Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Empirical1.1

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... 59
196
General Discussion / Re: BitReserve looking to steal the rest of our BitAssets
« on: December 30, 2014, 10:35:44 pm »
Quote from: Shentist on December 30, 2014, 05:20:56 pm
Quote from: sschechter on December 30, 2014, 05:14:31 pm
Quote from: NewMine on December 30, 2014, 05:09:17 pm
Quote from: WildWex on December 30, 2014, 04:50:14 pm
Hi all - I've asked my IP attorney to provide further detail which I'll share but essentially and to refer to an authoritative source, refer to the first 3 paragraphs here:

http://www.fr.com/prior-user-vs-federal-registrant--whose-mark-is-it-anyway1/

Note, when we filed for BitShares last year, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) used our own postings (on domains that we owned no less!) to initially make reference that the term was already out for public use and could not be trademarked.  We pursued that successfully and yet they added that the term was 'too descriptive'.

For the uninitiated "Too Descriptive" means:
A trademark that is overly descriptive and lacks secondary meaning is considered to be invalid. A mark is descriptive if it conveys an immediate idea of the ingredients, qualities or characteristics of the goods or services. This is because it would be unfair to allow a firm to prevent its competitors from informing consumers about the attributes of the competitor's brands by obtaining sole trademark rights to the descriptive terms. This also ensures the freedom of the public to use the language involved, without the possibility of infringement suits by the registrant against others who use the mark to advertise or describe their own products or services. If a firm does use a generic or descriptive term as a trademark, this makes it difficult for competitors to market their own brands of the same product or service.
 

Could you have added a word like blockchain or platform or wallet after Bitshares and got one? Or Bitshares BitUSD, and Bitshares BitGold....... I bet BitReserve will.

Who are they going to sue?

every merchant who will use it and place the name on their webside.

Yip

197
General Discussion / Re: Should we encourage poeple become share holders or customers?
« on: December 30, 2014, 09:56:48 pm »
Quote from: fuzzy on December 30, 2014, 09:40:51 pm
We need to leverage ALL bitshares chains to help one another.  Each chain, as it stands, will help adoption of the others. 

We do this by incenvitizing users of one ecosystem to use join other ecosystems.  For instance, what if logging into Peertracks every day gave you a chance at receiving a little bit of bitGold?  what if doing a daily quest in an on-chain bitshares PLAY game gave you a chance to get some bitshares Notes (so you could listen to some of your favorite tunes while you play)?

My main concern is that our community will
A) be too hateful of any chain that ISN'T BTS and thus will lock out this possible strategy (and many others)
B) be too interested in nitpicking everything Dev Delegates do to build new services for us...and will drive them away. 


C) May not happen because large chains will get more benefit from issuing their own BitGold type assets because of the increased demand the collateral requirements create for PLAY shares and thus benefits their shareholders vs. ours.

198
General Discussion / Re: Should we encourage poeple become share holders or customers?
« on: December 30, 2014, 08:47:28 pm »
BitAssets are for customers, BTS is more geared to shareholders, though they can also be BitAsset or other product customers.

Both are incredibly important for the success of BTS

- The more customers use BitAssets the more demand for BTS there is and the more money everybody makes.

- The more people invest in, like and have long term confidence in BitShares as a business the higher they will value BTS and the more money everybody makes.


Most of the time you hear from customers and shareholders though is when they are disgruntled, frustrated or have a complaint. So I've been advocating more business, PR and customer service roles to create better customer and investor relations in BitShares.

Imo, the talent, especially development talent shouldn't always be interacting directly with disgruntled customers and shareholders in most situations as the talent in any business usually have justifiably large egos due to their relative importance and feed off of appreciation vs. negativity. So the current structure is not conducive to encouraging, supporting & attracting talent or addressing the needs and concerns of shareholders and customers.

199
General Discussion / Re: Stable crypto-currencies are Impossible
« on: December 30, 2014, 08:01:54 pm »
 +5% Great, thought provoking article!

Quote
" In my opinion, gold and silver, should be physical money and a crypto-currency should attempt to peg to gold and silver"

However a crypto-currency could perform the same role if it got large enough and probably better than gold or silver as they're easy to manipulate in practice & disguise claimed vs. real gold holdings whereas crypto-currencies allow for complete, constant accounting transparency.

We also have the problem that over time BitAssets would result in the under-pricing of gold as they are not backed by the actual thing but a representation of it, so we would potentially have the same negative effect as the Comex on a large scale. Hence my preference for a crypto-currency who's supply curve or lack thereof can't be manipulated by man as an ambitious goal of a better currency for mankind that can be used throughout the universe.

