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 - pseudoscops

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8
91

This thread and the accusations fuzzy has leveled at Rune, i think, are jointly responsible for today's sell off.


Someone wants you to think so. But if a trader is playing with tens of millions of dollars, do you think he or she really gives a darn about some bickering between a few members on a user forum? They may not even read it. If they do, this kind of thing simply gives them cover for the perception that there is dumping or buying based on news. In reality, someone simply owned enough to engage in one last dump/pump before the distortion of the upcoming snapshot. And it was a good bet that there wouldn't be too much buying right now as folks cautiously await the next stage--great time to dump and buy it back cheap. I'll bet $20 million that whoever dumped today doesn't care what Rune or Fuzzy thinks and doesn't care what I think either! This is simply crypto-static for long term investors.

It is possible that you're right here. I may have all of this completely wrong and none of it matters. It is entirely possible that my more general concerns about a lack of understanding of how to manage PR and marketing are leading me to overblown the importance of individual posts. Perhaps I'm  projecting my larger concerns on to things that I shouldn't be. My Spidey senses indicate to me that I'm not, but maybe they are wrong.

Despite having six timed my original stake in crypto in the last year or so, I'm actually a pretty naive investor with little experience. Most of my gains have probably been due to dumb luck in fact. Perhaps I've been losing my cool a little, where others more experienced just ride it out. Please feel free to tune out if you think I'm just adding unhelpful noise here.

92

You've posted a total of 23 times, and you've taken your money out of BTS to put it into Bitcoin so that you can lose money as the Bitcoin price goes down?

For some reason I don't believe you. Why didn't you just buy BitUSD like I did?

If you read my post, you'll see that I am holding BitAssets as well - actually to the tune of about 25% of my holdings. My reasoning for switching to Bitcoin is that I may invest elsewhere and diversify. I guess I was signalling that I'd like to see something that makes me want to put funds back here and avoid that need to diversify. Obviously from my post a lot of my concern surrounds the way the marketing is being handled. I just think that some here think that because they understand how it all works it automatically means that this project will ultiately be a asuccess. Most people won;t spend the time you've spent i here in order to become a true beleiver and that is why the marketing angle is so important in my view.

I'm not particularity confident in the long term price of Bitcoin, but I don't think holding some short term while I decide what to do with the funds is necessarily a bad idea.

The fact that I've only ever posted 23 times does not mean I am newcomer here, I've spent literally weeks reading things here on this forum over the last year.


Hmm.. isn't that as good as broadcasting to the SEC that Dan is changing the 'language' of Bitshares on purpose and with a clear intention to avoid the SEC?  This does not sound like a good idea to me.

What fuzzy said about Rune has an impact on btsx price?  Common.. you are stretching it.

Maybe I'm wrong about Rune's post. I think clear explanation as to why we need to change the language would help both us and the SEC understand how perhaps we do not fall within the bounds of something that would traditionally be seen as a hierarchical company with a centralised structure and CEO. This is not what we are about and that is why we have so far been called a 'Digital Autonomous Company' and not just a  'Company'. Surely the arguments to the SEC can still be made as to why we should not be treated in the same way without completely changing language and the direction of all marketing efforts away from the 'Company' metaphor. If I'm wrong here though and people really think it's worth steering clear of the 'Company' moniker then personally I prefer 'Digital Autonomous Cooperative.' It sounds more like something that actually produces something rather than something that just pushes an ideology.

93
This thread has been very enlightening and points out how different messages reach different audiences.

I never intended this thread to completely change everything...

BTS will be marketed according to how the marketers feel it will be best and I am deferring to their judgement.

Good discussion everyone.

Reading the above it kinda sounds like the answer to my questions about the marketing teams involvement in the Community message, see below, should have been 'no not so much really'.

I have to ask - was this run through Brian and the marketing team before being announced? What is Brian's view on this if so? I think it's really important for the community to know that it was at least discussed with him first?

Its probably actually coming from Marketing, (and/or Legal).

I think BM has learned by now not to just randomly post his thoughts on the forum, after what happened last time.

This overall goal was discussed with the team and Adam from Follow My Vote and we are coordinating with Brian to revamp the marketing for the BitShares launch.    Adam is really a huge asset and is helping us a lot.

