0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I disagree with the argument that low prices will kill BTS. Low prices didn't kill Bitcoin in the beginning.
If you're somebody who can afford 5m BTS immediately and you only have 100,000, then you have little faith in BTS, and rather than give you incentive to jack the price up when you'll most likely just dump as soon as you can, I think I'd prefer to just stock up on cheap BTS a while longer.
1,Low prices will kill BTS, we have no much time to wait.2,Not to advance is to go back.3,Do not worry about the reward for big holders, because they have more risk than who has less BTS. 4,The club is open for everyone, and all is voluntary and fair.5,Now there are about 30-50 persons with 5m BTS, if the plan will be implemented, there will be 100 persons with 5m BTS immediately, and the value of BTS will rise to 5-10 times.6,As me, I am only 100000BTS now, if the plan will be implemented, I want to buy BTS to become a person with 5m BTS immediately. 7.the goal to set the members in observation period is what can reduce the frequent in and out of members.
Quote from: chryspano on November 16, 2015, 10:44:12 pmIf cheap bts price makes further development of the project difficult, we can ask for another round of donations in exchange for brownies. Donations from who? If the biggest losers are the longest holders who are you going to get future donations from? The dumpers aren't going to donate.Quote from: chryspano on November 16, 2015, 10:44:12 pmPeople that after 2 years are still here donating, despite all this pain, deserve brownies more than a whale who decides to lock 10 out of her 20M bts (he wouldn't sell those 10M in any case, he will "only" dump the remaining 10M he has, but now he can earn some free brownies too! 10M bts x 50.000 brownies equals 500.000 brownies! isn't that great? what will be the next project that this whale will dump his "free" brownies-sharedrop? identabit? ) While I'm a person who was here for the full 2 years, I still think because a whale has more of an impact on the network by their holding, they should get more reward because ultimately they are taking more risk TODAY. People who held since the beginning took a lot of risk over a long period of time but the risk wasn't the same opportunity cost as it is for the whale today.There was no Ethereum back then, there was no competition from anything but NXT back then, but now the competition is fast rising, and the ecosystem is different. These opportunity costs have to be factored in and I think you're missing the opportunity costs that a whale is taking that a small holder isn't taking.A person who holds 10,000 BTS isn't taking the same risks in terms of opportunity cost as the person who holds 10 million BTS. 10 million BTS is worth a lot more money than 10,000 and 10 million BTS may be a person's entire life savings while 10,000 BTS is a lot for a lot of people, but it's not the same. Brownies by the way should be slow release and capped at 50,000 so 500,000 isn't possible.People in the 10,000 BTS range might be more willing to trade all 10,000 BTS in the hope of increasing it. They have opportunities within BTS itself to make a profit off 10,000 BTS. A person with 10 million BTS can't do a lot right now and most people aren't going to risk their entire life savings gambling in the high risk opportunities currently offered.Quote from: chryspano on November 16, 2015, 10:44:12 pmGiving candies to a "criminal" may stop him from doing "criminal" activities but this doesn't mean that he deserves the candies, it's just a bribery. I don't know how many TRUE "criminals" you will find that are willing to be "good guys" in exchange for candies. I'm not sure where you are going with this. Why should we be using terms like "criminal" and "good guys" and "bad guys" as if this is a black and white space? We only have math to work with and a person willing to lock up a significant portion of BTS no matter who they are, is doing a favor for BTS, and is showing faith in BTS.It might be that some of the BTS holders who do this held BTS and never sold any for the full 2 years. It might be that they acquired the BTS by accident when some whale dumped recently. It doesn't really make a difference as long as they are willing to lock up their BTS.If you view a gift as a bribe then Protoshares could have been the bribe used to create Angelshares and ultimately Bitshares X. If you view gifts as bribes then all sharedrops could also be bribes. Anything which is a gift could be viewed as a bribe if you take on that glass half empty perspective, but if you take on the glass half full perspective then it's just loyalty credits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyalty_programCompanies use loyalty credits all the time on employees and on customers. Bitshares is currently using similar sorts of credits with Brownie points which basically are a kind of loyalty point, but without the promise of any reward. We