BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: fuzzy on April 29, 2015, 11:10:26 am
-
Please vote in this poll and discuss why or why not. Try to keep this constructive (please).
-
I'd prefer several interconnected PR-groups .. Reason being: different countries have different goals and ways to achieve PR.
They should share base knowledge but have to be flexible enough to efficiently work in different countries on different continents.</imho>
-
Extremely speaking, we don't need PR group.
Instead, we should have multiple groups for attracting investment, creating news, holding investment seminar, so forth.
-
Extremely speaking, we don't need PR group.
Instead, we should have multiple groups for attracting investment, creating news, holding investment seminar, so forth.
Don't we have that already? Or at least always have it in the works?
And if not why not?
I cant make others form groups... :/
-
A unfinished project that'll pop out rumors that cause panic every now and then will certainly drive away market makers (not speculators , market maker is a different term ) .
Market makers provides liquidity , without several major market makers competing with each other , the market is easy to manipulate .
Market makers need to watch the price and earn small profits .
Those huge order in the past at exchange was an example of market maker operation (sort of ) . That makes BitShares withstand lots of volume .
But with the pattern that how this project pops out bad news , people who dare to market making for BitShares will be hit constantly . Sooner or later , big players and small players will jump to another market to do market making . ( It runs through bots , they can jump ship easily )
While we all want to say "we don't need those who care about the price" , well , that's just to the complainers . Those who care about the price and stability most were the ones who provide liquidity the most . It'll be wise for them to stay away from BitShares and find another simple project with little drama to run their operation or only run short term operation in BitShares .
The down trend is related to many reasons of course , the absence of major market making operation is certainly one of them .
Market markers are like the oxygen pump in the pond ..... Without them , there is not much wave in the pond . (Again , market makers is not pure speculators or pumper and dumpers , the difference is hard to master ) . Just check out how that works in Nasdaq , but of course that's more formal .
Without an active market , no big investors would even consider looking at BitShares , because it'll be hard to exit . I've talked to a guy who is quite fond of BitShares , but in the end he choose to buy Bitcoin , because it's impossible for him to in and out of BitShares with such low liquidity .
Of course , some of us thinks the ways and the laws in the real world don't apply to BitShares because we're so free and have a bright future etc..etc .... Then ignore me .
You can always build a project with codes and talks , but you can only build a market will real people who don't care about idealism but cold hard financial rules .
Hope that provides some insight on "why there looks like no resistance in the market ? " because those who can resist are either left or still waiting a better time to entry .
PS.Again , Market makers are not exactly "whales" "big buyers" ...... but they're essential for big players .
And again , I think the software itself is gonna be amazing with or without PR consideration . If what we're here for is just to build a software , then screw PR .... software don't need PR . It's just a code store in a computer . But if we're here to build a financial system that interacts with the real world , real investors , real grandpas and grandmas ....
-
There is value in effort that breaks new ground, reaches out and engages new investors - communicating the message clearly.
It's not a matter of working hard but working effectively. The form of PR/marketing we do not need is the form that large corporations use cynically as damage management.
Anything that can leverage interest and new business, that can release devs and others who can work more effectively on other areas, is worthwhile.
So, perhaps we need more Sales/marketing than PR/marketing. Whichever way you want to consider it, there is work to be done ensuring that those who could use BitShares understand its potential.
Where is the low hanging fruit?.. Is it possible to get into MSM? Producing YouTube vidoes maybe useful but is enough being done to ensure that the message is getting where it's needed. Navel gazing adds no value.. Is BitShares talking to new people?.. Again I think setting out the stall with simple elements that can act as hooks and catch the curious, do matter: Milestones; a clear list of what is unique about BitShares; a Mission statement; a Vision statement.
PR experts perhaps can review the outputs and reform those for different audiences.. channel people by their interest to what they need to know, make it simple to understand and simple to action their interest.
-
A unfinished project that'll pop out rumors that cause panic every now and then will certainly drive away market makers (not speculators , market maker is a different term ) .
Market makers provides liquidity , without several major market makers competing with each other , the market is easy to manipulate .
Market makers need to watch the price and earn small profits .
