BitShares is a community of likeminded individuals working together to make the world a better place. The only way to become a member of our community is via proof of work.Wah?! :o ...
AGS donators have proven their support by giving resources they had to work to earn. Delegates are continuing to do the work to grow the community and realize our vision.Ohhh... nice pun! I can't wait to use that one on the Bitcoin community.
We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) ...
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community. Details of this plan are still under review, but at the end of the day the result will be that no one developer will have "king making authority" for delegates. People have stated that I have "too much power", but I do not wish to rely of fiat to get things done, but instead on my ability to persuade the community. I also wish for the development of BTS to continue regardless of what the SEC or government attempts to accuse I3 of. BTS is bigger than any one of us and has the potential to unite everyone under a fully voluntary society.
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
BitShares is a community of likeminded individuals working together to make the world a better place. The only way to become a member of our community is via proof of work. PTS miners did work to create and secure our first membership token. AGS donators have proven their support by giving resources they had to work to earn. Delegates are continuing to do the work to grow the community and realize our vision.
BitShares are Proof of Work.
Companies are contractual entities while communities are voluntary associations. We want to work together and recognize the contributions of each member to helping the community grow and achieve its ultimate mission, world peace. In our community it is imperative that each individual produce more value than they consume and equally so that no individual be expected to sacrifice themselves disproportionally for the group.
We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against us in every way except understanding the economic consequences of various decisions.
BitShares will be a self-governing community which elects delegates who serve the community and enforce the social consensus that majority stakeholder opinion rules.
The BitShares community is a contract-free zone where at no point in time shall there exist a legal obligation for any party to behave any way in the future. We shall stick to these principles and rely on reputation and community coordination to facilitate efficient commerce with low overhead.
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community. Details of this plan are still under review, but at the end of the day the result will be that no one developer will have "king making authority" for delegates. People have stated that I have "too much power", but I do not wish to rely of fiat to get things done, but instead on my ability to persuade the community. I also wish for the development of BTS to continue regardless of what the SEC or government attempts to accuse I3 of. BTS is bigger than any one of us and has the potential to unite everyone under a fully voluntary society.
Lets make this happen... lets change the world and reimagine BitShares.
A guiding principle is reciprocity. You have to give to receive in nature. If you plant a million seeds it might cost you time but it could yield a bounty of crops in the future.BitShares is a community of likeminded individuals working together to make the world a better place. The only way to become a member of our community is via proof of work.Wah?! :o ...
On the other, it makes me fearful that attacks are coming.
Companies are contractual entities while communities are voluntary associations.
...
BitShares will be a self-governing community which elects delegates who serve the community and enforce the social consensus that majority stakeholder opinion rules.
The BitShares community is a contract-free zone where at no point in time shall there exist a legal obligation for any party to behave any way in the future. We shall stick to these principles and rely on reputation and community coordination to facilitate efficient commerce with low overhead.
...
BTS is bigger than any one of us and has the potential to unite everyone under a fully voluntary society.
Lets make this happen... lets change the world and reimagine BitShares.
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?
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
...
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community... People have stated that I have "too much power", ...
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.
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
...
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community... People have stated that I have "too much power", ...
I totally get the idea of creating an autonomous "company" and will be interested to see what you mean by
"work together as independent parties". Sounds a little at odds with itself.
I hope it hasn't escaped your notice that some people want you to be in charge and to make decisions as the leader that you are and that their confidence and willingness to invest in this is based on that. Having an army of people "in charge" doesn't inspire confidence IMHO. Hopefully it doesn't turn out that way. As you've said, decentralization is a tactic, not an end in itself. Just saying...my 2 cents.
Edit: Real companies have leaders that take charge and make decisions, granted they work with a team but still, there is someone that is accountable and serves to set the agenda and marshal the resources of the organization.
I also hope it hasn't escaped your notice that some people want you to be in charge and to make decisions as the leader that you are and that their confidence and willingness to invest in this is based on that. Having an army of people "in charge" doesn't inspire confidence IMHO. Hopefully it doesn't turn out that way. As you've said, decentralization is a tactic, not an end in itself. Just saying...my 2 cents.
