Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
You will be rewarded extremely handsomely by shareholders as a paid delegate if you do something like this. Just look at how big corporations reward top executives with massive bonuses. We will do the same thing for people we can see have made us money.
Maybe but how can I be sure all of you agree to give me what I want. What if i want more ?With scenario 2 I don't have to worry.
I propose that they are all used to buy up BTSX, and then burned.Why? I can think of a million ways these funds can be used. Since BTS is going to have DCI I don't see how this will be of any use to the shareholders.
Burning them means distributing them equally to all shareholders. Once funds are needed for something new in the future, they are simply diluted into existance by elected delegates. There is no reason to take the risk of having an external entity holding the funds for us.
The plan has always been to move all employees to delegates and phase out I3.
Sounds good really like the Bitshare OS analogy . But what about the following scenario :
- BTS price is 1$. I raise money to develop my Dapp(not easy need to convince the majority of BTS network to get the funds...). I'm lunching a amazing Dapp let's take Music as an example. My Dapp is doing absolutely great let's suppose that it is the most popular on the Bitshare OS and maybe other Dapps are not doing so great. So now because of my amazing Dapps, BTS is worth1.5$. Because there is no such think as Notes there is no way I will make money out of Bitshare OS except if I own BTS( by the way those i should buy myself with my own money) and hope that different good Dapps are there to raise the value of the BTS. But what if someone is starting selling DaappCocaine now my BTS are going down like bitcoin, now I'm losing money. As a developer the only way to make money it using the PeerTrack website.
- Now same idea but as independent DAC, I clone Bitshare OS so I have all the goodies of the toolkit( I print my own bitUSD). I have no intention to go against Bitshare at all I just want to run my business and do one think well, sell music that's it. I pre-sale Notes to acquire some founds classical style,( I may honor AGS/PTS holder just for the fun of it
). I lunch. Notes are going to the moon, the shareholders are happy my shares are not diluted by other non successful Dapps . I'm not is in danger of collapse because of dangerous DappCocaine.
Of course this scenario will not apply for every third party DAC but for some I thing will be an attractive alternative i.e A DAC like Music is special they don't need the network effect of the cryptoword, so they don't really need the network effect of Bitshare OS and BTS shareholders
Before you could build your own business, now you could only be an employee .
I use Music as a example not suggesting anything here.I'm also 100% absolutely in favor for the merger, because I thinks this is the best thing to do at this point in time no question about. We are to small to do it otherwise. I just don't think this is the best solution long term. I still prefer the of 1000 blockhain original philosophy model more than Bitshareum one chain model.
I think keeping them as an "emergency fund" would be wiser. The rate of dilution at the beginning might not be fast enough to be very helpful if something drastic were to happen. At the very least they should be used to make bitUSD stronger.I propose that they are all used to buy up BTSX, and then burned.Why? I can think of a million ways these funds can be used. Since BTS is going to have DCI I don't see how this will be of any use to the shareholders.
Burning them means distributing them equally to all shareholders. Once funds are needed for something new in the future, they are simply diluted into existance by elected delegates. There is no reason to take the risk of having an external entity holding the funds for us.
I propose that they are all used to buy up BTSX, and then burned.Why? I can think of a million ways these funds can be used. Since BTS is going to have DCI I don't see how this will be of any use to the shareholders.
No matter what, if one DAC wants to absorb another, stakeholders of the absorbed DAC will get to vote on it, and only if they choose to do it will it go ahead. They will then get awarded a proportional stake so their holdings will continue at the exact same value as before.
One would hope this is the case, but no such vote occurred in the DNS DAC and as of now it's being merged with the mega-DAC at less than half its market value.
One thing that is always sure in the bitshares world is that nothing is ever sure...
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
QuoteI would like to see every team member on this page http://bitshares.org/community/team/ apply to become a paid delegate after the hard fork. It would greatly increase transparency and understanding of the average shareholder about what exactly is being done, and who is doing it, and will MASSIVELY increase shareholder confidence and demand. I don't think anyone has ever seen a company structure like this before, the level of transparency will be absolutely revolutionary. Once the entire team has been integrated as paid delegates, it will provide an excellent showcasing to new developers that might be interested in working for the blockchain.
It prevents the liquidity happy PTS folks from dumping crap load of shares at once and tanking the price.
I thought it was a priority to avoid a situation where an announcement gave someone an information advantage (meaning we were thinking only in terms of current % of market cap).
It doesn't matter anymore because the market has adjusted the price of all assets for this allocation. So any change after the OP would just be BM deciding which current asset holder (AGS, PTS, DNS, BTSX) gets more BTS... meaning this basically has to be the real allocation.
BM is a genius programmer and visionary.... But maybe not the greatest when it comes to when and what to post publicly on the forum
These kind of situations will be avoided in the future when we have matured as a community, and as a DAC.
Yes. Unfortunately. But that will mean you have to wait longer to get information to effect your investment decisions until the story has been polished and vetted. This will increase the knowledge gap between insiders and outsiders. Right now that knowledge gap is measured in minutes...
This is common in politics - each side picks a name that supports its point of view:
pro-choice vs. pro-life comes to mind.
So, I'm naturally going to call it Dynamic Value Infusion because thats the benefit I see for doing it and it describes the NET EFFECT you get from Value Added + Share Dilution.
But if you want to pick just half the story for your name to make your point, I recognize it as an effective rhetorical strategy.
I thought it was a priority to avoid a situation where an announcement gave someone an information advantage (meaning we were thinking only in terms of current % of market cap).
It doesn't matter anymore because the market has adjusted the price of all assets for this allocation. So any change after the OP would just be BM deciding which current asset holder (AGS, PTS, DNS, BTSX) gets more BTS... meaning this basically has to be the real allocation.
