x is always 0.
What I currently see is continuous dillution via (business proposals/delegates etc) that allocates % dillution over time.
What I meant is that GENESIS shares should be non-dillutable - meaning:
If you print 10% stake in the new DAC all GENESIS increases with 10%.
The result will be ~+12% total (10% for the business proposal and 2% for GENESIS)
You can propose whatever you want, if DAC creators feel it is a ridiculous deal they will ignore it and do a better distribution (and they will likely succeed with that better distribution).
There are two purposes mixed together here when dealing with snapshots.
First, it is to get a strong initial network effect and strong hands to not dump your stock. You know what is the really good way of achieving that? An ICO specific to that DAC. The people who donate will be self-selected to be strong hands and the DAC creators get good initial seed funding. Later, shareholder-approved dilution can allow further funds to support development. I don't believe guaranteeing a 20% stake of your DAC for
all time to a group who was able to get into that position without even financially contributing to the project is a smart move for any DAC creator (at least not unless there are other benefits, see second point). If I was a DAC creator and I wasn't going to get any help from I3 anyway (see second point), I would probably just say: screw that deal, I'll fork the BitShares toolkit, learn how to master it, do my own ICO, and compete.
Second, it is to get help from I3, Dan, and the team who are experts in the toolkit. This can tremendously help the DAC succeed in these early days. But my conclusion from the discussions these past two days is that it is in the best interest of the BitShares community for I3 to focus their limited time on one DAC and try to make it grow really big (and if that requires developing some new technology and secret sauce plan that was meant for the Voting DAC, so be it). Only after that one DAC has gotten the critical network effect it needs can they start focusing on multiple DACs specializing in various different industries. At that point, the network effect will be in BTS, so with regards to the first point, DAC creators will want to snapshot from BTS because that is where the value is at. So, it makes sense for I3 to change the social contract to: we will eventually help out third party DACs after we first get the critical network effect we need for BTS, but only if they credit BTS holders sufficiently (whatever the community decides that means).
So, with all of that said here is my new proposal that I don't actually believe the community would accept but is just my attempt at decoy pricing. PTS holders haven't contributed anything to I3 by speculating on that asset, so cut them out entirely. AGS holders have contributed funds (either BTC or PTS that then gave I3 about 10% stake in BTSX) to I3 which has made all of this wonderful technology possible. The pre-Feb 28 AGS holders have already gotten most of their reward from the BTSX snapshot. What remains is the value contributed by post-Feb 28 AGS holders, as well as the residual value of pre-Feb 28 AGS holders that wasn't included as part of the BTSX snapshot. Use the after-drop-off price immediately after Feb 28 to calculate the residual value that is distributed to pre-Feb 28 AGS holders. Use the total value contributed to the AGS fundraiser after Feb 28 until the end of the AGS campaign to distribute to post-Feb 28 AGS holders. Give them a little bonus to compensate them for opportunity costs (let's say a prorated 5% p.a. yield), and distribute that amount of value to them through diluted BTS. Done. The BTSX community wouldn't even need to that, but might do it anyway to be
fair and not piss too many people off. Some PTS holders still got their fair share of BTSX, DNS, VOTE, NOTE. The current PTS holders lose their value since the social contract changes. Sorry, you lose. The VOTE holders lose whatever value they might have had (we won't ever know since VOTE hasn't started trading yet). Sorry, you lose. DNS may stay independent or all the development effort may go into the BTS chain (I guess it depends on what toast wants to do?). If it's the latter, then again, sorry, you lose. BitShares Music would still be independent for now. If necessary BTS might later acquire them and merge them into the chain. But for now NOTE holders don't necessarily lose.
Please note: The above is just my
proposal that is not endorsed by anyone else, and even I don't really even believe in it much. Don't start panic selling anything because you think the above is what is going to happen.