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.
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
...
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community... People have stated that I have "too much power", ...
I totally get the idea of creating an autonomous "company" and will be interested to see what you mean by
"work together as independent parties". Sounds a little at odds with itself.
I hope it hasn't escaped your notice that some people want you to be in charge and to make decisions as the leader that you are and that their confidence and willingness to invest in this is based on that. Having an army of people "in charge" doesn't inspire confidence IMHO. Hopefully it doesn't turn out that way. As you've said, decentralization is a tactic, not an end in itself. Just saying...my 2 cents.
Edit: Real companies have leaders that take charge and make decisions, granted they work with a team but still, there is someone that is accountable and serves to set the agenda and marshal the resources of the organization.
There are leaders and then there are rulers. I hope the lead the team without ruling the team.
There are leaders and then there are rulers. I hope the lead the team without ruling the team.
PTS miners did work to create and secure our first membership token. AGS donators have proven their support by giving resources they had to work to earn. Delegates are continuing to do the work to grow the community and realize our vision.
BitShares are Proof of Work.
We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
...
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community... People have stated that I have "too much power", ...
I totally get the idea of creating an autonomous "company" and will be interested to see what you mean by
"work together as independent parties". Sounds a little at odds with itself.
I hope it hasn't escaped your notice that some people want you to be in charge and to make decisions as the leader that you are and that their confidence and willingness to invest in this is based on that. Having an army of people "in charge" doesn't inspire confidence IMHO. Hopefully it doesn't turn out that way. As you've said, decentralization is a tactic, not an end in itself. Just saying...my 2 cents.
Edit: Real companies have leaders that take charge and make decisions, granted they work with a team but still, there is someone that is accountable and serves to set the agenda and marshal the resources of the organization.
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
People have stated that I have "too much power", but I do not wish to rely of fiat to get things done, but instead on my ability to persuade the community.
I do see a bit of confusion in your OP given that our rebranded name is still BitShares. The language in your OP says we'll be moving away from the "shares" terminology / metaphor. Would you care to elaborate on this point?^This
I do see a bit of confusion in your OP given that our rebranded name is still BitShares. The language in your OP says we'll be moving away from the "shares" terminology / metaphor. Would you care to elaborate on this point?^This
I think those metaphors work pretty well. Honestly I can't think of a better way to explain bitshares.
If we HAVE to move away from them because of something legal then that is fine.
I am just waiting for Rune to put the positive spin on the OP... I do believe he can!
We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against us in every way except understanding the economic consequences of various decisions.
I am just waiting for Rune to put the positive spin on the OP... I do believe he can!
I like the gist of it, but would like more information about this:We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against us in every way except understanding the economic consequences of various decisions.
This concerns me.
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against us in every way except understanding the economic consequences of various decisions.
I am just waiting for Rune to put the positive spin on the OP... I do believe he can!
I like the gist of it, but would like more information about this:We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc. I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against us in every way except understanding the economic consequences of various decisions.
This concerns me.
Why? I think what he is trying to say is that we need our own economic language and concepts else we will be put into a box with entities which don't or can't do what we do.
Bitshares is a decentralized application which has functions which make it like a cooperative but it's not a company. So when we define ourselves we should do so carefully so that what we are doing is understood but also in a way so that regulators who don't understand cannot use it as an excuse.
If you want Bitshares to be treated as sovereign then it has to use it's own language. Of course these are my opinions and I think the community would benefit long term from this but I'm interested in knowing why it concerns you.
This change might be important for legal reasons, but in my opinion will only further lead to confusion. People are having a REALLY hard time wrapping their head around what this is...
EDIT: I think the term "open source company" sums up what we are quite nicely. BitShares is literally an open source project + monetary incentive.
'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.
'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.
'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.
That's a good point, but if that were the intended meaning the name should drop the trailing "s" to become BitShare
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community. Details of this plan are still under review, but at the end of the day the result will be that no one developer will have "king making authority" for delegates. People have stated that I have "too much power", but I do not wish to rely of fiat to get things done, but instead on my ability to persuade the community. I also wish for the development of BTS to continue regardless of what the SEC or government attempts to accuse I3 of. BTS is bigger than any one of us and has the potential to unite everyone under a fully voluntary society.
