No.

You do not adjust to make up for a bad proposal by making it worse (taking from VOTE and AGS to feed DNS)

PTS/AGS/DNS/VOTE are all getting the short end of the stick...by a lot.

For some reason, this entire proposal has been configured to overwhelmingly satisfy the current BTSX holders who were freaking out about possibly being overtaken by VOTE.

The reason for the merger is that recent BTSX investors were more leveraged in BTSX and either had less held as hedge in PTS/AGS, or none at all.

PTS/AGS holders were not "all in" with BTSX and many of them would not mind which DAC gained network effect first.

BASING THE CURRENT PROPOSAL NEAR MARKET CAP OR DISTRIBUTION IS INHERENTLY UNFAIR.

- The value of the VOTE DAC was significant and had not been valued and shares properly priced due to 2 main reasons:

1. VOTE had not yet been issued and therefore, was not tradable on an exchange.

2. Bytemaster has not yet gone public with whatever epiphany has led to him being so excited about VOTE <---This is a big point that everybody seems to be ignoring about the value of the non-BTSX entities.

If "fairness" or "value" is being attempted here - it is nowhere close. Many PTS/AGS were not only safely hedging, but looking forward to a bitshares ecosystem consisting of many competing experiments.

BTSX holders are gaining a windfall here - by gigantic proportions: They are basically stealing the VOTE DAC's likely future network effect for themselves at below market cost (thanks to doing this before allowing VOTE to price itself).

I have no suggestion of a more just proposal since I lack the information needed, but the current one is obviously done with too much bias toward BTSX.

*That being said: The most important decision needed here, IMO - is what will benefit I3, bitshares development, and the entire bitshares ecosystem most - so despite the obvious misallocation and bias in the current proposal - I'd like to get I3 what they need to continue down the road, but hopefully with less alienation of the original supporters.

DISCLAIMER (weight as you will): I currently hold PTS, post-Feb.28 snapshot AGS, BTSX (the majority of my holdings were purchased after release) and DAC.

How about another option?

Starts at 0% and grows by 1% a week.

^^^This...and not depending upon withdrawal.

Most AGS holders, by definition, have a long time horizon.

I3 is the largest PTS holder.

I don't think dumping is a very worrisome issue to begin with.

I've always been against the idea of making AGS transferable, but some arguments in this thread seem to make the argument very convincing.

Most important - There must remain an avenue for those new to the Bitshares community to invest in upcoming DAC's

The bundle of changes I find most interesting:

*Final snapshot / end PTS on 1 year anniversary
*Convert PTS and AGS to transferable UIA on BTSX
- (maybe later to be moved when ME launches - move and transactions would offer incentives to attract delegates for ME)
*Convert existing amounts to equivalent amount of 1 billion total new asset - "Bitshares Snapshot" or "Bitshares Seed" or "Bitshares S" or "Bitshares DAC"...whatever (just because I like nice round numbers that allow easy calculation of percentages ;-) )

If there are any other concerns regarding the conversion of AGS to transferable assets, maybe it can be entertained that they remain "locked" until the originally announced DAC's are snapshot (I believe only PLAY and ME remain from the original vision - please correct me if I am wrong) - and at that point allowing conversion to transferable assets.

...my .02 BTSX

Quote from: Pheonike on October 13, 2014, 11:08:17 pm

Could we implement something like this for secure login.

https://www.grc.com/sqrl/sqrl.htm

Already done.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

Quote from: roadkill on October 10, 2014, 05:31:31 am

BitUSD, internet cash
BitUSD, own your money
BitUSD, cash for smart masses
BitUSD, make your mattress cash work for you
BitUSD, or: How I Learned to Give Up POW and Love DPOS
BitUSD, next stop: BitGLD
BitUSD, I can't believe it's not USD!
BitUSD, not a significant source of Calcium

Quote from: bobmaloney on October 10, 2014, 03:38:17 am

bitUSD: Dollar stable, blockchain safe

The masses do not have to learn about blockchain (if they do not want to, that is)
other than that, this is great:

That's like saying the masses do not have to learn about a bank vault - but it is a great way to imply "security".

IMO, the term: "Blockchain" will soon be a very well recognized term.

What happens in Vegas...

Wouldn't it make more sense to modify Diaspora with DPoS in a way that combines delegates and pod operators?