People who simply own Bitcoin but didn't actually invest in AGS fund with Bitcoin deserve no Bitshares. Unless they are willing to use their Bitcoin to purchase Bitshares.

More importantly those who have contributed to AGS deserve PTS… see here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1890.msg52735#msg52735

Quote from: davidpbrown on April 13, 2014, 11:35:56 am

Quote from: tonyk on April 13, 2014, 01:26:21 am

Does someone have a reasonable explanation why at least 45-70% of all PTS are not in the AGS fund?

Personally, I've never understood AGS well enough. It's not been made obvious that PTS can be converted to AGS.

If the idea of future DACs honoring AGS/PTS is proven and it's clear that benefit you suggest would continue, then perhaps swapping to AGS would be attractive. Perhaps if another snapshot deadline is looming a push for this would go down well.

Jumping extra hoops, and contending with whatever the changing balance of AGS/PTS is, is off putting. I expect I'm more likely to see PTS for sale than AGS, so keeping everything PTS is simple. Also, if some PTS holders switched to AGS, would PTS value not fall?.. Perhaps AGS offers an option to those unfamiliar with cryptocurrencies but I wonder having everyone in one flavour of holding would be easier to understand.

Maybe in future if change to a simple PoS is required to avoid issues with the PoW PTS, perhaps both AGS and PTS can just have that PoS instead - perhaps coupled with a default inflation that doesn't require a server to action, just every account gets interest - or perhaps that is the effect that AGS achieves already??

Perhaps the seemingly low exchange ratio between PTS and AGS can be partly explained by the option value and flexibility of PTS with respect to timing of donation. Even if a PTS holder doesn't donate to AGS today, they have the flexibility to do so tomorrow, or the day after, or the day after that... That is to say, if the exchange terms for donating could be almost as good tomorrow, or even better, why jump into donating right away? Indeed, it'll be more surprising if exchange rates stay low throughout the entire remainder of the donation period.

"Even if a PTS holder doesn't donate to AGS today, they have the flexibility to do so tomorrow, or the day after, or the day after that"

It is good in theory but with 1,200,000+ PTS available for donation for the available 96 days (or 480,000 AGS) waiting for much better than current exchange rate does not seem logical. Let say 600,000 waiting to be donated/exchanged for 480,000 AGS

The only argument for holding to PTS is liquidity… but I have accounted for that (I think) by expecting only 45-60% to actually exchange for AGS not 100%

I was kidding that bytemaster does not takes it seriously enough... after your post I guess I can too..

“These people are at the professional heart of cryptography…
These guys have announced plans to work with the core bitcoin developers so that by the time bitcion 2.0 comes out 2 or 3 years from now, sidechains will be fully secured by the hashing power of the network”

And what this :"Part of the narrative is that bitcoin has effectively crowdfunded an ASIC hashing infrastructure currently valued at $250,000,000 and growing. " have to do with anything??

If anything it is concerning that  decentralizations idols of 2-3 years ago are proud to announce enormous investment in specifically centralization oriented hardware.

I personally hold my PTS and donate in BTC because I feel BTC will eventually be realized to be a respected a respected crypto amongst a group of a small handful of others.  I feel that eventually those others will be on par with regard to price...and bitShares PTS might be one of them.

It might be me, but I have no idea what you are saying.

Are you saying you hold your PTS and donate BTC expecting PTS will appreciate?
If so, just buy PTS with your bitcoins first.

Then follow the logic: if PTS (ever) go up in value it will be because the DACs are successful. And if so your PTS will be better (i.e. multiplied) if they are transferred to AGS…

83% (5/6ths) of PTS holders are of the opinion that holding PTS, for the benefit of having the option to sell them for $5-$10 apiece, is better than exchanging them for AGS.

This, while AGS investment gives 1.73 better stake in future DACs (add to that that 1.73 is based on average past purchase price and at the moment the price is even more favorable).

Does someone have a reasonable explanation why at least 45-70% of all PTS are not in the AGS fund?

Thanks

Shouldn’t the airdrops be funded by the account dedicated at its announcement as the one dedicated for such purposes?

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1863.msg21379#msg21379 “…They will be used for advertisements, conferences, promotions and give-aways to stimulate interest in the new industry and to provide opportunities for everyone to contribute…”

The basic idea is the following – instead of  diluting the shareholders equity by setting aside certain % of the shares for airdrops, can’t we find way/s to use the shares received in the new DAC (by/in the AGS account) for said airdrop.

The implications of such approach are manifold so lets’ discuss them.


BTW I in semi-related line of thought the percentage of PTS in that (AGS) account relating to the total supply of PTS is suspiciously low (in my opinion) having in mind the beneficial AGS/PTS ratio it offers. In other word if most people are indeed in the bitshares for the long run why the long run investment strategy (i.e. AGS) attracts roughly 1/6th of all investments compared to the short term (liquid one) at almost 5/6th.

You're saying we might honor all of BTC?

Might just work...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How  should I put this – from 2 unlikely developments I find this one more likely (in the order of 5*10^-3 to 5*10^-4)

Oh my goodness. That is one heck of an interesting idea. I'm not sure I'd want all Bitcoin holders in all of these DACs, but air-dropping a stake to all BTC holders is an experiment I would love to see with one of these DACs or DAC families. Talk about viral marketing.

That is really great!!!
But if I was Dan I would choose other forms of self-destructing my own interest if I can help it.

I decided to edit this post and to make something clear(er):
1. 1 BTC to 1 BitBTC protocol/exchange will achieve 2 indisputably great things (Bitcoin 2.0 – i.e. 2-way pegged parallel chain, and POS for said/parallel/unparalleled chain)

2. What will it do for the developers will be - unknown amount of work put in implementing an idea that results in total devaluation of all of their shares by BTC holders…

So ... are we screwed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you have just come up with the best beer in the world and 1 mo. before you have actually produced it for all of your 500 customers in your local pub to try it, Budweiser comes with a bear that is 75% of what you offer but will be available in 20Mil stores for 1Bil customers –what do you do? Stop and do not deliver your beer? No you just mention the 25% difference in your favor and go on hoping what will eventually matter is the 25% better quality not the smaller exposure you will initially get.
In other words only time will tell what matters more – better product or better initial market position…