Either that or BM did discuss it at length with the team and is now graciously trying to take the fall for what everyone on the team now realises was perhaps too radical of a message for the market to take. Honestly I like the vision but this ideology/community focused marketing that's taken up so much airspace recently is not going to work well for us IMHO - it really needs to take a back seat if it somehow can. I'm not sure you can sell the DAC this way. The ecosystem, the technological USPs, focused products/apps built on the SuperDac and most importantly the utility need to be in the spotlight. I'm all for a list of one word tenets, as originally suggested by Kisa, that embody the things that BitShares stands for. One of those words could and should be Community:

e.g. Freedom, Privacy, Fairness, Creativity, Meritocracy, Security, Community

But no more than this. I do realise that SEC concerns might have led to an itchy trigger finger on this announcement and that they ultimately might necessitate us having to re-imagine everything as a 'Digital Autonomous Community' or something similar rather than calling it a 'Digital Autonomous Company'. I really hope not, but maybe we do have to act here. If that is the case then the message from Dan needed to be more along the lines off 'Hey look guys we're gonna get screwed by the SEC if we don't rethink the language we use surrounding BitShares. Here are some of the things that I've been thinking over, what about about if we used a Community metaphor etc etc etc  - now please lets us all discuss this.' Maybe there are other legal issues at play here that I don't understand that make that difficult to do.

Instead the way it was announced by Dan and the way it came across seemed to demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of how one should approach this sort of delicate matter. It sounded like a dictat and I think it spooked a lot of people today.  Dan you are so talented in so many other ways and have led this thing so far, I'd hate to think that your apparent total lack of good PR and marketing instinct could lead to you torpedoing all the hard work from you and everyone else. Please seek more advice on how to approach these kind of things before you post them, even if there are legal issues afoot.

You mentioned you didn't think that this thread had much to do with today's drop in share price. I believe that you believed this when you wrote it, but I knew you were wrong when I read it.

Guess I was right to feel bad about this post, another 20% drop today.

Congrats on killing Bitshares.

Who will be left in the "community" when bitshares is below 1 cent?

I doubt this post was the cause of the 20% drop...

This thread and the accusations fuzzy has leveled at Rune, i think, are jointly responsible for today's sell off. By the way I'm not saying that fuzzy is wrong, but Rune seems genuine to me when I ask my gut what it thinks. I get the impression he's young, very intelligent, very excitable and perhaps a little naive in thinking that one day BitShares will take over the world. I think he's is probably going to turn out to be a huge asset to this community in the long run. I hope I'm proved right.

But back to these posts and more importantly how they've affected my actions today. My actions on an individual level are not that important and probably did little to shift the share price, but they are perhaps an important bell weather as to how others might have felt and acted today. I put more weight on this thread being responsible for the larger portion of the share price drop today. I actually shifted about 25% of my holdings back in to Bitcoin as a result of BMs OP in this thread and as a result of the mixed and muddled marketing I've been witnessing here lately. I might shift at least part of this into the Music DAC from Bitcoin. I was all in before today either in BitUSD or BTSX. I hope things don't go even more pear shaped, I don't think they will in the long run. But I wanted to mention how I acted today so that people can understand how someone passionate about this project, I've been following and investing for almost a year, has reacted as a result of what I think is carelessness handling of information presented here on the forums. I don't feel like I've been a weak hand, I've just lost a tiny little bit of faith in the direction of things lately and I've had to act in order to reflect that in my holdings.

Much more consideration needs to be taken before posting such radical changes to messaging. Perhaps we need some sort of official press release channel, maybe then everything suggested on the forum can immediately be assumed to be up for discussion and not set in stone until it appears as an official press release from the marketing team separately from the forum. Somewhere on the main website is the obvious place. I do believe in BitShares and I'm hoping to become a 100% believer again. I also hope circumstance will allow me to contribute something more practical to the ecosystem. As well as having some marketing skills I can code too, mainly Rails, front end web and some hybrid mobile stuff. Get your marketing and PR act together guys. If you don't you are going to keep hemorrhaging share price. Where is Brian in all this, I'm not sure I've even seen a post from Adam yet. Sorry about the wall of text, but I just had to get all this off my chest.

Dan, hope there's no hard feeling here. It's not personal I think 99% of everything else you do is great!

94
General Discussion / Mega block, ELI5 explanation required...
« on: October 30, 2014, 05:01:36 pm »
I know this is a total noob question. But does this mean that this block actually executed (i.e. someone sold a load of BitUSD ?) or that they simply placed an ASK that may or may not have been filled? Perhaps to create a temporary wall of some kind? If it is the former then I guess someone is a true believer in BitShares and has taken advantage of the currently low share price? I think I actually saw more than one block containing similar amounts.


http://www.bitsharesblocks.com/blocks/block?id=879648

95
I have to ask - was this run through Brian and the marketing team before being announced? What is Brian's view on this if so? I think it's really important for the community to know that it was at least discussed with him first?