might have people willing to buy them because they trust Dan will reward them or sharedrop on them but it's very possible that Dan can change his mind and there is nothing legal they could do about it.That is why I haven't bought any, and that is why I don't treat Brownies like a currency or like some kind of stock. It's a gift token, and anyone can offer a gift token and redeem them or not, it's at their discretion. So you can't call it a bribe unless there is a promise involved. These tokens are speech and the Supreme Court of the USA has made a decision. Quote from: chryspano on November 16, 2015, 10:44:12 pmIf in the other hand we care about those people that still HODL and we feel we need to reward them, then we should randomly(once per month? random date) check for accounts(in the future and in the past if this is possible) that keep accumulating bts and reward them.That is fine too but you're not offering enough of a detailed plan on how we would go about doing that. Also I think because there is a limited about of Brownies I don't see how what you're doing could be done with Brownies which is why I think we should focus on the whales first, as a test case to see if a reputation economy can be built with the people taking the most financial risk and accepting the most opportunity cost.Opportunity cost, I'll put the definition here so people can understand my arguments.QuoteIn microeconomic theory, the opportunity cost of a choice is the value of the best alternative foregone, where a choice needs to be made between several mutually exclusive alternatives given limited resources. Assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would be had by taking the second best choice available.[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_costQuoteDEFINITION OF 'OPPORTUNITY COST'1. The cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action. Put another way, the benefits you could have received by taking an alternative action.2. The difference in return between a chosen investment and one that is necessarily passed up. Say you invest in a stock and it returns a paltry 2% over the year. In placing your money in the stock, you gave up the opportunity of another investment - say, a risk-free government bond yielding 6%. In this situation, your opportunity costs are 4% (6% - 2%).http://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/opportunitycost.aspBrownies offset the opportunity cost and are therefore fair. If you think it's fair for commercial entities to offer frequent flier miles, then it's the same exact concept going on here. People who are loyal to the Bitshares network, who are whales, will get more credits, just as people who fly more will get more points, or people who shop more. Over time you could expand on this to include people who test out new features of the network receive Brownies, but the point is at this time we need to test it out on whales because currently whales don't have any better way to contribute to the benefit of Bitshares.
If cheap bts price makes further development of the project difficult, we can ask for another round of donations in exchange for brownies.
People that after 2 years are still here donating, despite all this pain, deserve brownies more than a whale who decides to lock 10 out of her 20M bts (he wouldn't sell those 10M in any case, he will "only" dump the remaining 10M he has, but now he can earn some free brownies too! 10M bts x 50.000 brownies equals 500.000 brownies! isn't that great? what will be the next project that this whale will dump his "free" brownies-sharedrop? identabit? )
Giving candies to a "criminal" may stop him from doing "criminal" activities but this doesn't mean that he deserves the candies, it's just a bribery. I don't know how many TRUE "criminals" you will find that are willing to be "good guys" in exchange for candies.
If in the other hand we care about those people that still HODL and we feel we need to reward them, then we should randomly(once per month? random date) check for accounts(in the future and in the past if this is possible) that keep accumulating bts and reward them.
In microeconomic theory, the opportunity cost of a choice is the value of the best alternative foregone, where a choice needs to be made between several mutually exclusive alternatives given limited resources. Assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would be had by taking the second best choice available.[1]
DEFINITION OF 'OPPORTUNITY COST'1. The cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action. Put another way, the benefits you could have received by taking an alternative action.2. The difference in return between a chosen investment and one that is necessarily passed up. Say you invest in a stock and it returns a paltry 2% over the year. In placing your money in the stock, you gave up the opportunity of another investment - say, a risk-free government bond yielding 6%. In this situation, your opportunity costs are 4% (6% - 2%).
