0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Going to sell your BTS?
Quote from: luckybit on January 03, 2015, 05:07:43 amQuote from: Rune on January 03, 2015, 12:28:17 amI support core developers making six figures, and I support a single person running several 100% delegates whenever it is required. (or runs their own delegate and gets others to run support delegates)But strategically I think right now a bad time to begin negotiating salary. It's a debate that is most definitely required in the near future, but can it wait until we have a working full node, a working lightweight client, and a working mobile wallet? Great points Rune/Luckybit! The best time to negotiate their salaries is after they have left!They are 2 for a buck! Let's have our ducks ready first. Then we start searching for them!I think the total amount of stupidity has reached its critical mass....so, you do not need me, I guess. Bye, idiots of all kinds!
Quote from: Rune on January 03, 2015, 12:28:17 amI support core developers making six figures, and I support a single person running several 100% delegates whenever it is required. (or runs their own delegate and gets others to run support delegates)But strategically I think right now a bad time to begin negotiating salary. It's a debate that is most definitely required in the near future, but can it wait until we have a working full node, a working lightweight client, and a working mobile wallet?
I support core developers making six figures, and I support a single person running several 100% delegates whenever it is required. (or runs their own delegate and gets others to run support delegates)But strategically I think right now a bad time to begin negotiating salary. It's a debate that is most definitely required in the near future, but can it wait until we have a working full node, a working lightweight client, and a working mobile wallet?
Quote from: HRickover on January 03, 2015, 02:47:28 am- 3Mil BTS bonus for Stan, for posting obscure and/or condescending comments on the forum. ... add to that a 100% delegate.Costliest memes I've ever seen.
- 3Mil BTS bonus for Stan, for posting obscure and/or condescending comments on the forum.
15 Mil BTS and 100K annual pay for the marketing guy that did nothing.......God,Finally I found the reason why the price of bts keeps going down and why we are running out of ags FUND
Quote from: bytemaster on January 02, 2015, 05:22:34 pmI am sorry, but this kind of legalistic penny pinching will kill BTS and hurt morale. Incentives are alignedSure, "incentives are aligned" I will be as honest as possible (as always). I was virtually searching for the final straw, to divest at least 1/3 from my favorite project...- 15 Mil BTS and 100K annual pay for the marketing guy that did nothing...The incentives are aligned. - 500-700 K USD for the marketing guy, cause he is 'VOTE' and the next better thing than BTS... (but do not worry he is not getting 2K/mo. delegate, so he is OK).- 3Mil BTS bonus for Stan, for posting obscure and/or condescending comments on the forum. - 3Mil BTS bonus for Agent86 for almost finishing an article in 45 days; [striving for the most expensive piece of literature I guess]- as far as developers go.... well drltc will need 4 delegates voted in to get a fair compensation, after Feb15th. That of course was needed for no other reason but to get all of the above 'greater good' achieved!If this is not example of 'The incentives are aligned', I really do not know what is!
I am sorry, but this kind of legalistic penny pinching will kill BTS and hurt morale. Incentives are aligned
Quote from: bytemaster on January 02, 2015, 09:42:57 pmI don't like creating complexity when such simple work arounds are in place. You are trading off code complexity for social complexity. I prefer code complexity.
I don't like creating complexity when such simple work arounds are in place.
I thought that having business people and block signers overlap would result in a lot of people like me spending a ton of time dealing with delegate IT issues, feeds, etc. Which has certainly turned out to be the case.
The centralization issue can be easily avoided if the block producers and employees are separated. I have given the proposals several times elsewhere.
This is the main issue. Some discussion in the other thread led me to believe that multiple 100% delegate registration for developers was being discouraged due to increased centralization. This thread started out as a technical proposal for mechanics that would achieve the same economic outcome for developers as multiple delegate registration, without the drawback of increased centralization.
I have your back, I don't intend to let any developer go underpaid.
Quote from: arhag on January 02, 2015, 09:45:27 pmQuote from: bytemaster on January 02, 2015, 09:42:57 pmI don't like creating complexity when such simple work arounds are in place. You are trading off code complexity for social complexity. I prefer code complexity.Code complexity like you suggested creates new social complexities.
