Would you Support "Worker" Proposals Paying to add Peercoin & Primecoin? (poll)

[Tuck Fheman]

We're finishing some things up, but before xmas you guys will get the formal announcement.

https://www.ccedk.com/qora-btc

[kenCode]

Would Qora make sense?

Qora always makes sense.
I heard through the grapevine that they're getting some deal together with a "major crypto media company" that wants a "decentralized crypto news and streaming video site".

The grapevines ... Dang, you are so mysterious, it's killing me !
Can you say more about it ?

Hey person who knows more about it, you know who you are, can you elaborate yet?

We're finishing some things up, but before xmas you guys will get the formal announcement.

[Tuck Fheman]

Would Qora make sense?

Qora always makes sense.

I heard through the grapevine that they're getting some deal together with a "major crypto media company" that wants a "decentralized crypto news and streaming video site".

The grapevines ... Dang, you are so mysterious, it's killing me !

Can you say more about it ?

Hey person who knows more about it, you know who you are, can you elaborate yet?

[EstefanTT]

Would Qora make sense?

Qora always makes sense.

I heard through the grapevine that they're getting some deal together with a "major crypto media company" that wants a "decentralized crypto news and streaming video site".

The grapevines ... Dang, you are so mysterious, it's killing me !

Can you say more about it ?

[Tuck Fheman]

Would Qora make sense?

Qora always makes sense.

I heard through the grapevine that they're getting some deal together with a "major crypto media company" that wants a "decentralized crypto news and streaming video site".

[tonyk]

Tony I have a feeling that one day there will be a vote and 6,999,999,998 people will vote one way and you and I will be standing there looking at each other with a "dafuq" look on our faces. 

Aren't we already? 



And while on the topic of brownie.pts... GreenPoints are now available for sell for brownies...price is at a discount, the same way it is at a discount for BTS.

[Tuck Fheman]

And seeing poll results before casting the vote can obviously influence people, causing an echo-chamber effect where the most active members (those that answer the quickest) will have a disproportional influence on the results.

It's called the "Bandwagon effect" I believe.

However I'm pretty sure logic would come into play at some point for most, especially if the poll was "Death or Cake" and the first 20 people chose "Death".

I can only imagine the Bandwagon effect having any influence if the voters simply didn't give a rats ass about the outcome, did no research of their own and were given choices that weren't all that different ... like government elections.

OK then...voted...just to see the results...the opposite of my real opinion btw.

Tony I have a feeling that one day there will be a vote and 6,999,999,998 people will vote one way and you and I will be standing there looking at each other with a "dafuq" look on our faces. 

[tonyk]

fuzzy, can you please stop posting polls for your own research purposes only. I mean polls that you have to vote in order to see the results. The next one that I see made like that, I promise I will vote exactly the opposite of what I think.

I think this is a legitimate poll, not sure what you mean. And seeing poll results before casting the vote can obviously influence people, causing an echo-chamber effect where the most active members (those that answer the quickest) will have a disproportional influence on the results.

OK then...voted...just to see the results...the opposite of my real opinion btw.

[triox]

fuzzy, can you please stop posting polls for your own research purposes only. I mean polls that you have to vote in order to see the results. The next one that I see made like that, I promise I will vote exactly the opposite of what I think.

I think this is a legitimate poll, not sure what you mean. And seeing poll results before casting the vote can obviously influence people, causing an echo-chamber effect where the most active members (those that answer the quickest) will have a disproportional influence on the results.

[tonyk]

So would you be willing to vote for worker proposals to pay for bitasset versions of, say, the top 10 tokens on coinmarketcap?  It would, of course, depend on the interest of those communities...but I would gladly approach them and even hold a hangout for the "ground-breaking" ceremony. 

Why would those other communities ever want their coins to be inflated by a market pegged asset? BitAssets effectively increase the supply of something and dilutes demand for it like paper gold. Its great for BitShares but not great for those other coins.

Of couse IOUs that are backed by those coins are a different story. We should have all the top 10 coins trading on OpenLedger, and this can be used as a gateway drug for those communities to see the value of our exchange, and the value of BitAssets.

