Charity DAC 

I think the key is transparency and the involvement of everyone as whole. The charity part is a DAC on its own, but with an added incentive of a big price (Lotto).

I know this DAC has just started, personally I believe that BitShares LOTTO is a great idea as it decentralizes the lottery from governments and so call "charities" with huge administration fees. 

First of all I assume the initial DAC, BitShares LOTTO, will be for profit, as it will fund the DAC development and of course pay the shareholders (AGS / PTS).

Based on that assumption I would like to propose the creation of a complementary fork (if you don't plan to already), to create a global lottery charity, this will be purely for non profit and no administration fees.  All the hard work will be put on BitShares LOTTO so it won't be necessary to add extra fees.

All the profits (everything but the prizes) will go go directly to health care (public hospitals, residences), public education, research (cancer, aids, anything).  Each daily / weekly draw can be for a specific cause.

This could have the possibility to be a true global charity, and hence remove huge waste, especially on research areas.

Rules of course will be different (IE.. euromillions vs national lottery vs other old style ball lottery) and complement each other as  other lotteries do.

This project can benefit to the whole ecosystem of DACs,  one of the hardest things will be the global purchasing of tickets, mainly exchanging fiat for a ticket. Money conversion is a general problem to any DAC, and project like this would help to open the barriers.

We should not be shy and with a project like this we should ask for resources of global players, which already have simple purchasing capabilities (paypal, microsoft, amazon, google, twitter, facebook).

Glad you got it sorted

The wallet is not released yet. Check my signature to see how to check your balance. Hope that helps

So you want to take 10% of the entire AGS funding and you want to give it to 8 of the largest players?  But as a DAC builder you don't want to give 10% of your own venture back to the community of AGS investors?  What if the market doesn't move in the way you think it should move - years in advance? Is your fee structure correct?  Would you stick to the terms outlined here no matter what or would you be willing to change it?

Why should AGS holders only be awarded for DACs funded by AGS? What if AGS-DAC solves common functions that every DAC could then duplicate?  Is it now free for you to use at your own will? Or do you start walling off functionality and do it your own way? Do we want to start splitting people into camps based on which type of shares they want to honor? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to encourage everyone to work together as much as possible?

Is putting the community in a perpetual competition against each other really a good idea? I think this could discourage people from wanting to help each other out - especially the largest DAC developers in the market. We are an open source community. We can all build on top of what we do as a community.  Right now we have more DACs than developers.  We need to focus on the core product before trying to squeeze out every last share of an immature platform. 

I really think after reading these forums these last few days, we need to unify PTS and AGS, as described by bytemaster in another post.  Not for a while, not until they both run their course.  Because honestly, in a couple of years, why would anyone new to the community give a shit about trying to decide whether to honor the religion of the shareholders who paid money vs. the religion of the shareholderss that plugged a bunch of computers into a wall. Then they would have to go through the forums and read about an ongoing civil war and get confused as hell trying to figure out who to support.  This would make things much simpler, seeing as people are already confused now. AGS would become liquid, and PTS would upgrade to a TaPOS system. And do you know what would be the best part about this? You could drop the clunky Bitshares AGS and Bitshares PTS monikers, and that one unified unit could then simply be known as a BitShare.  Anyone could buy into the community and be on the same level of expectation as everyone else in the community.

So what do I honestly think about this competition? I like it, but only if we do it one year at a time.  After the first one ends, the community should vote whether or not to have one for the next year.  No need to commit ourselves so far out in advance.

  AGS holders always carry more risk, specially now as the benefit of AGS over PTS is gone. But the idea of promoting new DACs is excellent.

you have a total of 46.63184074