Quote from: NewMine on January 02, 2015, 09:18:33 pmIt sounds like you got duped...I am quite surprised that in an industry where everyone exclaims to not invest more than you can lose, that you would be asked *or you would commit to flip upside down your life to work for a not guaranteed wage and with possible total loss of all earnings if BTS price dropped.From what I understood, I was to be paid in US dollars, discounted by the USD value of my delegate income. At the time, I believed I3 still had a ton of AGS funds and was only employing ~10 people. It didn't seem risky because the plan seemed to be that I3 would use AGS funds to indemnify me against exchange rate risks, problems with the chain itself, or delegate IT screwups.To be fair to bytemaster, it was suggested around this time that people begin to run inflationary delegates to preserve AGS funds (at first on DNS chain, after the merger on main chain), and that this would be the long-term vision: People paid by inflation rather than AGS.However, it was not at all clear -- or at any rate, it was not clear to me -- that compensation arrangements were going to change at the end of the year.It's still been less than 24 hours since I first saw the post detailing the new compensation arrangements, and I am not going to make any big life decisions for at least a week while I consider the implications.
It sounds like you got duped...I am quite surprised that in an industry where everyone exclaims to not invest more than you can lose, that you would be asked *or you would commit to flip upside down your life to work for a not guaranteed wage and with possible total loss of all earnings if BTS price dropped.
Quote from: NewMine on January 02, 2015, 09:18:33 pmMultiple delegates held by one person taxing the blockchain will definitely kill this.Which is why I proposed the system in OP where bytemaster decides who deserves what, issues IOU's, then the shareholders vote in delegates held by multiple different owners to redeem the IOU's by buying and burning them.The real solution would be to have the blockchain scale delegate income within the supply envelope, i.e. if max inflation is 5050 BTS / round, and you have 11 delegates at 100% and 90 delegates at 3%, then you just figure 11 * 100 + 90 * 3 = 1100 + 270 = 1370, make each percentage point worth 5050 / 1370 so the 100% delegates get 368.61 BTS and the 3% delegates get 11.05 BTS, the total is 11 * 368.61 + 90 * 11.05 = 5049.21. Now the "%" has become kind of a misnomer and we just have arbitrary weights.You should be able to have the delegate specify maximum as well as a weight, then you pour the round's supply allocation into each delegate proportional to their weight, removing a delegate whenever its max pay is reached. You should be able to specify the maximum as a BitAsset, so you can specify e.g. "I want $200 / round" and the blockchain will give you $200 worth of BTS when your slot comes up (or even better, front-run the market and buy you BitUSD automatically).All of these features would be hardforks and need lots of testing, the main selling point of OP is it captures 80% of the value and can be implemented by a simple script on today's blockchain, no complicated, potentially exploitable exchange rate discovery / market maker bot logic or hardfork required.
Multiple delegates held by one person taxing the blockchain will definitely kill this.
Quote from: NewMine on January 02, 2015, 07:31:49 pmWait. You just got $17K bonus and you have a 100% delegate raking around $2k per month? Plus, I assume you got $100K/yr prorated for however many months you were on I3/AGS payroll and you are publicly complaining that you think you won't be able to eat in a fewmonths? I don't know what you do for a living, but if you moved to a different state for a new job (including paying relocation expenses out of your own pocket), and then within less than three months of hiring you they gave you a big bonus equivalent to a couple months' income, but told you they'd be cutting your pay to 1/3 going forward, wouldn't you try to negotiate a deal somewhat equivalent to what you originally agreed to -- and if you couldn't, wouldn't you at least seriously consider walking away?Quote from: NewMine on January 02, 2015, 07:31:49 pmbe able to eatThis is a metaphor. As others have noted, the relevant metric is opportunity cost -- how much I could be earning elsewhere, but am not.Quote from: NewMine on January 02, 2015, 07:31:49 pmpublicly complainingI think it's clear that I3 has little interest or ability to continue to directly pay developers. Therefore, if I want to raise concerns about how much I am paid, I must talk to shareholders and present my case for new 100% delegate(s). Which means making my case publicly, since there is no effective way to contact the BTS holders privately.