Seraphim is interested in building an exchange that would be owned by bts and would do precisely that!

fuzzy, can you please stop posting polls for your own research purposes only. I mean polls that you have to vote in order to see the results. The next one that I see made like that, I promise I will vote exactly the opposite of what I think.

[phillyguy]

I also agree the UIA route first makes more sense. Also - I think it would make sense to target an altcoin that 1.) has a community we can talk to and 2.) has members who have been burnt by a centralized exchange.

Would Qora make sense?

[Akado]

I guess a migration with a 1:1 sharedrop is out of question...

[Samupaha]

We have to remember that if a cryptocurrency has a small market cap, an MPA might "steal" a lot of its volume and make the market cap even smaller. MPA is not the real thing so in a way it is like a competitor. If a big whale decides to change his cryptocoins to MPA-coins, he has to sell the real coins on the market, which will cause price to decline. If everybody does this, the underlying currency will become worthless, and so becomes the MPA too, because it tracks the value of original asset.

On the other hand, UIA does not cause prices to collapse. If you have UIA-coin on the Bitshares blockchain, you have also equal amount of the original currency in the gateway's wallet.

[xeroc]

in this case, im referring more toward the userbase who may come over, most generic btc clones have a shady crowd who run with them,
im not sure about the benefits of DPOS vs POS but i can say that the people involved with POS coins tend to be a lot more shady.

I disagree but am not going to continue de-railing the thread

[kuro112]

Ive been a supporter of peercoin from the begining, proof of stake has made users so much money compared to the mining method,

the only issue is that it has also led to tons of scam coins, and scam users...

we should take care to ensure this type of behavior does not come to bitshares, peercoin may be a good option though.

1) We here use *DELEGATED* Proof o Stake
2) Scams have happend with POW first
3) I don't get why you related scams to a consensus technology at all. It makes no sense to me

in this case, im referring more toward the userbase who may come over, most generic btc clones have a shady crowd who run with them,
im not sure about the benefits of DPOS vs POS but i can say that the people involved with POS coins tend to be a lot more shady.

[xeroc]

Ive been a supporter of peercoin from the begining, proof of stake has made users so much money compared to the mining method,

the only issue is that it has also led to tons of scam coins, and scam users...

we should take care to ensure this type of behavior does not come to bitshares, peercoin may be a good option though.

1) We here use *DELEGATED* Proof o Stake
2) Scams have happend with POW first
3) I don't get why you related scams to a consensus technology at all. It makes no sense to me

[kuro112]

Ive been a supporter of peercoin from the begining, proof of stake has made users so much money compared to the mining method,

the only issue is that it has also led to tons of scam coins, and scam users...

we should take care to ensure this type of behavior does not come to bitshares, peercoin may be a good option though.

[fuzzy]

So would you be willing to vote for worker proposals to pay for bitasset versions of, say, the top 10 tokens on coinmarketcap?  It would, of course, depend on the interest of those communities...but I would gladly approach them and even hold a hangout for the "ground-breaking" ceremony. 

Why would those other communities ever want their coins to be inflated by a market pegged asset? BitAssets effectively increase the supply of something and dilutes demand for it like paper gold. Its great for BitShares but not great for those other coins.

Of couse IOUs that are backed by those coins are a different story. We should have all the top 10 coins trading on OpenLedger, and this can be used as a gateway drug for those communities to see the value of our exchange, and the value of BitAssets.

Seraphim is interested in building an exchange that would be owned by bts and would do precisely that!

[speedy]

I feel that we need a gateway like openledger to add the top 30 coins on coinmarket cap as user issued assets so that when people use bitshares it feels like any other exchange.  and these shoulld always trade as a pair with BITBTC and not BTS.

the only MPAs that need our attention and trading volume are USD and BTC.

And BitYuan!

But yes having all those altcoins trading against BitBTC would provide a very familiar experience.

[CLains]

I suggest opening threads like this on all the major altcoin forums, lite, ether, doge, dash, peer, to see how their community responds. It can be viewed as a partnership, a chance at publicity or as a hostile move depending on their respective attitudes. Of course you have to sell it the right way too. Let's go with the ones who most want this

Edit: If Sunny King thought this was a good idea I could be great publicity.. on the other hand, if we can't provide liquidity and the peg after all that debacle, this could be a huge failure short term and only add to the market confusion.