Generally I like what you're saying here BUT I find using a company metaphor the best way to describe what BitShares actually is. What is a company? It's a community. It makes more sense to describe BitShares as an "unmanned company". People actually get excited when I describe it like that. This change might be important for legal reasons, but in my opinion will only further lead to confusion. People are having a REALLY hard time wrapping their head around what this is...
EDIT: I think the term "open source company" sums up what we are quite nicely. BitShares is literally an open source project + monetary incentive.
Keep in mind that this community will have many faces. Just like the users of a BitShares debit card or a voting booth or a day-trader's console don't need to know the whole backstory.
But there will be times when a bigger metaphor is needed to communicate the entire vision and legal theory of operation.
"You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."(http://www.stuartwilde.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/The-Maxtix.jpeg)
So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...
So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...
We want to work together and recognize the contributions of each member to helping the community grow and achieve its ultimate mission, world peace.For the benefit of attracting a wider community, I think it would be helpful to list some of the ways members can do this and be recognised, apart from the limited number of delegate roles. How do community members without developer skills meaningfully contribute?
We want to work together and recognize the contributions of each member to helping the community grow and achieve its ultimate mission, world peace.For the benefit of attracting a wider community, I think it would be helpful to list some of the ways members can do this and be recognised, apart from the limited number of delegate roles. How do community members without developer skills meaningfully contribute?
So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...You start by declaring yourself a community, then you build in as much utility as you can so that community can be self sufficient. It's not a blockchain country but it could become one if we want it to.
BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community. Details of this plan are still under review, but at the end of the day the result will be that no one developer will have "king making authority" for delegates. People have stated that I have "too much power", but I do not wish to rely of fiat to get things done, but instead on my ability to persuade the community. I also wish for the development of BTS to continue regardless of what the SEC or government attempts to accuse I3 of. BTS is bigger than any one of us and has the potential to unite everyone under a fully voluntary society.
I would ask that this happen only after a MVP BitShares product is in place - ie. stable client, basic feature set, major bugs ironed out.
It would be terrible if BM identified another opportunity like the merger and was not be able to implement because the 'community' does not want to inconvenience share price.
BitShares is not ready for Dad to take the training wheels off just yet. I'd say give it at least six months and then disband I3 and divvy the remaining funds.Generally I like what you're saying here BUT I find using a company metaphor the best way to describe what BitShares actually is. What is a company? It's a community. It makes more sense to describe BitShares as an "unmanned company". People actually get excited when I describe it like that. This change might be important for legal reasons, but in my opinion will only further lead to confusion. People are having a REALLY hard time wrapping their head around what this is...
EDIT: I think the term "open source company" sums up what we are quite nicely. BitShares is literally an open source project + monetary incentive.
I agree with MeTHoDx on this one.
The term 'DAC' is already out in the wild and folks that invest in BitShares expect to be investing in a company.
Companies produce profit, communities produce people.
I like BM's philosophy and I think BitShares + Meshnet might actually have a shot at changing the world.
But first things first - this community needs to build a profitable, self-sustaining DAC.
Then we can go change the world.
So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...
Thought about this. But the masses would laugh at such a thing.
Here is what I don't want to happen is for delegates to be considered directors of a company issuing shares to the public as an unlicensed security.
A self governing community that uses bts to track each persons share of the work contributed is much more generic and does not imply a legal entity.
I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.
We want to work together and recognize the contributions of each member to helping the community grow and achieve its ultimate mission, world peace.For the benefit of attracting a wider community, I think it would be helpful to list some of the ways members can do this and be recognised, apart from the limited number of delegate roles. How do community members without developer skills meaningfully contribute?
I am working with Adam to create jobs for everyone to earn money by helping to market without dilution.
This is the same sort of debate about whether Bitcoin is a coin, a currency or a commodity. Bitcoin is more than a coin, currency or commodity. Currency is an app. Coin is a description to make it easier to understand (like company for Bitshares).Here is what I don't want to happen is for delegates to be considered directors of a company issuing shares to the public as an unlicensed security.