Quote from: merivercap on November 16, 2015, 08:57:06 amQuote from: Shentist on November 15, 2015, 07:57:58 pmi should we want a lockup?i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.we need active user.I agree Shentist. I'm not a big fan of locking up shares. I mean I can somewhat understand the sentiment to try to artificially create a perception about the market value of an ecosystem, but is it logical? Is everyone considering the unintended consequences? It's like trying to discourage people from acting as they would normally and letting the free market work. Why give favors or brownie pts or anything to weaker holders, non-believers, or people who just need liquidity compared to those newer believers, potentially stronger holders who would have better prices to buy in? If we are trying to intervene with the free market, we should create a BTS big trader's club that promises to buy & sell 5 million BTS in a month. We should refund all transaction fees. Locking up of BTS creates illiquidity does it not?Also in the long run, we should probably favor those who use the platform more than those that just do nothing with it...(ex. giving more voting power to BTS holders that use it for transactions/transfers)....then BTS itself eventually might be used as a form of money in the distant future...Fortunately the plan you're talking about has nothing to do with what we discussed. Weak holders wouldn't be people who are whales with over 1 million BTS. At some point they believed or they wouldn't have acquired so many BTS.At the same time if you purchase that many BTS and you're watching BTC go up, or Ethereum, or Storj, or Safecoin, or anything else, even if you don't believe in it at some point you're going to have to dump because the opportunity cost of holding becomes too high.So the options we have is encourage people to dump so they don't miss the opportunities to invest in better newer or perhaps just rising older technologies, or we will have to promote loyalty. It's your choice.There aren't any transactions for whales to put 1 million BTS to use. We don't have a bond market so they can't loan it out. The majority of people aren't going to risk trading 1 million BTS on an untested hard to use exchange even if they were professional traders and if they do trade they probably would only trade a small fraction while dumping the rest to put it on Poloniex so they can get interest.There is no logical reason for someone to hold millions of BTS on Bitshares 2.0 for no interest when they can hold something else which gives them interest, unless they can know for sure other people are going to hold. Basically this is like game theory where if you know everyone else is going to dump you don't want to be that one bag holder who decides not to.So if you have people locking their coins up then you know there are people like you who still believe, and who can't dump, and now you'll be more likely to lock yours up as well. The people saying Brownies shouldn't be used this way, wait what are Brownies for then? Are Brownies supposed to be treated as BitUSD? Were any of the people saying that around for Protoshares and Angelshares?Angelshares was basically locked Protoshares. We don't have that anymore but we should and these ideas would basically take us back to that mentality but perhaps better because you'd get a reputation economy. When you mention the free market, a reputation economy is a market, a gift economy is a market, but it's not the kind of market you're used to so you believe it's somehow less than free?In a gift economy no one is obligated to give anything to anyone. People feel guilty if they don't return the favor because in these societies there is the value of reciprocity. People give to receive, but they don't make any promises, and they don't expect or know how the favor will be returned. So it's not barter where you know exactly what you're trading for, but more like Christmas where you give a gift of some unknown value and receive a gift of some unknown value and hopefully it all balances out.If you would like to dump and encourage others to dump then go ahead. Ethereum and Bitcoin are waiting. If you'd like to encourage people to hold then without a Bond market, Prediction markets or any of the use cases to make a person actually use Bitshares you're basically asking people to hold a lot of Bitshares and essentially do nothing with them, not even for Brownies but out of charity to the market so that people dumping can get better prices.I don't think it's wise to punish the most loyal holders with low priced BTS and make them bag holders.
Quote from: Shentist on November 15, 2015, 07:57:58 pmi should we want a lockup?i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.we need active user.I agree Shentist. I'm not a big fan of locking up shares. I mean I can somewhat understand the sentiment to try to artificially create a perception about the market value of an ecosystem, but is it logical? Is everyone considering the unintended consequences? It's like trying to discourage people from acting as they would normally and letting the free market work. Why give favors or brownie pts or anything to weaker holders, non-believers, or people who just need liquidity compared to those newer believers, potentially stronger holders who would have better prices to buy in? If we are trying to intervene with the free market, we should create a BTS big trader's club that promises to buy & sell 5 million BTS in a month. We should refund all transaction fees. Locking up of BTS creates illiquidity does it not?Also in the long run, we should probably favor those who use the platform more than those that just do nothing with it...(ex. giving more voting power to BTS holders that use it for transactions/transfers)....then BTS itself eventually might be used as a form of money in the distant future...
i should we want a lockup?i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.we need active user.
Quote from: luckybit on November 16, 2015, 11:55:45 amAngelshares was basically locked Protoshares. We don't have that anymore but we should and these ideas would basically take us back to that mentality but perhaps better because you'd get a reputation economy. That's an interesting thought. There were some potential legal hurdles with AGS, if I recall, but mostly because it looked a tiny bit like a security. Assuming those issues could be avoided, then the community could empower someone to hold donated shares in trust. What would be the reward? I think they'd eventually get their principal back for sure. One thing I'd suggest is that we could consider modifying the social consensus, requesting that x% of any future sharedrops be made to those who have donated to the AGS trust (perhaps instead of using Brownie Points for this). That would be consistent with the gift economy, though with an uncertain future array of projects, it might make sense to combine that with some other reward.
Angelshares was basically locked Protoshares. We don't have that anymore but we should and these ideas would basically take us back to that mentality but perhaps better because you'd get a reputation economy.
Quote from: EstefanTT on November 15, 2015, 02:57:16 pmIsn't it exactely what the bond market is about. Loaning money and get interest ? Any info in when it would be in place ?If I remember well it's not a part of the recent BM proposal ? Why is that ? Isn't it one of the "big feature" we need ? I'm also curious where bond market development currently sits on the to-do list, it seems to have drifted off the radar...