[speedy]

So would you be willing to vote for worker proposals to pay for bitasset versions of, say, the top 10 tokens on coinmarketcap?  It would, of course, depend on the interest of those communities...but I would gladly approach them and even hold a hangout for the "ground-breaking" ceremony. 

Why would those other communities ever want their coins to be inflated by a market pegged asset? BitAssets effectively increase the supply of something and dilutes demand for it like paper gold. Its great for BitShares but not great for those other coins.

Of couse IOUs that are backed by those coins are a different story. We should have all the top 10 coins trading on OpenLedger, and this can be used as a gateway drug for those communities to see the value of our exchange, and the value of BitAssets.

[JonnyB]

I feel that we need a gateway like openledger to add the top 30 coins on coinmarket cap as user issued assets so that when people use bitshares it feels like any other exchange.  and these shoulld always trade as a pair with BITBTC and not BTS.

the only MPAs that need our attention and trading volume are USD and BTC.

[Akado]

This seems like a good idea but.. Would they really use BitShares? I think that before we try to know people's opinions here, we should know the opinion of Peercoin community. Are they willing to trade here? Are they willing to pay the current fees?

I like it but this is something we must be sure of, first. Not to mention I can't stop thinking those 10btc could be used to help develop a Bond Market or other stuff first. Then it would make sense to bring other coins in.

Btw, would it just be a MPA? What if they migrated here? Meaning, do a sharedrop 1:1, one PeerCoin MPA per Peercoin on their chain, then they would migrate here?

I only like the idea because we could possibly have more people developing in BitShares and even have Nubits and BitUSD competing in the same chain in the future since Peercoin seems related to Peershares and Nushares.

[xeroc]

I voted "no". Not because I don't like peercoins .. but because it makes no sense to have them added if they don't want to trade here.
I'd rather go a different approach and have them used OPEN.PPC. Once there is some volume there and we see committment by the corresponding community, I see nothing standing in its way.

[fuzzy]

I think the first step should be a UIA from a gateway/exchange. If we have that and it is used with high volume, we can start to consider creating the MPA.

MPA itself might be too big step to take first. We have to know if the users of that currency are interested in having it in the Bitshares or not.

  I like this idea. UIA and a marketmaker would be much better start

Yes.  Maybe a competition among coins...the one that brings the most volume gets an MPA free?

[fav]

I think the first step should be a UIA from a gateway/exchange. If we have that and it is used with high volume, we can start to consider creating the MPA.

MPA itself might be too big step to take first. We have to know if the users of that currency are interested in having it in the Bitshares or not.

  I like this idea. UIA and a marketmaker would be much better start

[Samupaha]

I think the first step should be a UIA from a gateway/exchange. If we have that and it is used with high volume, we can start to consider creating the MPA.

MPA itself might be too big step to take first. We have to know if the users of that currency are interested in having it in the Bitshares or not.

[fuzzy]

I like the idea of promoting Market Pegged Assets (MPA) to the altcoin communities as an another revenue path for Bitshares.  MPA is considered a 'new product' in the industry.  We can and should have a big promotional campaigne for it.  A 50% 'open-shop' promotional discount can pull in the first few altcoin buyers and create a good buzz to other active communities.  The discount becomes a form of indirect advertisement cost which is necessary to bootstrap a new business.   I am, however, not sure about sponsoring this discount via a worker/dilution method which has a negative side-effect.

First off i have to say i truly love you guys for your constructive feedback. 

But now to the point: Do you have any ideas of a better way to do it?
Im all ears.  Lets defeat this dragon and haul home a horde of treasure!

[cube]

I like the idea of promoting Market Pegged Assets (MPA) to the altcoin communities as another revenue path for Bitshares.  MPA is considered a 'new product' in the industry.  We can and should have a big promotional campaign for it.  A 50% 'open-shop' promotional discount can pull in the first few altcoin buyers and create a good buzz to other active communities.  The discount becomes a form of indirect advertisement cost which is necessary to bootstrap a new business.   I am, however, not sure about sponsoring this discount via a worker/dilution method which has a negative side-effect.

