We take this very seriously. We learn, adapt, improve, ... compete.
Have you read the reasoning behind the decision? It was not made on a whim.
I am quite sure that you didn't do it on a whim. I'm not saying that. But the changes - in terms of the value a person gains from various actions (buying pts, ags, or bts promoting Bitshares, or trying to build an allied business), as well as the core way that Bitshares is structured and its features have been subject to near constant changes from the start. My point is that when making such changes so often, regardless of how positive and well thought out those changes are, you make it very difficult for newcomers to get to grips with how to get involved, and potentially burn people who are already involved and trying to do something.
What's more this brownie point thing in particular is just another way of drawing value from the decentralized Bitshares to Cryptonomex. It feels like yet another example of what seems to be a general disregard for people who have actually bought into this thing in some way - either financially or with time and effort.
Just the opposite.
BitShares Sharedrop Theory has been well defined in many posts since I first introduced it more than a year ago. It's always been
up to each developer to pick the demographics that work best for their coins. We try to encourage them to honor BTS with 20% of initial stake by making that a factor in whether they get a license, but in the end all developers will do what they feel best meets their objectives.
Your preferred critieria, "
people who have actually bought into this thing in some way - either financially or with time and effort," is met explicitly in the two choices John Underwood made:
"financially" (via BitShares) or "with time and effort" (via Brownies).
Cryptonomex gets no special benefit from John's decision to
double the minimum amount of initial stake the community gets and targeting it
precisely the way you seem to be advocating.
The decision about interest on bitAssets took place over an extended period of discussion and community feedback this spring and everyone had plenty of notice about the issues. All of the lessons learned are bundled into just one major upgrade in the switch to version 2.0. Seems about right for a highly competitive industry and a development team well known for its fast-break offense.
And we continue to add tools to allow developers to build their own user issued assets to support their own business models. This whole summer has been about giving associated businesses lots of advance warning about where the developers are going. The 30 day countdown is to allow time for integration and testing so that everyone can step off in lockstep at 2.0 launch.