Those huge order in the past at exchange was an example of market maker operation (sort of ) . That makes BitShares withstand lots of volume .
But with the pattern that how this project pops out bad news , people who dare to market making for BitShares will be hit constantly . Sooner or later , big players and small players will jump to another market to do market making . ( It runs through bots , they can jump ship easily )
While we all want to say "we don't need those who care about the price" , well , that's just to the complainers . Those who care about the price and stability most were the ones who provide liquidity the most . It'll be wise for them to stay away from BitShares and find another simple project with little drama to run their operation or only run short term operation in BitShares .
The down trend is related to many reasons of course , the absence of major market making operation is certainly one of them .
Market markers are like the oxygen pump in the pond ..... Without them , there is not much wave in the pond . (Again , market makers is not pure speculators or pumper and dumpers , the difference is hard to master ) . Just check out how that works in Nasdaq , but of course that's more formal .
Without an active market , no big investors would even consider looking at BitShares , because it'll be hard to exit . I've talked to a guy who is quite fond of BitShares , but in the end he choose to buy Bitcoin , because it's impossible for him to in and out of BitShares with such low liquidity .
Of course , some of us thinks the ways and the laws in the real world don't apply to BitShares because we're so free and have a bright future etc..etc .... Then ignore me .
You can always build a project with codes and talks , but you can only build a market will real people who don't care about idealism but cold hard financial rules .
Hope that provides some insight on "why there looks like no resistance in the market ? " because those who can resist are either left or still waiting a better time to entry .
PS.Again , Market makers are not exactly "whales" "big buyers" ...... but they're essential for big players .
And again , I think the software itself is gonna be amazing with or without PR consideration . If what we're here for is just to build a software , then screw PR .... software don't need PR . It's just a code store in a computer . But if we're here to build a financial system that interacts with the real world , real investors , real grandpas and grandmas ....
I always enjoy your posts.. even though they tend to be pointing to downside of things.. you like to try and keep it practical and as balanced as possible.
Every company that comes out with a new widget or added a new feature has a marketing engine to get it out there. Everyone knows there is clearly an absence of that here. Even various alt coins that are little more than carbon-copies of bitcoin with a different block rate are making their ways into news channels by making the effort to get the message out.
While there is always plenty to complain about why things are they way they are.. it's a catch 22 to not have news messaging going out and expect market makers to come on-board. If anything they need to see that kind of machine in action.
Keep in mind.. a group like this really would only need to push a message out once a month. So would be a matter of choosing the highlight of the month and then getting out to the media. I personally think highlighting new projects that are built on bitshares every month is the way to go.. since that is our overall objective.. to be the ubiquitous platform of choice.
I think having a group to peer review materials before going out is a good idea. Process could go something like gathering and consolidating major events of the month and formulating a story around all or some of them to release on something like the 1st Monday of each month so everyone can expect that news to come out.. maybe even market makers can plan accordingly.
On a side note.. isn't delegate.kencode (VOTE: http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=delegate.kencode) planning to do something like this in his delegate proposal? In which case.. we got the channel to handle it.. though the cost of distributing one PR a month is going to take almost all his delegate pay at the current rate... assuming he gets voted in of course. :)
-
:devil:
Comedian Bill Hicks on Advertising and Marketing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEnA29wK7uM)
;D
-
:)
Interesting considerations. Our community has many people who are really intelligent so many make valid points. So it all comes down to Consensus I guess...really cool even if it is stressful at times.
What do you think about bitcoins difficulty in governing itself?
-
What do you think about bitcoins difficulty in governing itself?
Consensus is everything. Consensus follows from form resolving over time. Hammer the same point over and over until everyone is fed up with it. Only then make a change. Too much changes are hard to follow and unsettling.
People like stability. If they are uncertain, they will not invest or they will move to the next novelty. Same goes for all projects.
Done right, BitShares has huge potential. Nothing has substaintially changed.
At the moment everything blockchain related is something like survival of the fittest, the strongest and most persistent thoughts will survive. Uncertainty rules as legislation frustrates innovation but those projects that are prepared and ready for a big influx of investment once that is given the green light will succeed.