A self governing community that uses bts to track each persons share of the work contributed is much more generic and does not imply a legal entity.
I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.
I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.
Community, Cooperative, Country, Corporation. I would think in different countries to different people it could be marketed in a different way with a different metaphor. In the United States corporations aren't a good metaphor and country is science fiction to most people.
Here is what I don't want to happen is for delegates to be considered directors of a company issuing shares to the public as an unlicensed security.
A self governing community that uses bts to track each persons share of the work contributed is much more generic and does not imply a legal entity.
I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.
I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.
Decentralized Autonomous Network... DAN
It was SO meant to be!
A guiding principle is reciprocity. You have to give to receive in nature. If you plant a million seeds it might cost you time but it could yield a bounty of crops in the future.
I don't know how many people here believe in God but whether you do or you don't the earth we have is a gift. If you give to it you can get more from it in the future. A community works in a similar way where if you want to grow it you have to give resources to it so that in the future you can rely on it's gifts.
Let's look at what we have or could have:
1) Decentralized trust with privacy. We can trust each other enforced by algorithmic social measures instead of legal.
2) Decentralized reputation with privacy. We will know from experience how trustworthy we can all be in a way which can be quantifiable. The more "Big Data" we collect the more accurate our measurements will become and once again with algorithmic enforcement the scammer has to deal with the self enforcing contract.
3) Decentralized decision making with privacy. If we can trust each other and know each other's reputation then we become like a society of friends. We can trade with each other and make big important decisions while maintaining pseudo-anonymity (privacy).
On top of this we can organize ourselves into legal structures which promote and encourage trust/reputation. Basically the legal structures only really would have to exist to supplement the algorithmic social structures. The problems come when we speak in a language which attracts enforcement entities that our community does not need or want.
So we have to use the language which makes sense for what our community is trying to be. Our community will develop algorithms which will measure trust and reputation well enough that sooner or later there will not be a need for contracts. Just someone's word will be enough because their reputation will be their most important asset.
This means it will be in their own best interest to maintain that reputation. The threat of prison never really stopped people from scamming each other but if you wonder why everyone isn't a scammer it's because some people care more about their reputation and others don't. So by keeping score of how much each person cares about the community or how much each person gives back you can form legal structures around that data formula.
Decentralized trust and reputation are very powerful and I think so far most of the world underestimates how powerful. If we had those two components then all the institutions and legal enforcers set up wouldn't be necessary.
So, is it just me, or did Bitshares just completely jump the shark.
What happened, we got a letter from the SEC and now we cant be a company anymore, we have to all become hippies and be a community?
So, is it just me, or did Bitshares just completely jump the shark.
What happened, we got a letter from the SEC and now we cant be a company anymore, we have to all become hippies and be a community?
I would say that the definition of a stakeholder fits well with what BM is talking about. The definition and application of stakeholder almost perfectly align with the overall view of the community.
A corporate stakeholder can affect or be affected by the actions of a business as a whole. The stakeholder concept was first used in a 1963 internal memorandum at the Stanford Research Institute. It defined stakeholders as "those groups without whose support the organization would cease to exist."
Stakeholders:Stakeholder's concerns: Applications
Government - taxation, VAT, legislation, employment, truthful reporting, diversity, legalities, externalities.
Employee - rates of pay, job security, compensation, respect, truthful communication.
Customers - value, quality, customer care, ethical products.
Suppliers - providers of products and services used in the end product for the customer, equitable business opportunities.
Creditors - credit score, new contracts, liquidity.
Community - jobs, involvement, environmental protection, shares, truthful communication.
Trade Unions - quality, worker protection, jobs.
Owner(s) -profitability, longevity, market share, market standing, succession planning, raising capital, growth, social goals.
Investors return on investment, income.
So, is it just me, or did Bitshares just completely jump the shark.
What happened, we got a letter from the SEC and now we cant be a company anymore, we have to all become hippies and be a community?
Lol made my day.
But I agree the company metaphor was working great and I would like to use it further if it is some how possible.
