I started a similar thread about a month ago. Suggesting funds be put in a multisig address of 3 people.
Matt608 was the only one who responded positively AFAIK. Toast suggested I start out with a lower paid delegate. (Which thinking about it some more, with price feeds etc I can understand that suggestion but meh it complicates the whole issue) Anyway, seeing the lack of community support and realizing I was just setting myself up to be committed to another half-baked project I deleted the thread. I have another half-baked projects - thank you!
It does seem to me that marketing could use a general funds account to be used by any project. I would suggest that the multi-sig holders be in charge of deciding where the money would go. 2/3 would protect everyone involved.
I started a similar thread about a month ago. Suggesting funds be put in a multisig address of 3 people.
Matt608 was the only one who responded positively AFAIK. Toast suggested I start out with a lower paid delegate. (Which thinking about it some more, with price feeds etc I can understand that suggestion but meh it complicates the whole issue) Anyway, seeing the lack of community support and realizing I was just setting myself up to be committed to another half-baked project I deleted the thread. I have another half-baked projects - thank you!
It does seem to me that marketing could use a general funds account to be used by any project. I would suggest that the multi-sig holders be in charge of deciding where the money would go. 2/3 would protect everyone involved.
We spend >100k in the past for marketing and now we have 1 deleagte for 2k a month? We are not talking about taking money for your own (at least not all) but to have funds under someones controll who will allocate them. We have many programmers, but not 1 person who is doing fulltime "business development". Coordinate all the people who are willing to help and allocate funds to them.
Matt608 is willing to do something for 3 month. So it would cost 6k. What a big deal. We did much worth in the past and now is the time to throw little money around to get the wheels moving. I would like to hear from Bytemaster about how this will be handled or who is doing it. Always we are talking about developers (great) but no company is going to be successful without the other guys around. We need now a infrastracture for them as well. 1-3 people would be great!
I started a similar thread about a month ago. Suggesting funds be put in a multisig address of 3 people.
Matt608 was the only one who responded positively AFAIK. Toast suggested I start out with a lower paid delegate. (Which thinking about it some more, with price feeds etc I can understand that suggestion but meh it complicates the whole issue) Anyway, seeing the lack of community support and realizing I was just setting myself up to be committed to another half-baked project I deleted the thread. I have another half-baked projects - thank you!
It does seem to me that marketing could use a general funds account to be used by any project. I would suggest that the multi-sig holders be in charge of deciding where the money would go. 2/3 would protect everyone involved.
We spend >100k in the past for marketing and now we have 1 deleagte for 2k a month? We are not talking about taking money for your own (at least not all) but to have funds under someones controll who will allocate them. We have many programmers, but not 1 person who is doing fulltime "business development". Coordinate all the people who are willing to help and allocate funds to them.
Matt608 is willing to do something for 3 month. So it would cost 6k. What a big deal. We did much worth in the past and now is the time to throw little money around to get the wheels moving. I would like to hear from Bytemaster about how this will be handled or who is doing it. Always we are talking about developers (great) but no company is going to be successful without the other guys around. We need now a infrastracture for them as well. 1-3 people would be great!
You are singing to the choir buddy.
The worst thing that can happen is we took all this negative PR for cause an inflating DAC that is barely utilized.
At current usd price levels, 1 marketer would need about 5 100% delegates to do anything meaningful right out of the gate.
At $2k per month, what, you buy one ad on reddit that would last less than a day if based on views. It's a joke to think any marketing would get done by a delegate at these price levels or even double. This is why I withdrew my intentions as a marketing delegate awhile back. It's just not realistic. And for the community to expect anything in the meantime is absurd. I would suggest I3 should be kicking out some BTS for marketing supplements since AGS has been used up, but at current levels that reserve would get exhausted rather fast.
I think it's time we all except that BTS is going to have to reach the masses the old fashioned way: word of mouth. I don't think it is unreasonable to think we will likely take the same path and time as Bitcoin took to get to where it is now. Just hope no one rides our technological coat tails and surpasses us with AGS style crowd funds that go purely into marketing the same product with a different name.
I started a similar thread about a month ago. Suggesting funds be put in a multisig address of 3 people.