Its probably actually coming from Marketing, (and/or Legal). 

I think BM has learned by now not to just randomly post his thoughts on the forum, after what happened last time.



This overall goal was discussed with the team and Adam from Follow My Vote and we are coordinating with Brian to revamp the marketing for the BitShares launch.    Adam is really a huge asset and is helping us a lot.

That's great to know. Do I take from this that Adam is now taking a more active role in the day to day marketing efforts and general marketing direction and that Brian is more focused on selected marketing tasks and the on-ramps?

96
When you are preaching to the choir this sounds awesome. When you are not, it becomes a tougher sell.

I have to ask - was this run through Brian and the marketing team before being announced? What is Brian's view on this if so? I think it's really important for the community to know that it was at least discussed with him first? Because if it wasn't and I were him, I'd be really pissed right now and losing patience. This decision will radically alter the marketing message he has to push going forward.

I realise that there are larger things at play here than just marketing, SEC etc, but on first blush this decision does not seem to have had much community discussion. The decision, it appears, has already been made. No real discussion, at least not here on the forum. Seems kinda perverse given the nature of the post.

My Spidey senses are tingling again, I honestly can't work out if it's in a good or a bad way yet. Better sleep on it I guess.

97
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/bitusd/#markets

This seems to be because Coinmarketcap's feed to BitSharesX has ceased working. So instead they are using just the feed from BTER which today has so far had $0 volume. Presumably when all feeds are working they use some kind of weighting based on volume to decide what price to show. Previously it has always seemed to reflect the BitsharesX price more or less correctly and tracked the working peg from within BitSharesX. If it's just tracking BTER BitUSD then obviously there is no peg protection there.

This looks bad because to the casual observer it might seem like the peg is not working when in fact it is. It appears that it has been like this for nearly five days, a few days a go it was showing a similar figure.

Is anyone aware of what might have changed to stop the main feed working for Coinmarketcap? Anyone got any idea how the BitsharesX feed can be reinstated?

98
General Discussion / Re: Marketing Direction - Why not How or What...
« on: October 27, 2014, 08:10:19 pm »
Let's not mix up ideology with values with emotions. We might not succeed pushing either ideology or trying to sell BTS based on emotions. VALUES is what we need to define and live imo.

Even coming from various backgrounds and having different worldviews we bitSHARE certain values e.g. such as freedom, privacy, fairness, creativity, meritocracy, security - to name a few... bitValues should define BitShares culture!

I like the idea of having a set of tenets somehow attached to the brand. (e.g. Bitshares stands for freedom, privacy, fairness, creativity, meritocracy, security etc), but that's it - literally a list. Let people interpret these words to fit their own worldview and belief system.

Anything beyond that and we become preachers. Do we want to become preachers? I don't think we do. If we were to go down that route IMHO we place ourselves in to very dogy territory from a marketing standpoint. We have to start negative campaigning against other economic models and quickly you get in to an place where you are having to agree that you don't believe in a nations and states. This message, whether you believe in nation and state or not, does not have mass market appeal IMHO.

99
General Discussion / Re: Marketing Direction - Why not How or What...
« on: October 27, 2014, 04:31:07 pm »
Agreed 100% with everything Luckybit has posted. Very, very powerful points in those posts. Utility and "what can it do for me?" is most important first and foremost, and the ideology will inevitably follow...

100% Agree with Nomorehereoes' 100% agreement with luckbit. Utility. Utility. Utility.

I understand the desire to emulate Apple's approach to marketing in some way. Their 1984 Superbowl 'Think different' ad for the Macintosh was one of the best TV ads ever made. But the Macintosh was not Apple's first product, they had already proven themselves to the world at large - they were already famous. They could afford to take risks with big ideological, slightly wooly, messaging as part of their advertising. They were big enough and organised enough to do that. We are not at that stage yet.

The Macintosh had a screen and a keyboard and a mouse and although we all now know that the Apple ecosystem became much more, most users (not developers) at the time would have seen the Macintosh as a way of using a handful of software packages to get their work done and perhaps be more creative. The ultimate USP was that Macintosh owners could do these things more efficiently and in a slicker way than they could on any other PC available at the time. That value and utility along with a little aspirational messaging was enough to propel Apple forward. Trying to sell the vision of a different society, as yet unrealised, as the product is a very different kettle of fish. That sounds like what Dan was suggesting, but I might have misinterpreted?