The Schelling dollar thingy

I only know about it from your brief description but part of the Schelling dollar approach seems to be like BitAssets where price feeds are replaced by a prediction market. You say -

Quote
"From an economic point of view are people really any better or worse off if they have 100 tokens worth $1 or 1 token worth $100? If you are going to uniformly issue or revoke tokens to maintain price parity then we haven’t really solved anything other than saving merchants the hassle of changing their prices."

Isn't that what our system does?
BitUSD maintains parity by issuing or in future also revoking tokens determined by competition around a centralised feed whereas another approach could do it via a decentralised prediction market that viewed supply and demand levels around a peg & adjusted interest rates to maintain parity. The downside is it might not be as stable imo. They would also need to keep the high level of collateral we have to make it as secure. It also seems they want to offer unlimited exchange which is not doable because of the unlimited conversion issue you described.



200
General Discussion / Re: [Announcement]The plan for fine peg of BitCNY and business promotion
« on: December 30, 2014, 08:33:37 am »
Nice to see BitCNY on the main page of coinmarketcap :)

No.82 by CAP

201
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: argentina-marketing.matt608 is now live! Please VOTE for this vital project!
« on: December 30, 2014, 05:27:50 am »
Congrats

202
General Discussion / Re: Status of Ethereum
« on: December 29, 2014, 08:25:17 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 29, 2014, 08:13:32 pm

Here are my thoughts: 
With a small amount of work we can make an ethereum side chain that honors BTS and allows people to move funds between the two chains easily.

 +5%  +5%

203
General Discussion / Re: PayCoin bumped BitShares out of #4 on Coinmarketcap.com
« on: December 29, 2014, 08:00:21 pm »
Quote from: James212 on December 29, 2014, 07:44:32 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 29, 2014, 06:45:45 pm
Quote from: James212 on December 29, 2014, 06:31:35 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 29, 2014, 06:05:28 pm
Quote from: hotpotato on December 29, 2014, 05:49:58 pm
I don't think they should be taken this lightly.

They have the the resourceful Gawminers backing them and a huge community hashtalk.org supporting them. Just checkout their IRC #Gawminers , #XPY .Its quite active to say the least.

There is also a lot of hype around the launch of their coinbase competitor , paybase.com/

They are good with their PR.
Their websites , videos are mass appealing and they have already managed to get articles out in major publications.
http:// blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/11/25/bitbeat-gaw-miners-to-launch-bitcoin-challenger-paycoin/
https:// cryptocoinsnews.com/josh-garza-to-launch-paycoin-media-tour/
http:// coindesk.com/gocoin-gains-strategic-investment-software-development-push/

They are looking to buy out companies left and right .They have made investments in GOcoin ,have already bought the exchange coin-swap.net and may buy out shapeshift.io soon and many more acquisitions to come according to Josh Garza ,CEO of Gawminers twitter.com/gawceo

They have set out a ambitious plan to become the go to digital currency for the masses and it will be quite interesting to watch how successful they become in implementing it.

Yes, being good with PR brings great $$$ rewards.

I don't think their website is that good though, I think MethodX is working on improving ours.

Their video's aren't great either, is this their best one? http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TFDUDSm7bI0
I can edit something better I think. In fact if I combine an idea MethodX seeded, we would have a similar themed, 'global currency + community' advert

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_W8ZekJ4eSk That one of theirs is really bad.

Point taken Empirical, but I don't think the threat lays in the quality of their individual efforts, but in the effectiveness of their coordination.  the whole being larger than the sum of this parts, as it were.  We need to mirror this type of effort at BTS and hopefully we have finally gotten around to getting going.  It is however, unfortunate that we are getting to the point where we have completely squandered out lead out the gate.  Soon we may have no high ground, and we will be fighting the public awareness battle toe to toe with our competitors.

Yeah. I think we are getting going. I think the Chinese side is leading the way and is capable of great things once they overcome BitShares PR problems & if a handful of guys like Method, HPEnvy, Matt were a bit more incentivised, & with more to work with than their 1 100% delegate, I think we'd start to be in the game. POW is definitely weak right now. Bitcoin is paying $1 million a day to miners and hardly any of the retailers that accept BTC hold it, so the more utility it gains and the more purchases that are made the more downward pressure on price almost.

You have a good point, we need to find a way around the budget limitation that comes with the delegate system at this low level of market cap. 

Agree with you that DPOS is currently our big advantage, but it won't be that way forever...

Same as it ever was, development strong, but marketing weak. If we can empower the marketing team & work on PR, we can correct that.

Quote from: Empirical1 on April 07, 2014, 05:07:49 pm
What am I excited about?