Matt608 was the only one who responded positively AFAIK. Toast suggested I start out with a lower paid delegate. (Which thinking about it some more, with price feeds etc I can understand that suggestion but meh it complicates the whole issue) Anyway, seeing the lack of community support and realizing I was just setting myself up to be committed to another half-baked project I deleted the thread. I have another half-baked projects - thank you!
It does seem to me that marketing could use a general funds account to be used by any project. I would suggest that the multi-sig holders be in charge of deciding where the money would go. 2/3 would protect everyone involved.
We spend >100k in the past for marketing and now we have 1 deleagte for 2k a month? We are not talking about taking money for your own (at least not all) but to have funds under someones controll who will allocate them. We have many programmers, but not 1 person who is doing fulltime "business development". Coordinate all the people who are willing to help and allocate funds to them.
Matt608 is willing to do something for 3 month. So it would cost 6k. What a big deal. We did much worth in the past and now is the time to throw little money around to get the wheels moving. I would like to hear from Bytemaster about how this will be handled or who is doing it. Always we are talking about developers (great) but no company is going to be successful without the other guys around. We need now a infrastracture for them as well. 1-3 people would be great!
You are singing to the choir buddy.
The worst thing that can happen is we took all this negative PR for cause an inflating DAC that is barely utilized.
We should not call it inflation, because it is not.
We are creating BTS to pay for the employees we need. It is much better then always increase the issued shares because we need more funds. Bytemaster realized it in time so we need to fix our thinking as well. The community get a "loan" from himself to pay the employees. The employees need to create value for us, otherwise the "loan" will not get repaid in increasing marketcap.
This should not a reason why we are not hiring marketing or business developers.
At current usd price levels, 1 marketer would need about 5 100% delegates to do anything meaningful right out of the gate.
At $2k per month, what, you buy one ad on reddit that would last less than a day if based on views. It's a joke to think any marketing would get done by a delegate at these price levels or even double. This is why I withdrew my intentions as a marketing delegate awhile back. It's just not realistic. And for the community to expect anything in the meantime is absurd. I would suggest I3 should be kicking out some BTS for marketing supplements since AGS has been used up, but at current levels that reserve would get exhausted rather fast.
I think it's time we all except that BTS is going to have to reach the masses the old fashioned way: word of mouth. I don't think it is unreasonable to think we will likely take the same path and time as Bitcoin took to get to where it is now. Just hope no one rides our technological coat tails and surpasses us with AGS style crowd funds that go purely into marketing the same product with a different name.
Yes, the need for marketing delegates is getting higher and higher. At this rate we will have 1.0 protocol launch and almost no marketing budget. People seem to forget that only 50% of my pay is pledged to go to the Argentina campaign, perhaps the name I chose for my delegate was a mistake as it suggests 100%. The other 50% can be used for the many western marketing projects, videos, bitcointalk sig space, tipping hard working community members, targeted bitasset giveaways, sponsored blog posts, conference travel expenses for volunteers, etc, the list of options is long.
Voters, you've got to use the people who are available and ready to go. You've got to give people a chance. Do you choose to vote for almost no marketing? Or do you want to give your stake a chance to be worth something?
If you think I am
1. Loyal to serving BitShares
2. Not an idiot
You should vote for me.
I can tell you, not only am I loyal, I am obsessed and easily capable of the task.
I have an Argentina team ready and already in action, fran2k and elmato being the main team members.
I have listed the kind of projects I will fund.
So go ahead and make use of DPOS. Empower this community.
I started a similar thread about a month ago. Suggesting funds be put in a multisig address of 3 people.
Matt608 was the only one who responded positively AFAIK. Toast suggested I start out with a lower paid delegate. (Which thinking about it some more, with price feeds etc I can understand that suggestion but meh it complicates the whole issue) Anyway, seeing the lack of community support and realizing I was just setting myself up to be committed to another half-baked project I deleted the thread. I have another half-baked projects - thank you!
It does seem to me that marketing could use a general funds account to be used by any project. I would suggest that the multi-sig holders be in charge of deciding where the money would go. 2/3 would protect everyone involved.