Luckily most of the people who will have read this thread will not have freaked at the sentiment from Dan's OP, including myself. But in the wider world I think we have to be very very careful with this kind of language being part of core messaging:

Lets reimagine everything, think out side the box and create a society where we can be secure and where threats of violence by the government are overwhelmed by non-violent cooperation.  We all long for freedom, it is universal.    We all long for security.   No one likes theft and violence. 

It's the sort of language that will put off or even scare average users. Elon Musk's reason for creating Tesla and Space-X are largely to do with his desire to do good. To reduce global warming and help heal the planet with Tesla and to give us humans a better chance of long term survival by exploring space and creating a human colony on Mars with SpaceX . I don't see his desire to colonise Mars or to cool down the planet featuring in either company's marketing material in any significant way. Sure he talks about these goals and his beliefs when speaking and when interviewed, but it's not part of the core marketing message aimed at his customers.

First and foremost it's value and utility that will bring the masses to Bitshares. To some extent novelty/shiny-cool-stuff will do this too as is always the way. There is a difference between a marketing strategy that lists boring specs and Ghz as a means to grab attention (like Dell used to) vs one that wraps up it's marketing message in imagery and slightly amorphous ideological/aspirational messaging (like Apple).  I'm up for more of the latter - it can be a very solid strategy. Lot's of non-specific talk and imagery signifying freedom and individuality works and is probably a very good fit for Bitshares from a marketing point of view. But the latter is not the same as wholly defining an ideology as if it's part of the product itself and then shouting about it. I think we are much more likely to scare people off this way - i.e. the lets create a new society message. 9.99 people out of 10 will take the view that you have no chance of breaking the status quo (or colonising mars). They'll say it's impractical and unrealistic and then they'll switch off. I think Bitcoin suffers from this, people switch off because they can never see it truly taking over from traditional fiat. Their lack of understanding of it's potential slows adoption and the innovations that would create more utility. If we saw more utility within the Bitcoin ecosystem then perhaps things would change more swiftly. Bitshares has the opportunity and toolkit to demonstrate that crypto is not just about another way to pay for things. It's so much more, but it's utility not ideology that will demonstrate this.

Maybe I'm wrong and there is a way to weave both ideology and utility into messaging in a more palatable way for users. But I think it's a tall order and perhaps too risky to spell out the ultimate vision at this stage. Maybe one day the Bitshares brand will be big enough and established enough so that we can consider doing that, but at the moment it simply isn't. There's too much danger that we'll sound like a bunch of cranks, people are not ready for the message yet.

As a marketing strategy to attract bright and talented developers - well that's a different story. Here perhaps the vision and ideology is what will get the best and brightest through the door. They'll have the sense to understand what DACs offer themselves and wider society. But that's an entirely different marketing program to the the one you'd might execute in order to attract the average users we'll need to attract in order to grow.

Last week was a rough one in many ways, nerves were frayed, but I think we are pointed in the right direction now. Sorry if this contrary view brings even more rain to BM's parade, but I believe it's extremely important to discuss these things and make the right decisions. Almost as important as anything else we could be discussing. Without users we are dead in the water.

I do think we will colonise Mars one day and I think that Dan's vision for a DAC will come to pass in some form. Hopefully it will be by way of the Bitshares SuperDAC. I want to take the opportunity to express my appreciation for all the hard work that Dan and the various teams have done to push things forward so far. I've done very little in practical terms myself, though I'm very excited about the idea of someday working for a DAC. Perhaps even the SuperDAC.

For the record I've worked at a senior level within the advertising industry here in London for nearly twenty years. One client was actually one of the aforementioned big brands too and so I know at least a little bit about this kind of stuff. My Spidey senses are telling me this is a really big deal and that the path we take needs to be considered extremely carefully.

100
General Discussion / Re: Live SnapShot Calculator
« on: October 26, 2014, 06:17:25 pm »
Don't forget to factor in that fact that other 3rd party DACs are still being encouraged to snapshot PTS after Nov 5th. If you sell your PTS now then you obviously give up genesis shares in other 3rd party DACs. Not exactly an apples for apples situation. Please correct me if I'm wrong here...