- Bitshares is so far ahead of the curve with regards to understanding the potential of and developing DACs  in so many exciting areas.
- On the technical front it seems like Dan is a few moves ahead, anticipating problems other people aren't even thinking about yet and already implementing solutions to solve them.
- Bitshares X,  the value proposition is just so clear vs. the existing status quo, this one DAC & its successors can completely change the face of finance. Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What am I worried about?

- Social consensus, third parties that haven't been working with Invictus honouring AGS/PTS  - Personally I don't necessarily see that happening.
- Dan heavy, if something happened to Dan, my investment would be worth a lot less. (But I guess that is the case with a lot of companies in the beginning.)   
- Marketing, it's very good (Really liking the evolution of the website)  but it's not incredible yet.
Particularly with regards to advertising, I would like to see more videos and adverts, that I can share with friends. (I know they're coming... slowly :) )
I also think anticipation with regards to how the market and public will respond to certain product and branding decisions might not at the same gifted level as other areas. When marketing strong talent weak vultures start preying on some DAC's before they become established this could surface as a potential vulnerability.   


204
General Discussion / Re: Vitalik on stable currencies and POS
« on: December 29, 2014, 07:23:00 pm »
Quote from: Rune on December 29, 2014, 07:16:58 pm
Quote from: vbuterin on December 29, 2014, 07:11:03 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on December 29, 2014, 06:52:49 pm
Quote from: vbuterin on December 29, 2014, 06:50:24 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on December 29, 2014, 06:44:55 pm
Quote from: vbuterin on December 29, 2014, 06:41:37 pm
Quote from: Rune on December 29, 2014, 04:00:50 pm
If the block producers of all bitshares sidechains are paid in BTS and voted in with BTS on the primary bitshares blockchain

So, there are fragility risks that you have to keep in mind here. Particularly, if you allow anyone to apply to specifically become a delegate of any blockchain, then an attacker can take over 80 delegates on sidechain #173, then repeatedly move BTS from that sidechain to other sidechains and double-spend themselves, all before getting voted out.

Additionally, there's the issue that after the fact the only way to tell which history actually came first after the fact is by looking at centralized providers (blockchain.info, etc), so you're actually implicitly moving back to a fully subjective Ripple consensus model. Of course, your ideology may be that Ripple-level subjectivity (which is much greater than traditional PoS weak subjectivity) is fine, but you should be aware of this.

Now, if you require people to apply only to be a delegate generally, and then randomly assign delegates to sidechains, and add cross-channels between individual sidechains so that cross-sidechain transactions don't need to all go through the master chain, then you've actually basically reinvented https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/10/21/scalability-part-2-hypercubes/

My side change approach has exactly 101 delegates that handle ALL chains.   You only have one set of trusted individuals that come to a common consensus.  The only purpose of side chains is to allow parallel processing of transactions which cannot possible invalidate each other.

Right so I dislike that because it requires there to be 101 nodes that process all transactions, and that leads to rather high levels of centralization and eventually croaks if the blockchain architecture gets popular enough that you simply can't do everything that people want to do on a single server or data center. Also note that if a new delegate gets elected, downloading the database is going to take them a long time. That's why I strongly prefer, as Dominic Williams puts it, "scaling out, not up".

It wouldn't all have to run on one machine.  The technology can scale.   The time to sync-up is a "ONE TIME COST".   Users don't ever have to download the full chain.

My concern with this is that it means that even if it can scale architecturally, you're exposing yourself to a lot of political centralization. Particularly, I predict that if delegates get anywhere near as large as you are suggesting, you'll see the equivalent of "delegate pools": 3-5 large entities that actually maintain and update the state, and then individual delegates that simply point to those entities and that are there basically only as a way of voting on who the revenue should go to. It's possible to set up such a delegate pool that is anonymous to connect to, so delegates would have the incentive to secretly repoint themselves to that pool as they can easily avoid being caught. And if you manage to stop this from happening, then you're creating a large barrier to entry to the delegate industry, to the point where they're not much more decentralized than modern corporations.

Unlike with PoW, stakeholders can actually prevent pools from forming. One of the clearest trends you'll see at the moment is that everyone are very careful with supporting only delegates that are clearly individual people and hosting their delegates seperately (with riverhead I think being the only exception). There will always be more than enough money ready to compensate a delegate whatever amount they need to cover their hosting costs and then some. It's not supposed to become an industry like mining, it's more like the top nodes in a big web of trust. You only ever need to replace delegates if they lose their reputation in the web of trust (which for instance could be by doing something stupid that centralises the network).