We spend >100k in the past for marketing and now we have 1 deleagte for 2k a month? We are not talking about taking money for your own (at least not all) but to have funds under someones controll who will allocate them. We have many programmers, but not 1 person who is doing fulltime "business development". Coordinate all the people who are willing to help and allocate funds to them.
Matt608 is willing to do something for 3 month. So it would cost 6k. What a big deal. We did much worth in the past and now is the time to throw little money around to get the wheels moving. I would like to hear from Bytemaster about how this will be handled or who is doing it. Always we are talking about developers (great) but no company is going to be successful without the other guys around. We need now a infrastracture for them as well. 1-3 people would be great!
You are singing to the choir buddy.
The worst thing that can happen is we took all this negative PR for cause an inflating DAC that is barely utilized.
We should not call it inflation, because it is not.
We are creating BTS to pay for the employees we need. It is much better then always increase the issued shares because we need more funds. Bytemaster realized it in time so we need to fix our thinking as well. The community get a "loan" from himself to pay the employees. The employees need to create value for us, otherwise the "loan" will not get repaid in increasing marketcap.
This should not a reason why we are not hiring marketing or business developers.
Thank you for the lecture, but I don't think it matters what we call it in threads like this. Ok.. no inflation.. dilution.. whatever
I didn't say it was a reason, I was just pointing out that it would be a shame if that is the case. Although it will at least pay the core developers something for their continued support which is absolutely critical.
This is partially why things like this never go anywhere, people get sidetracked on bullshit.
Yes, the need for marketing delegates is getting higher and higher. At this rate we will have 1.0 protocol launch and almost no marketing budget. People seem to forget that only 50% of my pay is pledged to go to the Argentina campaign, perhaps the name I chose for my delegate was a mistake as it suggests 100%. The other 50% can be used for the many western marketing projects, videos, bitcointalk sig space, tipping hard working community members, targeted bitasset giveaways, sponsored blog posts, conference travel expenses for volunteers, etc, the list of options is long.
Voters, you've got to use the people who are available and ready to go. You've got to give people a chance. Do you choose to vote for almost no marketing? Or do you want to give your stake a chance to be worth something?
If you think I am
1. Loyal to serving BitShares
2. Not an idiot
You should vote for me.
I can tell you, not only am I loyal, I am obsessed and easily capable of the task.
I have an Argentina team ready and already in action, fran2k and elmato being the main team members.
I have listed the kind of projects I will fund.
So go ahead and make use of DPOS. Empower this community.
matt, you can include on the left side of the post your delegate, maybe this will help to get more attention. In fact anyone who is supporting you can do it. I did it with monsterer!
Gamey i didn't wanted to lecture you! I just wanted to say, that at least the community should use different words.
Inflation is - you get nothing back!
Hiring people with increasing the sharebase is ? I don't know the right word, but maybe we should think about it!
We could see as example the BTS as an Startup and we have 101 Fundingrounds for our investors. Our investors are not contributing money, but time. Time they should spend to create value for us.
We are hiring and paying with new created funds.
We are doing constant fundingrounds daily. I think we have to invent a new word for this kind of blockchain/shares.
We are paying our employees with company shares :D
I dont care if I dont see a penny. As a marketing department, we should have at least 10 delegates to do what's necessary. Free work will only work for so long. The fact we can't seem to vote in any other delegates made me diversify holdings for now.
At current usd price levels, 1 marketer would need about 5 100% delegates to do anything meaningful right out of the gate.
At $2k per month, what, you buy one ad on reddit that would last less than a day if based on views. It's a joke to think any marketing would get done by a delegate at these price levels or even double. This is why I withdrew my intentions as a marketing delegate awhile back. It's just not realistic. And for the community to expect anything in the meantime is absurd. I would suggest I3 should be kicking out some BTS for marketing supplements since AGS has been used up, but at current levels that reserve would get exhausted rather fast.
I think it's time we all except that BTS is going to have to reach the masses the old fashioned way: word of mouth. I don't think it is unreasonable to think we will likely take the same path and time as Bitcoin took to get to where it is now. Just hope no one rides our technological coat tails and surpasses us with AGS style crowd funds that go purely into marketing the same product with a different name.