101
General Discussion / Re: PTS -> BTS ratio?
« on: October 23, 2014, 05:43:34 pm »
Is PTS truly worthless as some are suggesting? According to cob, from Music, for now they have decided that they will go it alone with their own DAC. See 2nd post down on the 2nd page of this thread:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10258.15


If that is the case then a separate Music DAC will still allocated 35% of genesis to PTS holder and 35% to AGS holders post Nov 5th or am I missing something? Does this set the precedent for how PTS could live on with value in some way post VOTE/DNS merger (i.e. not become completely worthless)?


http://www1.agsexplorer.com/


I think the Music team has a very strong product. Music could position itself well for branching in to video, books etc. I just wish the incentives were strong enough to get them to join the BitShares DAC.

I've been considering buying some NOTES from the pre-sale, but I'm not sure how the pre-sale under the circumstance that they do ultimately decide to move to the BitShares DAC? Indeed I'm not sure what would happen with BitShares, would there need to be further dilution of BTSX over and above the current proposal?

102
I've been eagerly following the recent discussions about the merger. I was initially a little freaked out but it now all seems to make a lot of sense to me - in the short term we are stronger together rather than diluting effort. Luckily I didn't freak out enough to sell out back in to Bitcoin and hopefully share price will recover again once there is greater understanding across the whole community and weak handed short term speculators are shaken out of the tree. We'll also sadly lose some genuine believers who just find this evolution little bit too hard to swallow. C'est la vie. For those who have been genuinely burned by DNS I think that BM and Toasts recent appeasement for post genesis DNS buyers should help restore some shattered nerves and fill up some suddenly lighter DNS wallets. Those who felt that they were on the sharp end of what seemed to me to be one of the biggest negative outcomes will hopefully feel better now. Also there seems to be a fund being raised to try and appease other biggest losers who don't qualify for BMs and Toast's proposal (see this thread for details on both https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10381.0)

My main question:

Currently I own BTSX. 1/3 of my current BTSX stake is from Feb 28 PTS genesis snapshot and about a 1/3 of my total investment inside BitsharesX is pegged to BitUSD. Good to see a few more people hedging in there with me of late instead of leaving $ on a BTC exchange   ;)
I am also a long term holder of PTS and have tripled my stake there too since Feb 28.

I haven't actually set up wallets for or claimed for any other DACs yet, apart from my genesis for BTSX. (i.e. DNS, Vote, Lotto?). Under the new proposal what should I do now?

Nothing for DNS/Vote I think...? It'll get taken care of by the automatic dynamic value allocation/dilution post merger (i.e. my new BTS balance will be more than my old BTSX one). What about Music? Are there other DACS I should have claimed for that have done snapshots and will live on as separate DACs? I did I see Lotto mentioned somewhere.

Other related musings and some more questions:

The above one-time-only-merger-confusion and the historical confusion/effort required to keep track of new DACS is exactly the kind of confusion that this new merger proposal will eliminate.  There will be much less need to worry if there's a new product on the horizon from the team, when was the snapshot, is the wallet ready yet , can I import yet, which exchange supports the new DAC, where should I shuffle funds (PTS, BTSX, presale) etc etc. This is boring and time consuming. Moving away from this is a really good idea for those who want an efficient team and more profitable easier to track investment. If you wan to do some short term speculation then do it within the bitAssets ecossytem once the number of assets available grows. Overall a 100 separate bottle rockets vs one Falcon 9 rocket seems like a no brainier, especially when you couple the F9 rocket to the now easier to attain network effect.

I guess some entities will still decide to go it alone with their own DACs (hopefully not Music) and I'll have to keep an eye out for them. Ultimately separate DACs are going to be a fact of life if the DAC model proves itself to be a wider success. It may make a lot of sense for some DACS, especially competitive or incompatible or niche ones, to go it alone. In the grand scheme and the longer term it is to be encouraged. Over time more serious competition in the DAC space from larger similar-to-BTS (perhaps Etherium is closest. Anyone agree?) will mean that anyone long on BTS will hopefully have a big smile on their face anyway. Increased  real competition is validation of the whole DAC idea and will hopefully see lots more liquidity coming in the wider DAC ecosystem as a result. Let's just hope we can be at the number one spot.

So another clarification needed here. I'm sort of ELI5ing to myself here: under the new merger proposal, features/products added to a Bitshares DAC will not result in new BTS allocation, like we used to see with separate DACs, instead we hope they'll just add to the overall value proposition for the Bitshares DAC. This in turn will hopefully attract more liquidity and push the price of BTS upwards and that's how us early adopters benefit (i.e. no more snapshots or new shares for features added that get added inside the new SuperDac - our BTS share price hopefully just goes up instead). Have I got this right? I hate the term SuperDac by the way, FrankenDAC even more so. Maybe we should agree on a term? Universal DAC sounds much better to me.