Isn't it exactely what the bond market is about. Loaning money and get interest ? Any info in when it would be in place ?If I remember well it's not a part of the recent BM proposal ? Why is that ? Isn't it one of the "big feature" we need ?
I think it would be less about Reward and more about Risk to most. The reward would simply need to help balance that risk. I personally think this could be a browniable event. Not sure, honestly, how bitassets could be given to whales who lock their tokens. However, something like brownies (which I am fairly certain will become a huge sharedrop target), could be paid as a form of "interest" on locked funds. But bitassets, if it can be done...would be great too.
I prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.
If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.
We can see the named accounts just fine, all it really takes is for one whale to go first, no scheme is needed. I'm sure someone will put their name and balance in glowing pixels with a big heart icon right next to it for all to see.Let your word be your bond, literally.
I think it would be less about Reward and more about Risk to most. The reward would simply need to help balance that risk.
Quote from: bitscape on November 16, 2015, 06:03:08 amI prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.And then what is "the promise of reward" and where is it coming from?
I prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.
This discussion needs to continue. If we can get the right pieces in place, it could really help BitShares. Bond market would be best. But if we have to wait on that, it may be worth trying this through other means. As opposed as I am to doing anything meaningful in Brownies, I actually think that they could serve as a good test market for this. What is the rationale of limiting this to holders with 5M net worth? If that's mostly exchanges, then not much is going to be locked up by doing this. Might it be possible to include ANY sized accountholder? If it must be limited to the larger ones, then I would think a 1M or 2M limit would create a good-sized group.
So that if there are 200 members who has 5 m BTS, the price of the BTS would be changed dramatically!
I wonder if there are even 10 people with more than 5m bts
Of course I would think a bond market is the ultimate feature and have been promoting it but since we wont have that anytime soon what are we supposed to be doing for the next 6 months? Just lowering the fees and dumping?
Quote from: luckybit on November 15, 2015, 08:48:03 pmQuote from: Shentist on November 15, 2015, 07:57:58 pmi should we want a lockup?i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.we need active user.Holding BTS at this time is all most people can do until the bond markets are built to make them more active. Otherwise people with millions of BTS can only dump and move onto exchanges where there is more opportunity because of the opportunity cost.Without a Bond Market or something to do with large amounts of BTS then why would anyone hold? So we have to encourage holding until a proper bond market and prediction markets can be set up.Many people, however, think discussing about fees is the #1 top priority....
Quote from: Shentist on November 15, 2015, 07:57:58 pmi should we want a lockup?i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.we need active user.Holding BTS at this time is all most people can do until the bond markets are built to make them more active. Otherwise people with millions of BTS can only dump and move onto exchanges where there is more opportunity because of the opportunity cost.Without a Bond Market or something to do with large amounts of BTS then why would anyone hold? So we have to encourage holding until a proper bond market and prediction markets can be set up.
What are we trying to do? to artificially pump the bts price?(I don't think it will work) or to destroy brownies? Brownies can be created out of thin air but proposing to create 5x more for something like this, is madness imo.We need mass adoption or we die, it's as simple as that. "Tricks" are not going to save us.
Quote from: xeroc on November 15, 2015, 08:34:36 amConsidering that I only earned about 30k working for BTS for 2 yrs, I don't think locking 1M shares up is actually "worth" 50k BROWNIE.PTS .. </opinion>besides that, I like the idea ... but wouldn't want to be put on a "list" I like the Brownies concept a lot but the inflationary use of it makes them worth a lot less! Stop throwing them around like that! To put things in perspective: I have gotten 8k brownies for my 2 years of contributions.
Considering that I only earned about 30k working for BTS for 2 yrs, I don't think locking 1M shares up is actually "worth" 50k BROWNIE.PTS .. </opinion>besides that, I like the idea ... but wouldn't want to be put on a "list"
The number of 1 m has accounted for 40% of 2.5 m . How much reward should be discussed. I think the reward could be a little at beginning,for the BTS system operation no profits now .Depend on others is inferior to rely on ourself.
