will be overtaken by smarter competition making smarter business decisions IMO.

Want me to launch a test net? We can auction/buy/sell/transfer domains and set their values. That's all you need to start building the infrastructure around it. I had DNSchain modified and resolving .p2p domains for a previous version, won't take much work to update it. In fact we can hire the guy who originally wrote it for namecoin if we launch.

With delegate dilution + developer allocation we potentially have several million dollars to spend on developing the infrastructure required to actually build DNS resolvers. Without launching we have to go ask for outside money.

What's your smarter business plan? How much money do you need to execute it? We can probably afford it once we launch.

Also, the main network effect at the start is from KeyID + signin functionality, not .p2p. If the .p2p model fails it's ok, we have >50% of stake in the network and KeyID signin network effect to bring to whatever subsequent model we want.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline toast

Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #10 on: August 07, 2014, 08:43:01 PM »
please come to a decision toast. for pts holder it is not bearable. how can anyone expect to make an investment decision? i would love to give as much equity to pts and ags holders.

why should 101 delegates hold 50% of the whole equity? did someone explain it already why you choose this approach? or do you plan to increase the delegate base? in the moment i think i am really lacking some critical an impotant points to come to a decision. maybe you can say some more words about your thought and don't shuffle only the numbers around.

try this thread:  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6587.0

It's not 50% to 101 individuals, it's *up to* "whatever purpose we want".
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline Empirical1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
    • View Profile
Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #11 on: August 07, 2014, 08:44:27 PM »
I suspect the only model that would get more general approval than the previous 20/20/5/5 is 25/25/5/5 but that would be a lower initial supply for devs.

Offline toast

Re: Allocation proposal v3
« Reply #12 on: August 07, 2014, 08:48:57 PM »
Ok this thread has diverged, I have committed to an allocation and the other points should be brought up in new threads.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6753
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

 

Google+