I'm not anti-dilution, but I am anti-dilution for now.
Akado, you said that if we don't dilute then the only way the price goes up is as the result of a pump.
Based on what I recall about Bitcoin's growth, the only time a new higher bottom was ever established was in the aftermath of a giant pump. Bitcoin only starting hanging consistently above 255 after the pump above a thousand dollars, for the most recent example.
I believe giant pumps are good. They bring more attention to the coin and motivate new people to hold in the hopes of moonglory.
Here is what I see happening if we lay off the dilution for a while:
Development may stagnant for a while and be limited to what people are willing to contribute voluntarily. The project doesn't die. We employ patience. During this time speculators become more confident that they won't be buying into just an ATM for the devs (and their sponsors). Given enough time, there will be a new pump or two, which will leave the price a little higher than it had previously been.
Rinse and repeat this process a few times, then all of a sudden we're in a position to fund a new feature without shooting ourselves in the foot in the process.
Yes, Bitcoin, my example above, does dilute, but this is different because that's not what's funding development. Miners are in more of a position to hold until the price goes up and sell at a time when it's more appropriate and healthy for the market. Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet.
Obviously I can't speak for the chinese, but this is my logic as a temporary anti-diluter.
I'm not saying we necessarily need dilution either. I mean, we don't need every single proposal that does something to get approved, they just need to be better managed.
I, however, disagree with your reasoning. What you propose is we bet on:
1. We find people to develop stuff
2. Those people prefer developing for BitShares instead of Ethereum and others
3. Those people - already a niche within a niche - are willing to do that for free
4.
If we manage to do that:
4.1 Competition doesn't surpass us
4.2 We get pumped (when we can also get dumped)
4.3 That pump gets us to new higher lows
5. If this wasn't enough, rinse and repeat a few times
Well, that would work... on Bitcoin... in 2009
As for this sentence "
Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet." I agree. People should take this into consideration.
All in all, I don't agree with this specific reasoning of yours, but overall, I agree in that funds need to be managed correctly. Of course we shouldn't approve every single proposal just because they are creating something that sounds great, but has no utility at all.