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.


Messages - Rune

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ... 75
961
General Discussion / Lets just call it what it is: share dilution
« on: October 21, 2014, 11:33:54 pm »
After having the discussion in another thread I made, it seems that pretty much no one can agree on whatever new name to call share dilution. Even after some people agree to a new term, I see them still using the word "dilution" when actually explaining it in action.

It seems to me like the scariness of the word has already more or less disappeared from this forum, as people are starting to understand what a massive advantage it is.

Real companies and stocks call it dilution, it shouldn't be a long term problem for us to do the same. It is after all pretty much the exact same thing.

962
General Discussion / Re: * SNAPSHOT NOTICE *
« on: October 21, 2014, 11:08:25 pm »
I wonder if there will be some crazies that will continue mining even after it has lost all value... Just to preserve a piece of history. I'll definitely run my bitcoin node forever, even when it has been completely obliterated by bitshares and other second generation DACs.

963
http://cointelegraph.com/news/112761/bitstamp-unverified-bitcoin-accounts-at-risk-as-deadline-looms

Can it's boost BitShares decentralized exchange?  :)
once we have on/off ramps there is no need to business like bitstamp .. (unless you want to trade 'the real' crypto tokens)

Yep, that's what makes bitshares so fucking beautiful.

Large exchanges will not have an advantage over tiny exchanges because massive volume will not give a better spread when the thing people buy is already pegged. And once you've bought the pegged asset, then you can buy BTS on the internal decentralized market, which will have insane volume.

964
General Discussion / Re: Bytemaster on Mumble Now!
« on: October 21, 2014, 07:17:55 pm »
I can't make it, I hope someone is recording.

965
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.

966
+5% for this thread.

I think a hard coded cap as a "safety net" on "abuse of voting in the short term".... I think the social consensus should be 'as necessary and agreed upon by shareholders'... the "cap" should be like the bitcoin block size cap... and perhaps set to the same as Bitcoin's dilution schedule.

I absolutely agree, this is as much about market confidence as anything. The cap of 22 million bitcoins has become sacred, everyone knows that know one in there right mind would consider changing it. To gain the absolute confidence of investers, public and users we need some things to be sacred. A hard coded cap and dilution rate along with a statement from dev's that this was iron cast would add a ton of confidence to BTS

No

It can be hard to understand, but I think the easiest way to explain it is bitcoin = gold 2.0, bitshares = stocks 2.0

967
General Discussion / Re: Bitcoin - Good or Bad?
« on: October 21, 2014, 03:28:03 pm »
The bitcoin blockchain is like the crypto bible. It contains the mark of Satoshi.

968
General Discussion / Re: best solution for merging ags、pts and btsx
« on: October 21, 2014, 02:55:26 pm »
I know it can be difficult to understand exactly why the inflation has to be done the way it will be done. But at a certain point, you simply have to trust Bytemaster and the large stakeholders of the DAC to vote and do what is best for the DAC. We all own BTSX shares, and will own BTS shares in the future. We will ONLY do what increases the profitability of shares, and thus your profits as well.

969
I think this part of the proposal is not being discussed enough.

The proposal is to allow BTS to be diluted by the issuing of more BTS. In the mumble session BM suggested that a cap could be hard coded.

As well as voting on what you think that hard cap should be can we also have a discussion about :-

1. what we would consider it acceptable to spend the raised capital on? Development? Marketing?
2. Who should have control of the raised funds?
3. how will the amount of dilution be decided upon on a call by call basis?
4. Who can make a call for more shares to be issued?
5. Will there be a maximum frequency of share calls hard coded?
6. If X% per year is decided upon as a maximum, will we also have a maximum individual share call hard coded? eg if 10% was decided as the hard coded limit for a year should we have a maximum share call within that year hard coded like 2%?

These are just a few questions to get the ball rolling, I just think that this part of the proposal is not getting the posts is deserves.

You misunderstand how it is going to work. Individual delegates can register as inflating delegates, with a set amount of BTS printed per block. They will have to be voted in as delegates for it to take effect, so stakeholders will always vote on all inflation projects. An example could be a new developer that wants to work full time on making and maintaining an iOS wallet. He would then pitch his project on the forums along the salary he is asking for. The community can then have a dialogue with him and he can amend his project plan after getting feedback. Once his project is ready, he will register a delegate and stakeholders will decide if they want to vote him in or not.