For those DAC entities that use the toolkit and go it alone with their own blockchain, those that are outside the Bitshares Universal DAC, what will happen here?  If these entities want to honor the idea of a DAC having used the toolkit and reward those with a genesis allocation (i.e. like how PTS and AGS snapshots operate today). After the merger will they instead take a snapshot of BTS and publish their % allocations for BTS holders at the time of snapshot? If so is it still expected that if you use the toolkit you'll allocate some portion of your DACs genesis to BTS holders (i.e. nothing changes here - just the vehicle for working out the the snapshots becomes BTS instead of PTS/AGS)?  I guess what I'm asking here is, as long term holder who wants exposure to the BTS Universal DAC and future incompatible/niche extremal DACS using the toolkit, is just holding BTS a good strategy? For external DACs that I'm particularity interested in I can look out for pre-sales to try and get more exposure to them I presume.

On practicalities of the client software itself:

My one initial worry was that a BitShares FrankenDAC  from a usability point of view would be ugly and confusing - vote , exchange, music and eventually much more all under one GUI roof. The mall metaphor that Stan initially made, though generally pretty sound, made me think of this from a usability point of view. I hate malls - too busy and too much fighting for my attention.

But actually the mall metaphor from Stan is perhaps more meta than my initial basic interpretation of it. I prefer Universal DAC because it fits better with my more recent insight. The new Universal DAC is a bit like a mall, but that doesn't mean that all the shops have to be on the same street. The GUIs to all the different components of Bitshares do not have to be contained within one downloadable client.

With this insight it seems clear to me that there is a necessity for splitting up the various BTS products into separate GUI silos or apps. They will obviously need to have the BTS brand in common. A bit like how you have a separate Google Maps, Gmail and Google Cardboard app on your mobile phone today. All brought to you by Google, but each product with a separate focused app that you can choose to download or not. Each app has it's own team of engineers too. So the way you access the features and products, all sitting on the same BTS blockchain, may differ depending on the BTS product or feature you are interested in making use of. You most likely buy things with BitUSD or BitEUR within these apps. For some products it might be via specialized downloadable clients/wallet for your pc, for others a a browser-only based interface, others still will be touch/mobile apps. Perhaps some products will eventually have all three or more.  Personally I'm looking forward to features and products that require a VR based interface. What is the short term plan here? I've not seen the practicalities of how it will all work together discussed or spelled out. Will Vote/DNS and, perhaps Music if they come on board, all be initally contained in one client or will we have separate ones? I hope to god it's the latter otherwise it's going to get messy fast.

I'm all in on BTSX/PTS at the moment ($0 Bitcoin for a few months now). Confident in the team and community long term to steer the ship in the right direction. PR needs to be handled better in future without muting BM. This will become less of an issue for price volatility as more liquidity from the mainstream flows in. As we grow most investors won't read the musing and detail discussed over here in the forum. The big decisions will get made and passed off through Brian's marketing team. Most investors will then just read the main official press releases and blog posts and keep an eye for Bitshares news on Coindesk and perhaps Reddit etc. What they see there will hopefully be correctly spun or managed by an efficient and proactive marketing machine once it finally comes online.

Once last thing! For those who think they are in a similar place to me (i.e. long), do you think we're near bottom on PTS yet? Are you planning to buy more? Looks tempting to me.

103
General Discussion / Re: Trello Grassroots Organization Marketing
« on: September 10, 2014, 11:36:10 pm »
 +5% for this suggestion. Was there any movement on this...?

104
IMHO, where the marketing material will be used does not make my points any less valid.

105
I agree with some of the sentiments expressed earlier.

This is a really worthy endeavor and I like the way the points are shaping up  +5%

Design-wise not so much, it's just not doing it for me. I know these things are subjective but it doesn't look polished or professional enough. Basically I think it needs to at least feel like it's taking a lead from the design on the site it is linking to.

I think this opens up a wider issue that the community needs to address - brand consistency and quality control of marketing material. Is there anyone in the community who acts as a kind of brand guardian who these things can be funneled through? Do we need a brand book? Even a basic one (i.e. which fonts and point sizes to use, what color palette, use of logos etc etc). If not do we perhaps need a person/team with the right skills who will take ownership?

I'm not a designer, but I have experience that I might be able to lend to such a team if people thought it was a good idea to set one up. I also think things like taglines really need to be thought about very carefully and voted upon by the community before being bandied about externally. How can we democratically handle this. My intention is not to offend, just to improve things  :)

Thoughts....

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8