I keep repeating my view relative to BitShares because I think it's key: We need focus, to help resolve and establish sustainable consensus.. and we need to ensure the message is crystal clear and unambiguous.. [Milestones; a clear list of what is unique about BitShares; a Mission statement; a Vision statement] will help with that. The GUI seems to have taken a big step forward and I've not looked closely but I expect there efforts to make it faster to update and especially on first use.
PR perhaps then can help define the limits and parameters of what's likely and possible, so consensus is easy. The worst case is that nothing is defined; everyone with their own interpretations of uncertainty and expectations for BitShares, and all those then finding more difference than similarity. Which again, is why having input from leaders is key to maintain focus.
One of my previous posts critiqued the wiki, for addressing only one audience. Put a link at the top of the forum to the singular detail that literally everyone should know. PR perhaps can help making that detail clear to different audiences. Think like someone who knows nothing about BitShares and stumble over the different entry points. Are there enough examples of what to expect?
-
On a side note.. isn't delegate.kencode (VOTE: http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=delegate.kencode) planning to do something like this in his delegate proposal? In which case.. we got the channel to handle it.. though the cost of distributing one PR a month is going to take almost all his delegate pay at the current rate... assuming he gets voted in of course. :)[/size]
Yep. That's just a fraction of what I'm working on here. My Delegate Proposal is on google docs:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vg-N7NbX5J5FC9EvxRqjoRqXyl9f2oNpQnphk1yW5Jw/edit
Once I see that the voting thing works, then I can go full-time here. I've got a lot to accomplish for BitShares. In my DP I listed the major stuff though. the stuff that most people want to see me accomplish here.
My side projects like the job board, various Working Groups and meetups should help bring us Partnerships though, a major focus of mine.
-
One of my previous posts critiqued the wiki, for addressing only one audience. Put a link at the top of the forum to the singular detail that literally everyone should know. PR perhaps can help making that detail clear to different audiences. Think like someone who knows nothing about BitShares and stumble over the different entry points. Are there enough examples of what to expect?
@robrigo and I are doing the Wikipedia pages as we speak.
Rough Draft work:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zCMUJtqB3Gm9Za9plByINf_MRy0oPr5zuEU5BpyhvRQ/edit
Final Draft work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BitShares
-
@robrigo and I are doing the Wikipedia pages as we speak.
Rough Draft work:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zCMUJtqB3Gm9Za9plByINf_MRy0oPr5zuEU5BpyhvRQ/edit
Final Draft work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BitShares
Very encouraged by all your efforts @kenCode :)
In that wiki beta, is that block of Background really more important than the concept? Can I suggest that the history of BitShares is a bore?.. Block 1 of the wiki then should be later just ~"The History of BitShares Evolution".
Also, perhaps it needs something sharp at the top to punch those who don't like to read too much. Perhaps: "BitShares - The Decentralized ?+'Asset'? Exchange. Trade Dollars, Gold, Bitcoin, and more without counterparty risk."
+5%
-
@robrigo and I are doing the Wikipedia pages as we speak.
Rough Draft work:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zCMUJtqB3Gm9Za9plByINf_MRy0oPr5zuEU5BpyhvRQ/edit
Final Draft work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BitShares
Very encouraged by all your efforts @kenCode :)
In that wiki beta, is that block of Background really more important than the concept? Can I suggest that the history of BitShares is a bore?.. Block 1 of the wiki then should be later just ~"The History of BitShares Evolution".
Also, perhaps it needs something sharp at the top to punch those who don't like to read too much. Perhaps: "BitShares - The Decentralized ?+'Asset'? Exchange. Trade Dollars, Gold, Bitcoin, and more without counterparty risk."
+5%
Thanx David :)
Just ignore both of those links for content, colors and such right now. I'll get to how it looks after I get all the content entered and situated where it should be. The wiki that @gamey works on (wiki.bitshares.org) will be the mainstream user-friendly version and the one that @robrigo and I are working on right now (above) will be the really detailed one, so we have a lot more work to do over the coming weeks.
I'd like to do this full-time actually. *hint hint* :)
-
ehm .. most content if not all in the wiki has been written for FREE by volunteers of the community .. how come you think you can get paid for doing it?