Once he has been voted in, he will have to follow the transparency strategy he had in his original plan, and report his progress and spending weekly or monthly or whatever interval he has committed himself to do on these forums. If he misses a commitment, or it comes apparent from his reports that he isn't doing well enough, stakeholders will vote him out again. There'll probably be a very active "vigilante brigade" that will do everything they can to ensure he gets kicked out if he doesn't follow his commitments fully.

That seems reasonable, can you point me to the thread where this was discussed. I looked around but couldn't find the debate.

The threads discussing how inflating delegates work are actually quite old, it was primarily back when BM proposed the bitUSD referral bonus that the mechanics of it was discussed.

970
I think this part of the proposal is not being discussed enough.

The proposal is to allow BTS to be diluted by the issuing of more BTS. In the mumble session BM suggested that a cap could be hard coded.

As well as voting on what you think that hard cap should be can we also have a discussion about :-

1. what we would consider it acceptable to spend the raised capital on? Development? Marketing?
2. Who should have control of the raised funds?
3. how will the amount of dilution be decided upon on a call by call basis?
4. Who can make a call for more shares to be issued?
5. Will there be a maximum frequency of share calls hard coded?
6. If X% per year is decided upon as a maximum, will we also have a maximum individual share call hard coded? eg if 10% was decided as the hard coded limit for a year should we have a maximum share call within that year hard coded like 2%?

These are just a few questions to get the ball rolling, I just think that this part of the proposal is not getting the posts is deserves.

You misunderstand how it is going to work. Individual delegates can register as inflating delegates, with a set amount of BTS printed per block. They will have to be voted in as delegates for it to take effect, so stakeholders will always vote on all inflation projects. An example could be a new developer that wants to work full time on making and maintaining an iOS wallet. He would then pitch his project on the forums along the salary he is asking for. The community can then have a dialogue with him and he can amend his project plan after getting feedback. Once his project is ready, he will register a delegate and stakeholders will decide if they want to vote him in or not.

Once he has been voted in, he will have to follow the transparency strategy he had in his original plan, and report his progress and spending weekly or monthly or whatever interval he has committed himself to do on these forums. If he misses a commitment, or it comes apparent from his reports that he isn't doing well enough, stakeholders will vote him out again. There'll probably be a very active "vigilante brigade" that will do everything they can to ensure he gets kicked out if he doesn't follow his commitments fully.

971
General Discussion / Re: How much btsx did you panic sell?
« on: October 21, 2014, 12:33:38 pm »
Hedl.

973
General Discussion / Re: What is the master plan for BTS?
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:09:51 pm »
DNS can join if toast wants.

We work towards a consensus for BTS decisions, but the fate of DNS is all on toast?

If that is the case, then someone please explain what are his options.

Every DPOS DAC have delegates as the only source of authority. I'm not sure if DNS is even live, but if it is, then it is the delegates, and ONLY the delegates (and thus shareholders) that have the final say in what happens. Like everyone else, Toasts influence will be proportional exactly to his stake in DNS.

974
Here are my suggestions, along with a short example of how you could use it to describe what the system is and why it is beneficial

Delegated Capital Allocation (DCA)
Delegates can be authorize to allocate capital on behalf of stakeholders to fund projects that will be profitable and generate a net return for the shareholders.

Delegated Fundraising (DF)
"Delegated fundraiser is a type of delegate that has been approved by shareholders to raise funds at a set rate to fund a specific project that is profitable and generates a net return for the shareholder."

Decentralized Internal Funding (DIF)
"DIF is the system a DAC uses to raise funds from shareholders to fund profitable projects that generate net returns for the DAC and shareholders."

Please post if you have any other suggestions, and post which one of the existing suggestions you prefer. Once we start to use a better term than the FUD inducing "share dilution", people will perhaps calm down.

975
Will any of these options reduce current BTSX holders shares by number or percentage of the whole?

Yes, but the total market cap will also increase proportionally, so the share price will stay the same. It is just like a merger or acquisition of real businesses.

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ... 75