Regarding the other issues, please try to pitch to BM the benefit of separation of employees and block producers. I would like to see a page in my wallet which shows the various projects and the amount they are asking, and at the top I will see a bar showing how much money I have to spend (like a game). I can then allot it to the various projects/individuals accordingly and even tip volunteers (like, say, Fuzzy). I can either do it manually or click on recommended lists provided by other members.
Quote
Regarding the other issues, please try to pitch to BM the benefit of separation of employees and block producers. I would like to see a page in my wallet which shows the various projects and the amount they are asking, and at the top I will see a bar showing how much money I have to spend (like a game). I can then allot it to the various projects/individuals accordingly and even tip volunteers (like, say, Fuzzy). I can either do it manually or click on recommended lists provided by other members.
I think we'd all like separate employees and block producers at this point. The problem is that it is a major change. And we're not talking about strictly from the code's viewpoint. It will make the wallet even more difficult and time consuming to manage. :(
At current usd price levels, 1 marketer would need about 5 100% delegates to do anything meaningful right out of the gate.
At $2k per month, what, you buy one ad on reddit that would last less than a day if based on views. It's a joke to think any marketing would get done by a delegate at these price levels or even double. This is why I withdrew my intentions as a marketing delegate awhile back. It's just not realistic. And for the community to expect anything in the meantime is absurd. I would suggest I3 should be kicking out some BTS for marketing supplements since AGS has been used up, but at current levels that reserve would get exhausted rather fast.
I think it's time we all except that BTS is going to have to reach the masses the old fashioned way: word of mouth. I don't think it is unreasonable to think we will likely take the same path and time as Bitcoin took to get to where it is now. Just hope no one rides our technological coat tails and surpasses us with AGS style crowd funds that go purely into marketing the same product with a different name.
Its why I have cooled on the idea of running a BTCtalk sig campaign. Matt said he could spare 10% of a delegate pay, but I calculated its hardly enough to make a dent. I might still start it up later, but currently promoting by bumping threads and getting discussion going seems to be better.
Sadly, we don't have the money to go in swinging and grab attention. AGS funds could've been used but its gone now and we have to move on.
We are paying our employees with company shares :D
I'm thinking about running a delegate as well, but it really is tough to convince other people to join in on it, especially during this time since 1) december all the way to new year is always hectic for people; balancing work, buying gifts with meeting family and friends for a celebratory time, 2) it is lightning cold, at least here in the upper hemisphere, which makes people retreat into their safe nests both psychologically and physically, 3) the whole crypto scene is in a depression with the anticipated rise of Bitcoin not yet materializing.
Given all this I expect that we will mostly see only true believes and associates now who can prepare the ground. It would not be unexpected if we would have to wait until rites of spring before full bloom arrives. There really is much work to do, even in just preparing all the information and structuring the highways of the new ecosystem, so I fully agree that we should give everyone eager at this stage a chance to prove themselves.
For my own part I am thinking that IF I run a delegate with a few tech friends I could easily borrow money from some "investor," use that funding to pay for registration, pay and various initiatives, and then lock the delegate income until certain milestones are reached (i.e. market cap or vesting periods). In fact, we could even use 100% of the pay to double in by shorting bitUSD, i.e. maximally "betting on BitShares" while effectively raising the market cap. How does that plan sound?
I'm thinking about running a delegate as well, but it really is tough to convince other people to join in on it, especially during this time since 1) december all the way to new year is always hectic for people; balancing work, buying gifts with meeting family and friends for a celebratory time, 2) it is lightning cold, at least here in the upper hemisphere, which makes people retreat into their safe nests both psychologically and physically, 3) the whole crypto scene is in a depression with the anticipated rise of Bitcoin not yet materializing.
Given all this I expect that we will mostly see only true believes and associates now who can prepare the ground. It would not be unexpected if we would have to wait until rites of spring before full bloom arrives. There really is much work to do, even in just preparing all the information and structuring the highways of the new ecosystem, so I fully agree that we should give everyone eager at this stage a chance to prove themselves.