Yeah, unlike Bitcoin centralisation which Bitcoin holders have no say in. I think BTS shareholders will maintain a market acceptable level of decentralisation via voting and as the system matures will require various forms of proof that delegates have & are running their own full systems.

205
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 29, 2014, 07:09:39 pm »
Quote from: fluxer555 on December 29, 2014, 06:59:08 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on December 29, 2014, 06:50:54 pm
Quote from: davidpbrown on December 29, 2014, 09:07:56 am
Quote from: fuzzy on December 28, 2014, 06:16:43 pm
I actually tend to agree here...and by far my largest holdings are in BTS. 

Not providing significant incentive for 3rd parties to sharedrop on tokens like PTS/AGS make for a lack of decentralization in power.  Not only that, it also creates a lack of decentralization in one's portfolio. 

Now I am alllll in on DPOS because I feel it is by far the best protocol in crypto, but I would certainly like to see (someday) direct competitors to BTS.  How crazy is that?? I consider myself one of the most staunch of BTS fanboys!

The cure-all surely is to note that there is a difference between what BitShares does and what third parties might/could/?should do.

Given what bytemaster has suggested about the background, perhaps [10% AGS; 10% PTS; and 80% BTS] is a simple best option for DVS.. though equally given DVS' role relative to BTS, 100% BTS clearly makes sense too.

It seems there are enough people arguing for PTS and certainly some, including perhaps the Chinese, who are keen AGS is still acknowledged; so, perhaps third parties in future can consider those and no-one should really expect 100% BTS would ever occur from third parties and perhaps some measure of the distance they are from centre BitShares will be reflected in the push to PTS/AGS.

I have been thinking about it some more and here is where I am leaning pending review:

100% BTS with the 2 year vesting period converted into a 2 month vesting period and removing the 1% allocated to VOTE. 

My reasoning is that with a 100% share drop on BTS that AGS and PTS both get their 10% using the 11/5 snapshot AND it is inline with my prior statements that honoring a chain that honors a chain is good. 

This way we are not "reallocating" anyones money and efforts to support the development chain are not seen as reallocating ownership. 

The dev chain will have very high dilution (10x BTS... 60% the first year... ) assuming current BTS owners vote to support delegates that take 100%.   

After a review I will write a blog post explaining the change and reason.   

Because this was a "retro-active" snapshot and DEV is not listed anywhere and has no GUI few should be harmed by changing this.

Thank you Bytemaster!

 +5%

206
General Discussion / Re: PayCoin bumped BitShares out of #4 on Coinmarketcap.com
« on: December 29, 2014, 06:45:45 pm »
Quote from: James212 on December 29, 2014, 06:31:35 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 29, 2014, 06:05:28 pm
Quote from: hotpotato on December 29, 2014, 05:49:58 pm
I don't think they should be taken this lightly.

They have the the resourceful Gawminers backing them and a huge community hashtalk.org supporting them. Just checkout their IRC #Gawminers , #XPY .Its quite active to say the least.

There is also a lot of hype around the launch of their coinbase competitor , paybase.com/

They are good with their PR.
Their websites , videos are mass appealing and they have already managed to get articles out in major publications.
http:// blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/11/25/bitbeat-gaw-miners-to-launch-bitcoin-challenger-paycoin/
https:// cryptocoinsnews.com/josh-garza-to-launch-paycoin-media-tour/
http:// coindesk.com/gocoin-gains-strategic-investment-software-development-push/

They are looking to buy out companies left and right .They have made investments in GOcoin ,have already bought the exchange coin-swap.net and may buy out shapeshift.io soon and many more acquisitions to come according to Josh Garza ,CEO of Gawminers twitter.com/gawceo

They have set out a ambitious plan to become the go to digital currency for the masses and it will be quite interesting to watch how successful they become in implementing it.

Yes, being good with PR brings great $$$ rewards.

I don't think their website is that good though, I think MethodX is working on improving ours.

Their video's aren't great either, is this their best one? http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TFDUDSm7bI0
I can edit something better I think. In fact if I combine an idea MethodX seeded, we would have a similar themed, 'global currency + community' advert

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_W8ZekJ4eSk That one of theirs is really bad.

Point taken Empirical, but I don't think the threat lays in the quality of their individual efforts, but in the effectiveness of their coordination.  the whole being larger than the sum of this parts, as it were.  We need to mirror this type of effort at BTS and hopefully we have finally gotten around to getting going.  It is however, unfortunate that we are getting to the point where we have completely squandered out lead out the gate.  Soon we may have no high ground, and we will be fighting the public awareness battle toe to toe with our competitors.