So, is it just me, or did Bitshares just completely jump the shark.
What happened, we got a letter from the SEC and now we cant be a company anymore, we have to all become hippies and be a community?
The SEC rumour, be it for real or not, is something we should watch out for. If BM has reacted with a pre-emptive change to 'community', it is a good move. +5%
I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.+5%
So, is it just me, or did Bitshares just completely jump the shark.
What happened, we got a letter from the SEC and now we cant be a company anymore, we have to all become hippies and be a community?
The SEC rumour, be it for real or not, is something we should watch out for. If BM has reacted with a pre-emptive change to 'community', it is a good move. +5%
There's a tradeoff though. Avoiding the SEC by toning down the financial analogies/language risks communicating the message of what Bitshares is really about to end-users.
If a potential online retailer comes away with the impression that Bitshares is a website rather than a way for him to isolate exchange rate risk (BitUSD), and process transactions near instantly (DPOS), then it's a lost opportunity.
The same applies for more sophisiticated finance groups who need to know that they now have new possibilities to either hedge risks, create market liquidity with reduced frictional losses. How does the profound qualities and 'killer-app' feature of 'the peg' get spread in this context?
A 'community' message rather than 'exchange' type message also doesn't help distinguish Bitshares from Bitcoin which already has the network effect advantage and enormous libertarian idealism amongst its community.
To me, it sounds like Bitshares might be caught between a rock and a hard-place.
a) I like 'BitShare' (a bit to share)
2) The BitShare Currencies/DAC's are a *consequence* of the community not a *purpose*
iii) The metaphors are so ingrained in our phsyche because of the troubled world we live in... lets find some new terms, a new means to communicate ideas, that are not based on 'old world' terminology.I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.+5%
It is telling, reading the posts, as to where we as individuals are focused. The default is most powerful, but the world is changing, are we not pioneers, the engineers of our own future. It may take sometime and many checks on our vernacular to galvanize the 'newspeak' (thanks George) required to convey our message.
I'm exploding with excitement at what we have here. With leadership like this, I am at peace with my choice.
The world is cyclical... Atoms are round, planets are round, history repeats itself... As Bytemaster (and team) has just illustrated, technological advancement is leading us back to eachother. Will it take this generation or the next ... The choice is ours
[...knock knock...] :o Q: do you open the door or pretend your not home?
The working paper No. 179, 1994, of the Center for Coordination Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology describes the concept as follows: "The information superhighway directly connects millions of people, each both a consumer of information and a potential provider. (...) Most predictions about commercial opportunities on the information superhighway focus on the provision of information products, such as video on demand, and on new sales outlets for physical products, as with home shopping. (...) The information superhighway brings together millions of individuals who could exchange information with one another. Any conception of a traditional market for making beneficial exchanges, such as an agricultural market or trading pit, or any system where individuals respond to posted prices on a computer screen is woefully inadequate for the extremely large number of often complex trades that will be required."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_superhighway
Cyberspace is "the notional environment in which communication over computer networks occurs."[1] The term was first used in science fiction and cinema in the 1980s, was adopted by computer professionals and became a household term in the 1990s. During this period, the uses of the internet, networking, and digital communication were all growing dramatically and the term "cyberspace" was able to represent the many new ideas and phenomena that were emerginghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberspace
The World Wide Web (abbreviated as WWW or W3,[1] commonly known as the Web) is a system of interlinked hypertext documents that are accessed via the Internet. With a web browser, one can view web pages that may contain text, images, videos, and other multimedia and navigate between them via hyperlinks.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web
Here is what I don't want to happen is for delegates to be considered directors of a company issuing shares to the public as an unlicensed security.
A self governing community that uses bts to track each persons share of the work contributed is much more generic and does not imply a legal entity.
I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.
I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.
Yes!
There was a message. Pretty powerful one, indeed!
Message, Vision, Idea!
In which all of us believe(d), more or less; some sooner, some later; some totally, some only in the core principals;
Now all of a sudden comes this - lets build Bla-bla Bla-bla Community - not only totally uninspiring, but already accomplished!
We do have a community. No need to build one with some adjectives in front of it.