For my own part I am thinking that IF I run a delegate with a few tech friends I could easily borrow money from some "investor," use that funding to pay for registration, pay and various initiatives, and then lock the delegate income until certain milestones are reached (i.e. market cap or vesting periods). In fact, we could even use 100% of the pay to double in by shorting bitUSD, i.e. maximally "betting on BitShares" while effectively raising the market cap. How does that plan sound?
We are paying our employees with company shares :D
This is how most startups pay their employees, at least in part, with shares in the company.
Certain types of employees look for jobs where they can trade their ability to tolerate risk for the chance to make it big.
Whether the shares are held in reserve by the company or created just in time, the result is functionally equivalent.
What is the standard term startups use for this?
"Working for equity."
Historically very common and accepted.
Just new to crypto industry thinking.
We are paying our employees with company shares :D
This is how most startups pay their employees, at least in part, with shares in the company.
Certain types of employees look for jobs where they can trade their ability to tolerate risk for the chance to make it big.
Whether the shares are held in reserve by the company or created just in time, the result is functionally equivalent.
What is the standard term startups use for this?
"Working for equity."
Historically very common and accepted.
Just new to crypto industry thinking.
An observation: while I agree the metaphor is appropriate, in practice - it doesn't seem to be applicable in the same way.
- For a startup, does every member of the VC team interview every new candidate for each open position?
- How about for a publicly held company - does every shareholder need to vote, in order to approve hiring someone?
What we're seeing is a high barrier to entry for delegates that is playing out in a way of preventing well-intending individuals to properly allocate their time and resources to add value to the ecosystem. While this friction may be intentional to secure the network, it's not doing us any favors in incentivizing the work needed to tell the world about a network that needs to be secured.
Catch my drift?
Other: I think BTS is in need of general guiding business plan for 1 year definitely for the Western business. I think the development side is in the bag, we have rockstars but where do we want to be in one year and how are we going to get there in terms of marketing, business development, customer service, presence in key markets, BitAsset utility etc.
It has been talked about before, but a solution to this would be to have slates stored on-chain, have slates be linked to user accounts, and let users delegate their voting power to a given user account's slate. (Basically an implementation of RDPOS.)
This way, a 'hiring manager' would not even need to be a delegate, just someone who owns a user account that has a slate. He could run for being a delegate as well, of course.
This may lead to something that can be labeled as centralization (everyone just gives their votes to bytemaster), however it is centralization that is approved in a decentralized way, and is easily reversible unlike the locked-in centralization in Bitcoin due to mining.
Ways to help minimize the centralization that occurs:
1. Allow a percentage of your voting power to vote for a particular slate
2. The ability to give your voting power to more than one slate
3. Slates can contain slates
4. The ability to maintain a percentage of your voting power manually
What this means:
Let's say I trust bytemaster, so I give you 40% of my voting power (40 votes). I also love what hpenvy is doing, and I know his votes will be up-to-date with the latest onramp and bizdev developments, so I give him 40% of my voting power as well (40 votes). The remaining 20% (21 votes) I keep to myself and use to vote for my own delegates.
Now, let's look at bytemaster's slate. Since he is very informed of the delegate campaigns overall, he has manually selected 60 delegates to vote for (60% of voting power). Since he cannot keep up with all the marketing efforts, he gives 10% of his votes to MethodX, 10% of his votes to hpenvy. He has left 20% of his voting power unused.
I could go on and describe hpenvy's slate, MethodX's slate, etc, however I think you get the picture here.
There are clearly things that need to be worked out with this model:
1. How to distribute votes among a subset of a user's slate (if I vote for 1% of bytemaster's slate, who in his slate gets the lucky single vote?)
2. How to handle recursive slates (bytemaster gives 20% of his slate to hpenvy, and hpenvy gives 20% of his slate to bytemaster)
3. How to handle incomplete slates (if I give 20% of my voting power to someone with only 10 delegates selected, do they get 2 votes or all 10?)
4. Blockchain bloat, processing overhead?
I do think though, that with some thought that these things can be worked out reasonably. Input appreciated.
you are right!
i compared it to company shares to get rid of the inflation monster.
from your point of view you are absolutly right, it is really tough and cost you 1000 USD without any guarantee to get elected. I would also like to see chinese delegates, but it seems no one is trying to get a position.