Yeah. I think we are getting going. I think the Chinese side is leading the way and is capable of great things once they overcome BitShares PR problems & if a handful of guys like Method, HPEnvy, Matt were a bit more incentivised, & with more to work with than their 1 100% delegate, I think we'd start to be in the game. POW is definitely weak right now. Bitcoin is paying $1 million a day to miners and hardly any of the retailers that accept BTC hold it, so the more utility it gains and the more purchases that are made the more downward pressure on price almost.


207
General Discussion / Re: PayCoin bumped BitShares out of #4 on Coinmarketcap.com
« on: December 29, 2014, 06:05:28 pm »
Quote from: hotpotato on December 29, 2014, 05:49:58 pm
I don't think they should be taken this lightly.

They have the the resourceful Gawminers backing them and a huge community hashtalk.org supporting them. Just checkout their IRC #Gawminers , #XPY .Its quite active to say the least.

There is also a lot of hype around the launch of their coinbase competitor , paybase.com/

They are good with their PR.
Their websites , videos are mass appealing and they have already managed to get articles out in major publications.
http:// blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/11/25/bitbeat-gaw-miners-to-launch-bitcoin-challenger-paycoin/
https:// cryptocoinsnews.com/josh-garza-to-launch-paycoin-media-tour/
http:// coindesk.com/gocoin-gains-strategic-investment-software-development-push/

They are looking to buy out companies left and right .They have made investments in GOcoin ,have already bought the exchange coin-swap.net and may buy out shapeshift.io soon and many more acquisitions to come according to Josh Garza ,CEO of Gawminers twitter.com/gawceo

They have set out a ambitious plan to become the go to digital currency for the masses and it will be quite interesting to watch how successful they become in implementing it.

Yes, being good with PR brings great $$$ rewards. I expect them to crash again though shortly.

I don't think their website is that good though, I think MethodX is working on improving ours.

Their video's aren't great either, is this their best one? http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TFDUDSm7bI0
I can edit something better I think. In fact if I combine an idea MethodX seeded, we would have a similar themed, 'global currency + community' advert

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_W8ZekJ4eSk That one of theirs is really bad.


208
General Discussion / Re: The best explanation of a DAC I've seen yet - VIDEO, Andreas Antonopoulos
« on: December 29, 2014, 05:20:47 pm »
Quote from: G1ng3rBr34dM4n on December 29, 2014, 03:22:44 pm
Quote from: CLains on December 29, 2014, 12:48:06 am
Andreas is such a great teacher that he is personable without smiling even once :D

His short answer to the question What is a DAC? here is also brilliant,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGSePa9GwxA

 +5%

 +5% He is incredibly personable & great at engaging people

209
General Discussion / Re: We need more delegates for marketing
« on: December 28, 2014, 11:31:12 pm »
Quote from: CLains on December 28, 2014, 11:14:30 pm
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 would probably vote for it. If you did run a delegate, I think the more specific you can be the better and the sooner you can show something for your efforts the better too. I think people want to see something measurable as soon as possible vs. diluting and waiting a long time.

Which unfortunately is how it works out with some of the advertising & why it would have been great if nullstreet had been given some intial BTS vs. the trickle down marketing they're trying to make work atm.

210
General Discussion / Re: We need more delegates for marketing
« on: December 28, 2014, 11:05:36 pm »
Quote from: sumantso on December 28, 2014, 10:39:03 pm
Quote from: skyscraperfarms on December 28, 2014, 09:35:24 pm
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.

Yeah it's a critical time to just have $10k a month to direct at marketing and trying to wing it on $2k now that we've got dilution doesn't make sense. Ironically we'll probably see more with $2k a month than we did with $20k.

I already vote for Matt, I think the Argentina thing may have worked against him, I know at first I felt he wasn't ideal for Argentina. But we need more marketing delegates and he has good ideas, initiative and interacts well.

I would vote for

1. A crypto-advertising specific delegate. He gets the costs for adverts from Coindesk, CMC etc. and designs a 3 month advertising campaign based on his funds. I'd like to know in 3 weeks we'll seen an advert on here and then an advert on here etc.

2. A customer service delegate - We shouldn't dismiss how tricky using the product is for a first timer. I know we have the newbies section but actual having a customer service site where there's live help for a few hours a day would really help it seem like a business. 

3. Method to have a full personal salary delegate.

4. More 'pot of funds delegates' - delegates who essentially help create a 'marketing budget' that can use their funds by consensus towards a host of marketing activities and who are voted out if they direct them badly.

Edit: 5.  I'd probably vote for HPEnvy in some capacity too.

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.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... 59

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 20 queries.