[fuzzy]

My thinking is that we have a really good chance to bring them onboard and sunny is the satoshi of pos. 
We are also in a place where many of the other coins' communities (because we are not pow) will try to reject us and go toward a competitor on a chain that IS mined...

However, if we went with peercoin and got it onboard quickly, we would put those pow coins in a position where they would likely not want to be left behind and wpuld follow suit (potentially paying for the opportunity if they are "late" to the game.  Peercoin has a history with bitshares and our communities are definitely aligned in many ways. Heck beyondbitcoin even had one of its first hangouts between sunny and bm...and both communities loved it.

Not to mention it is a way of saying "thank you" to the creator of POS.  I mean...if there would be a history book 10 years from now talking about pow, pos, dpos...etc...i can definitely see it covering sunny and bm...and also talking about the historical moment when PPC became traded on a non pow decentralized exchange that started in part because of sunnys contributions...and bms innovations.

[donkeypong]

I think I like this. My main question would be which coin would be best? I'm really not sure that Peercoin is the next good one to choose. Yes, they are POS and their community is solid (and much closer to ours in many ways than other Top 10 coins). Back when airdropping was a thing, and we all discussed what coin communities made sense for a potential sharing, Peercoin came out very high in that discussion.

But what is our objective here? If it's publicity or volume, then why not go with the largest coins first, from BTC (got it) to LTC and on down? LTC and DOGE still have some utility because of mining. If you think of what's next in terms of market cap and publicity value, then maybe Ethereum.

Peercoin might bring a lesser quantity of PR, just because (frankly) I think most other people in crypto probably find Peercoin exceedingly boring. And that community is conservative/savings-oriented enough that I don't see it bringing much volume to the exchange.

Some other publicity suggestions:

"BitShares launches hostile takeover of NXT!"

"Take Gridcoin off the grid"?

[fuzzy]

more MPA means more feeds for witnesses and more costs in general.

I'm against it, if a altcoin community sees value in our service, they will kickstart and pay the ~10btc (?) for it.

we don't need coins without a community in my opinion

So it wouldnt be worth it to bring on some of the biggest and best coins to be traded on our exchange?  I mean i canleverage my connections with sunny to make this hapoen and it would be historical and would likely provide far more in press coverage than if we directly paid 10 btc to press institutions. 

I mean, imagine...peercoin is the first POS coin in existence.  And this is potentially a huge story.

How much are we talking in costs to add 10 more coins over time?  And mind you it might not need to be 10 before we can get momentum.  However, it is important to realize imho that momentum sometimes costs more upfront than people want to pay...but i honestly dont see any of these coins wanting to pay 10btc to be traded on our exchange while we have low liquidity.  To me that is huge and this would be a way to grab the big players in crypto before the competition does. 

Thanks for the input and looking forward to your opinions.

[fav]

more MPA means more feeds for witnesses and more costs in general.

I'm against it, if a altcoin community sees value in our service, they will kickstart and pay the ~10btc (?) for it.

we don't need coins without a community in my opinion

[fuzzy]

It is apparent bts needs liquidity in the internal exchange.  So while we are working very hard on bringing liquidity through the "Sharing" economy that will be created using ShareBits and other associated projects (many of which I cant really talk about here), I cant help but feel it is about time we begin looking to bring onboard other cryptocurrencies to have bitassets traded on our exchange.

For good reason, however, market pegged assets cost quite a bit...but early on while we try to gain traction, it is very important we make it very easy for other tokens to be added to our exchange.  The point i am making here is that until we have the top coins trading on our internal exchange, we should be careful to charge those coins' communities.

Once, we get the strongest communities onboard with us, our maketcap and liquidity wouldnt only significantly increase, but it would also highly incentivize other tokens to pay good money to be listed alongside them. 

So would you be willing to vote for worker proposals to pay for bitasset versions of, say, the top 10 tokens on coinmarketcap?  It would, of course, depend on the interest of those communities...but I would gladly approach them and even hold a hangout for the "ground-breaking" ceremony. 

Please vote in the poll above and let me know your thoughts.
So i would like to open up a poll and discussion on this idea. 

Am i missing something that makes this idea worthless or is it brilliant?