Wait. You just got $17K bonus and you have a 100% delegate raking around $2k per month? Plus, I assume you got $100K/yr prorated for however many months you were on I3/AGS payroll and you are publicly complaining that you think you won't be able to eat in a fewmonths?
be able to eat
publicly complaining
I am sorry, but this kind of legalistic penny pinching will kill BTS and hurt morale. Core developers have a large enough stake that they now get "automatic bonuses" if the value of that stake goes up as a result of their efforts. The incentives are aligned. I am very much against the idea of "selling your time" or "buying time". If these guys are only working for a paycheck then we would get crap work out of them. If they are working for more than a paycheck then we will get far more value out of them. Lets not remove incentive for efficiency. Lets not begrudge someone profits earned as a result of taking great risk.
Can you say how much you received in total as pay (BTS, BTC, USD) and how long you have been working full time so things can be put into perspective?
demanding excessive accountability to the point of hindering productivity.
I plan to start a campaign for 1-2 additional 100% delegate(s) sometime in February or early March.
Quote from: bytemaster on January 02, 2015, 05:58:34 pmI think you are misunderstanding my intentions. My intentions are for developers to be well compensated and error on the side of over compensation. The penny pinchers I was referring to are those who are trying to nickel and dime developers and demanding excessive accountability to the point of hindering productivity. I have provided complete transparency on the bonus each developer received so that people would not overcompensate developers with a large bonus + paid position. I want to make my own intentions clear as well. It's not my intention to soak the community for the year-end bonus from AGS funds and additional 100% delegate(s). Rather, my problem is that the AGS bonus will only last a couple months at the current exchange rate, and I want to be reasonably sure that I'll still be able to eat when it runs out, even if BTS hasn't gone to the moon by then.Despite the tax accounting of the bonus, I think the community will be unlikely to support any future delegate proposal which does not treat the bonus as an advance payment of my 2015 funding. Thus, even though I am not contractually obligated to do so, I currently plan on sticking around for at least 2-3 months with a single delegate regardless of the outcome of this discussion.Then I plan to start a campaign for 1-2 additional 100% delegate(s) sometime in February or early March. At that time I will provide a detailed accounting to the community, showing that my bonus has run out and I do in fact need the additional delegate(s) to continue to receive a competitive salary, and also including a detailed list of my recent contributions.Note that most other developers received a much larger bonus, and will not be in that situation at the same time.
I think you are misunderstanding my intentions. My intentions are for developers to be well compensated and error on the side of over compensation. The penny pinchers I was referring to are those who are trying to nickel and dime developers and demanding excessive accountability to the point of hindering productivity. I have provided complete transparency on the bonus each developer received so that people would not overcompensate developers with a large bonus + paid position.
So I guess I would say that being paid is more important, since I'll probably eventually leave if I'm not getting paid enough, even though I love the work. Does that make sense?
I have no problem with developers asking for additional delegate slots if one slot doesn't pay enough.
I have provided complete transparency on the bonus each developer received so that people would not overcompensate developers with a large bonus + paid position.
I had no problem advancing you the funds to register your paid delegate nor trusting you with a no-strings-attached bonus
I think everyone values you and you will have no problem maintaining a good income while you have support of the community.
I am against any kind of commitment to vote for you. People have a right to vote how they think is best when they think it.
Just trying to understand the dev mindset more. At the moment, what factors motivate you to work full time on the project and can you quantify how much each factor matters to you?
In theory , if your contribution is big enough that somehow you think the project can not go to the moon without you , then (y-x) would be really huge .
Quote from: bytemaster on January 02, 2015, 05:22:34 pmCore developers have a large enough stake that they now get "automatic bonuses" if the value of that stake goes up as a result of their efforts. The incentives are aligned. Assume for the moment I did have a large stake. Then I have two choices:(a) Leave and watch my stake grow x% based on the efforts of other developers(b) Stay and watch my stake grow y% based on the efforts of myself and other developers combinedMy effective salary is then (y-x)% times my stake, plus income from any delegate(s) I operate.I am not sure that (y-x)% is large enough even if my stake is large.
Core developers have a large enough stake that they now get "automatic bonuses" if the value of that stake goes up as a result of their efforts. The incentives are aligned.
I am sorry, but this kind of legalistic penny pinching will kill BTS and hurt morale.