If they were equals, they would already be building their projects and giving other people bounties, not waiting for bounties before getting started. We're all here because we're convinced that Bytemaster and the rest of the Invictus team is on to something and is offering something of value. There are good reasons for honoring the social consensus, and there's no reason for any developers to be left without a stake in their own ventures as you suggest.
Invictus already hoovered up the available funds the community has for development of the ecosystem, that was called protoshares. Invictus is throughly vested in the success of the platform they started, but the point wasn't to give them millions of dollars they'll then dole out in little chunks to people who ask nice enough, it was to incentivize the development of an ecosystem. You do that with broad incentives otherwise you're bottlenecking the process to how fast you can approve projects and how good you are at picking them. Equals are teams who can execute and are wiling to work, but they can also choose to just start their own protoshares and sell their own tokens which gives THEM money instead of having to ask for it from Invictus.
Adam, tell me straight up: Do you think Noir and MMC are good investments? Would you rather have $100 of those two, or $100 of a random choice of the 5 or 6 known invictus DAC ideas?
edit: I know that's not the point you're making, but you can't really say anyone who can make copy/paste altcoins can actually deliver a profitable DAC
Memorycoin has an unknown premine I could not drag out, a founder who I feel has not represented the best interest of his coins in the past and is basically a bitcoin clone with regards to functionality. I am not interested in coins like this any more. Noirshares is a DC, Distributed Corp and has a developer behind it who has some baggage in his past but has a strong vision for the future and puts in long hours towards it. I hold both of these coins because I believe there is potential in Noirshares and can't be bothered to get rid of my memorycoins.
Also, announcing it in the Newsletter is not what you do if you want people to actually know about it. How big exactly do you think this community is?
In the recently posted video Daniel said that the other DACs will be on board in the next few years. So I guess they don't want to bring them to the table at this moment.
We need to see a few DACs released this year. They don't all have to be sophisticated, they don't all have to be released by Invictus, just three DACs which we can hold up as examples and one of them could be Bitshares.
We have to show the world what a DAC is this year, not over 3 years because time moves faster in this space and 3 years is way too late.
Yep, totally agree. The opportunity to get people involved is right now.
We want as many DACs to emerge as possible, as soon as possible. We are limited only by our ability to find qualified developers.
We have learned not to publish our most aggressive timetables because we always miss our most aggressive timetables.
We won't stop being aggressive.
But we are trying to learn to under-promise and over-deliver.
The problem is you are looking for qualified developers instead of defining the outcome you want to be created and then letting the market find the developers because the incentive is so big. You're off to a good start with 5% finders fees.
It's very good you're not publishing more aggressive timetables than you still do. You should be aggressive and work hard towards the goals, but you should also walk the talk and let the community do the distributed intelligence thing we're all so fond of theorizing.
Your motto is decentralized solutions for centralized problems, do you really not see how the structure you're trying to build is centralized and the inefficiencies that weakness has already caused?