-
ehm .. most content if not all in the wiki has been written for FREE by volunteers of the community .. how come you think you can get paid for doing it?
People are free to pitch for a delegate in whatever way they want. Votes win prizes..
-
ehm .. most content if not all in the wiki has been written for FREE by volunteers of the community .. how come you think you can get paid for doing it?
I'm doing a lot more here than just the Wiki's:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vg-N7NbX5J5FC9EvxRqjoRqXyl9f2oNpQnphk1yW5Jw/edit
-
ehm .. what wikiS are we talking about here??
Changes made in bts.wiki in the last30 days:
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&days=30&from=&limit=500
I dont see what you are selling here .. besides the nice interview at cointelegraph I cant see your contributions .. please enlighten me!!
-
I dont see what you are selling here .. besides the nice interview at cointelegraph I cant see your contributions .. please enlighten me!!
xeroc, what's up? Why are you attacking me? Am I not working hard enough?
In my Delegate Proposal I show exactly what I am doing here. bts.wiki work doesn't start with gamey until robrigo and I are done with Wikipedia first.
Please read my DP:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vg-N7NbX5J5FC9EvxRqjoRqXyl9f2oNpQnphk1yW5Jw/edit
And:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=30868
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
Exactly.
Over time, BTS value will be driven by demand generated by real businesses built on top of the platform, not so much from speculation about the platform itself.
(Although, this is also something real that professional speculators can base quantitative decisions upon.)
Altcoin holders are, in general, stuck speculating on the continuing value of a meme. Nothing wrong with that as harmless entertainment, I suppose.
But growth lies with an ability to support profitable businesses. :)
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
Exactly.
Over time, BTS value will be driven by demand generated by real businesses built on top of the platform, not so much from speculation about the platform itself.
(Although, this is also something real that professional speculators can base quantitative decisions upon.)
Altcoin holders are, in general, stuck speculating on the continuing value of a meme. Nothing wrong with that as harmless entertainment, I suppose.
But growth lies with an ability to support profitable businesses. :)
my big concern is how those businesses get into positions of power and if the stakeholders will have the ability to vote them out if they do something against our foundational beliefs (like verizon tapping and sending off all your info)
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
Exactly.
Over time, BTS value will be driven by demand generated by real businesses built on top of the platform, not so much from speculation about the platform itself.
(Although, this is also something real that professional speculators can base quantitative decisions upon.)
Altcoin holders are, in general, stuck speculating on the continuing value of a meme. Nothing wrong with that as harmless entertainment, I suppose.
But growth lies with an ability to support profitable businesses. :)
my big concern is how those businesses get into positions of power and if the stakeholders will have the ability to vote them out if they do something against our foundational beliefs (like verizon tapping and sending off all your info)
I'm not sure what kind of "position of power" any business could get into, but let's consider something concrete:
Suppose a business is engaging in something obnoxious like promoting capitalism or Austrian economics or selling Baltimore Ravens football tickets. Do we really want shareholders in the neutral platform to be able to somehow stop them?
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
Exactly.
Over time, BTS value will be driven by demand generated by real businesses built on top of the platform, not so much from speculation about the platform itself.
(Although, this is also something real that professional speculators can base quantitative decisions upon.)
Altcoin holders are, in general, stuck speculating on the continuing value of a meme. Nothing wrong with that as harmless entertainment, I suppose.
But growth lies with an ability to support profitable businesses. :)
my big concern is how those businesses get into positions of power and if the stakeholders will have the ability to vote them out if they do something against our foundational beliefs (like verizon tapping and sending off all your info)
I'm not sure what kind of "position of power" any business could get into, but let's consider something concrete:
Suppose a business is engaging in something obnoxious like promoting capitalism or Austrian economics or selling Baltimore Ravens football tickets. Do we really want shareholders in the neutral platform to be able to somehow stop them?
Whup.. Stan took the train to crazy town.. Baltimore Ravens tickets?
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
Exactly.
Over time, BTS value will be driven by demand generated by real businesses built on top of the platform, not so much from speculation about the platform itself.
(Although, this is also something real that professional speculators can base quantitative decisions upon.)