And no, I do not believe we have achieved our goal if we force a half-a** constitution on the king,If we want a republic there should be no king!
If we want better business model(s) for our kids, we should not hide behind false pretenses that this is not a business![/b]
Here is what I don't want to happen is for delegates to be considered directors of a company issuing shares to the public as an unlicensed security.
A self governing community that uses bts to track each persons share of the work contributed is much more generic and does not imply a legal entity.
I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.
I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.
Yes!
There was a message. Pretty powerful one, indeed!
Message, Vision, Idea!
In which all of us believe(d), more or less; some sooner, some later; some totally, some only in the core principals;
Now all of a sudden comes this - lets build Bla-bla Bla-bla Community - not only totally uninspiring, but already accomplished!
We do have a community. No need to build one with some adjectives in front of it.
And no, I do not believe we have achieved our goal if we force a half-a** constitution on the king,If we want a republic there should be no king!
If we want better business model(s) for our kids, we should not hide behind false pretenses that this is not a business!
So, is it just me, or did Bitshares just completely jump the shark.
What happened, we got a letter from the SEC and now we cant be a company anymore, we have to all become hippies and be a community?
The SEC rumour, be it for real or not, is something we should watch out for. If BM has reacted with a pre-emptive change to 'community', it is a good move. +5%
There's a tradeoff though. Avoiding the SEC by toning down the financial analogies/language risks communicating the message of what Bitshares' applications are about to end-users.
If a potential online retailer comes away with the impression that Bitshares is a community website rather than a way for him to isolate exchange rate risk (BitUSD), and process transactions near instantly (DPOS) and anonymously (TITAN), then it's a lost opportunity.
The same applies for more sophisticated finance groups who need to know that they now have new possibilities to either hedge risks, or create market liquidity with reduced frictional losses and less compliance hassle. How will the profound implications and 'killer-app' feature of 'the peg' get spread to these groups?
A 'community' message rather than 'exchange' type message also doesn't help distinguish Bitshares from Bitcoin which already has the network effect advantage and enormous libertarian idealism within its community.
No easy answers here for sure - but, it sounds like Bitshares might be caught between a rock and a hard-place.
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?
Regardless of how good any particular idea is, if you keep making 90 degree turns with little to no warning, people are going to lose confidence. Why should I believe the direction you are promoting for BitShares today when in less than two weeks, there will be a whole new twist to adopt?
And how will there ever be an effective marketing campaign when the "company" and "product" are constantly being described in different ways?
To become a sovereign nation: All we need is an island, a blockchain and a few more women
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.
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.
Good to hear. While these may be some great ideas, they may not necessarily be the most marketable. Hope the marketing guys know what they're doing.
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.
Good to hear. While these may be some great ideas, they may not necessarily be the most marketable. Hope the marketing guys know what they're doing.
They do... and this idea of mine has been properly tempered so those who have freaked out about the post can calm down...
It's kind of like the stock market's reaction to the Fed chair's words.
BM made another good post (not that this one was bad or anything...:) ) explaining the reasoning and some good guidelines on use of the "company" metaphor.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10767.msg141723#msg141723
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.
^ThisYou need to get that on a mug or something lol.
I never intended this thread to completely change everything...
BM,
With all this merger (which I support) we are in a confusion period now. Adding new areas of change serves no good.
If you are proposing this "company to community" change just for the sake of cleaning up the bitshares concept - this is really bad timing. And also this is not a very motivating change from the marketing perspective: being part of a company is more inspiring than belonging to a community.
Unless you have legal reasons to do so - then this change makes much more sense as the last thing we want you to have are legal problems. But then this should be clearly stated as we (the stake holders) should know it.
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.
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.
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.
This thread and the accusations fuzzy has leveled at Rune, i think, are jointly responsible for today's sell off.
...donkeypong...
This thread and the accusations fuzzy has leveled at Rune, i think, are jointly responsible for today's sell off.
...donkeypong...
You found the quote of the day donkeypong, and made my day! +5%
Though I will say, this thread did not help much, to the cause of the other direction.
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!
...
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.
...
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.
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?
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.
...
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.
...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.