Altcoin holders are, in general, stuck speculating on the continuing value of a meme. Nothing wrong with that as harmless entertainment, I suppose.
But growth lies with an ability to support profitable businesses. :)
my big concern is how those businesses get into positions of power and if the stakeholders will have the ability to vote them out if they do something against our foundational beliefs (like verizon tapping and sending off all your info)
I know you care about this platform fuzzy and I appreciate everything that you do for the platform.
I would like to know your opinion about this question:
Do you want people to have the ability to vote on which business can or cannot be built on BitShares?
-
PR should be done by business building on top of bitshares.
If we create enough incentives to attract entrepreneurs and devs then we should have no problem
getting the exposure and marketing we need.
So basically, I don't think the protocol needs a PR focus group.
We need products and services built on top of BitShares and rewarding those businesses for bringing in users.
Exactly.
Over time, BTS value will be driven by demand generated by real businesses built on top of the platform, not so much from speculation about the platform itself.
(Although, this is also something real that professional speculators can base quantitative decisions upon.)
Altcoin holders are, in general, stuck speculating on the continuing value of a meme. Nothing wrong with that as harmless entertainment, I suppose.
But growth lies with an ability to support profitable businesses. :)
my big concern is how those businesses get into positions of power and if the stakeholders will have the ability to vote them out if they do something against our foundational beliefs (like verizon tapping and sending off all your info)
I know you care about this platform fuzzy and I appreciate everything that you do for the platform.
I would like to know your opinion about this question:
Do you want people to have the ability to vote on which business can or cannot be built on BitShares?
The question is kind of misframing my point(though respectful and constructive, as I have come to expect from you). There is nothing keeping 1000's of businesses from using the bitshares platform, but we have to provide incentives for businesses to want to do the opposite of what we see today. It is a matter of incentives...and a delegate to subsidize your freedom-loving (3D Printing, free energy) business is a huge benefit. This is especially true if competitors are monitoring each other in hopes of taking eachothers' delegates. I think the incentives are absolutely critical.
It isn't just that we reach a high marketcap, but also how we set the foundation for that growth in a way that incentivizes companies to see bitshares' citizens' rights as the number one priority.
But this is not the point of the OP. ;)
-
bump
-
sure bts need PR. need to go and present saying here we are, you need to use because you get a ton of profits for your bussines left out the game your competence thanks to our advantajes.
-
The question is kind of misframing my point(though respectful and constructive, as I have come to expect from you). There is nothing keeping 1000's of businesses from using the bitshares platform, but we have to provide incentives for businesses to want to do the opposite of what we see today. It is a matter of incentives...and a delegate to subsidize your freedom-loving (3D Printing, free energy) business is a huge benefit. This is especially true if competitors are monitoring each other in hopes of taking eachothers' delegates. I think the incentives are absolutely critical.
It isn't just that we reach a high marketcap, but also how we set the foundation for that growth in a way that incentivizes companies to see bitshares' citizens' rights as the number one priority.
But this is not the point of the OP. ;)
The incentive should be the utility that BitShares provides. There is no point in a product that need subsidising .. bribing users is a short term indicator that something's wrong. If the timing is wrong, then wait a while and find a different class of user/audience who will engage at this stage.
If it's a matter of bridging that gap in time, then approach Richard Branson or similar.. he's apparently hosting some Bitcoin summit roughly now: http://www.coindesk.com/richard-branson-blockchain-summit-private-island/ If not him, then Bill Gates etc. Fortune favours the brave?
Perhaps what we need more that what is typically PR, is ambassadors. The best will be those close to the core dev team who can communicate exactly on target what is possible and inspire that support.
Trifold brochures etc are all very well.. but who's getting the message? The measure of PR/Marketing is the volume [quality x quantity] of the message they are creating. It's unclear that the message is getting out or to the right people in the right way.. perhaps it is and we're suffering the natural evolution of BitShares class of activity right now, coupled with pressure on BTC from merchants turning it over. Perhaps the halving date in 2017 will be the next uptick. Plan for worst case and enjoy the difference.. 8)
Edit: fixed detail of Richard Branson event : http://www.coindesk.com/richard-branson-blockchain-summit-private-island/