The nature of gift economies forms the subject of a foundational debate in anthropology. Anthropological research into gift economies began with Bronisław Malinowski's description of the Kula ring[3] in the Trobriand Islands during World War I.[4] The Kula trade appeared to be gift-like since Trobrianders would travel great distances over dangerous seas to give what were considered valuable objects without any guarantee of a return. Malinowski's debate with the French anthropologist Marcel Mauss quickly established the complexity of "gift exchange" and introduced a series of technical terms such as reciprocity, inalienable possessions, and prestation to distinguish between the different forms of exchange.[5][6]According to anthropologists Maurice Bloch and Jonathan Parry, it is the unsettled relationship between market and non-market exchange that attracts the most attention. Gift economies are said, by some,[7] to build communities, and that the market serves as an acid on those relationships.[8]Gift exchange is distinguished from other forms of exchange by a number of principles, such as the form of property rights governing the articles exchanged; whether gifting forms a distinct "sphere of exchange" that can be characterized as an "economic system"; and the character of the social relationship that the gift exchange establishes. Gift ideology in highly commercialized societies differs from the "prestations" typical of non-market societies. Gift economies must also be differentiated from several closely related phenomena, such as common property regimes and the exchange of non-commodified labour.
According to Chris Gregory reciprocity is a dyadic exchange relationship that we characterize, imprecisely, as gift-giving. Gregory believes that one gives gifts to friends and potential enemies in order to establish a relationship, by placing them in debt. He also claimed that in order for such a relationship to persist, there must be a time lag between the gift and counter-gift;
Daniel Everett, a linguist who studied a small tribe of hunter-gatherers in Brazil,[36] reported that, while they are aware of food preservation using drying, salting, and so forth, they reserve the use of these techniques for items for barter outside of the tribe. Within the group, when someone has a successful hunt they immediately share the abundance by inviting others to enjoy a feast. Asked about this practice, one hunter laughed and replied, "I store meat in the belly of my brother."[37][38]
Luckybit I value a lot your opinions I just don't want this to be manipulated by traders and this is something that needs more thorough thought..See below some replies to yours.. Quote from: luckybit on November 15, 2015, 11:11:03 amQuote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amwhy establish a big shareholders club and not let every physical person to participate by locking BTS and reward them brownies (or even better another UIA or even better some bitusd) for doing so in proportion to their bts blocked and time blocked? If you use another UIA it should still include a percentage of Brownies. I don't know how it would work with another UIA which represents a basket of sharedrop tokens (including Brownies) so I would think Brownies is the easiest way to go about it in the beginning.Brownies is the easiest way for sure in the beginning but changing the rules later on will not make people happy. Also there is always a risk of manipulating the price of Brownies since they can be used by people to get dumped once received by hedging opportunity costs. Market is irrational many times.Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amLocking 1 M for 1 month and get awarded 50k of Brownies is like receiving something worth c$830 for blocking something worth c$3,330 for 1 month...I know that I would definitely go buy 1m BTS on the market and bock them for 1M if I get awarded 50k Brownies and probably dump them as soon as possible...So I don't think this is a good idea since Brownies will become worthless.. You wouldn't get your Brownies all at once. It should be you'd get them slowly over time just as if you're mining with the maximum over a fixed period of time being 50k. If you're only in it for the dollar amount then you'll dump your Brownies but people only in it for the dollar amount will probably not want to lock up 1 million Bitshares for some period of time.I Agree with the steady release of Brownies. As I said above, don't think that market participants won't find ways to mamupulate the price of Brownies.. Also who said it has to be 1 month? The amount of time could have a minimum and a maximum, and be randomly set so that you don't even know for sure if it's going to be 1 month, or more, or less. The length of time could also be a configurable parameter which gets voted on, but in any case once you agree to lock up you can't unlock it prior to the time limit agreed to.This is just a very quick idea.I am pretty sure others with trading bots and more sophisticated techiniques will find much better ways to manipulate the prices.. So this is the reason I would prefer people to receive stable bitasstes for locking their BTS than Brownies..The point is if you dump your Brownies then you dump, but the person who doesn't dump would still have a better reputation than the person who does, and the longest locked holders could get additional UIA sharedrops according to the length of time they locked up. You can basically create an economy around reputation for being a whale supporter of BTS.Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amI think it would be more normal to earn 5% interest on the bitusd value of the locked BTS. For example, lock 1M BTS for 1 Month will earn c$15 bitusd. The question is from where the bitusd will be found?From the network reserve pool? Is this a good idea?I don't think you get the point. The goal isn't to pay people USD. The goal is to encourage people to be long term holders by giving them additional future equity, sharedrops, opportunities, rewards, etc. So people who have a reputation for proving they are willing to lock up their Bitshares for long periods of time should be rewarded.People who just want cash will develop the reputation for immediately cashing out and compared to the people who hold longer, they'd probably not have an equal reputation. So it's kind of like how with Proof of Stake the older coin age means something, the same could be for the amount of time you keep your BTS locked up. If you set it to lock up for 1 month then 50,000 Brownies, and if you go longer than this then you could get priority in sharedrops because people launching new businesses or who are doing sharedrops probably want people who will be willing to lock up and not dump.Earning bitusd for locking bts is like earning interest on your investment in this case bts. A BTS supporter never touches a certain amount of BTS no matter what. I think they would want to receive some bitusd, bitgold or a stable asset for holding those BTS rather than playing the market again by receiving Brownies which one day maybe worth 1BTS and the next day 20BTS depending on the news at that time and market traders who follow close pump and dump..I do not want Brownies to get manipulated the way BTS have been manipulated by traders in the past and quite often actually. Imagine I am a whale and lock 5Mil BTS for 1 month and receive within this month 250k Brownies which I dump on the market everytime I receive them..After this 1month (or whatever period) Brownies would be worth much much less now so once my BTS are unlocked I buy up all the Brownies I previously sold and keep them and next month I lock less BTS. I end up with many Brownies so people think I am a long term supporter and manage to lock less BTS next month..This is just a very quick idea.I am pretty sure others with trading bots and more sophisticated techiniques will find much better ways to manipulate the prices.. So this is the reason I would prefer people to receive stable bitasstes for locking their BTS than Brownies..
Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amwhy establish a big shareholders club and not let every physical person to participate by locking BTS and reward them brownies (or even better another UIA or even better some bitusd) for doing so in proportion to their bts blocked and time blocked? If you use another UIA it should still include a percentage of Brownies. I don't know how it would work with another UIA which represents a basket of sharedrop tokens (including Brownies) so I would think Brownies is the easiest way to go about it in the beginning.Brownies is the easiest way for sure in the beginning but changing the rules later on will not make people happy. Also there is always a risk of manipulating the price of Brownies since they can be used by people to get dumped once received by hedging opportunity costs. Market is irrational many times.Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amLocking 1 M for 1 month and get awarded 50k of Brownies is like receiving something worth c$830 for blocking something worth c$3,330 for 1 month...I know that I would definitely go buy 1m BTS on the market and bock them for 1M if I get awarded 50k Brownies and probably dump them as soon as possible...So I don't think this is a good idea since Brownies will become worthless.. You wouldn't get your Brownies all at once. It should be you'd get them slowly over time just as if you're mining with the maximum over a fixed period of time being 50k. If you're only in it for the dollar amount then you'll dump your Brownies but people only in it for the dollar amount will probably not want to lock up 1 million Bitshares for some period of time.I Agree with the steady release of Brownies. As I said above, don't think that market participants won't find ways to mamupulate the price of Brownies.. Also who said it has to be 1 month? The amount of time could have a minimum and a maximum, and be randomly set so that you don't even know for sure if it's going to be 1 month, or more, or less. The length of time could also be a configurable parameter which gets voted on, but in any case once you agree to lock up you can't unlock it prior to the time limit agreed to.This is just a very quick idea.I am pretty sure others with trading bots and more sophisticated techiniques will find much better ways to manipulate the prices.. So this is the reason I would prefer people to receive stable bitasstes for locking their BTS than Brownies..The point is if you dump your Brownies then you dump, but the person who doesn't dump would still have a better reputation than the person who does, and the longest locked holders could get additional UIA sharedrops according to the length of time they locked up. You can basically create an economy around reputation for being a whale supporter of BTS.Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amI think it would be more normal to earn 5% interest on the bitusd value of the locked BTS. For example, lock 1M BTS for 1 Month will earn c$15 bitusd. The question is from where the bitusd will be found?From the network reserve pool? Is this a good idea?I don't think you get the point. The goal isn't to pay people USD. The goal is to encourage people to be long term holders by giving them additional future equity, sharedrops, opportunities, rewards, etc. So people who have a reputation for proving they are willing to lock up their Bitshares for long periods of time should be rewarded.People who just want cash will develop the reputation for immediately cashing out and compared to the people who hold longer, they'd probably not have an equal reputation. So it's kind of like how with Proof of Stake the older coin age means something, the same could be for the amount of time you keep your BTS locked up. If you set it to lock up for 1 month then 50,000 Brownies, and if you go longer than this then you could get priority in sharedrops because people launching new businesses or who are doing sharedrops probably want people who will be willing to lock up and not dump.
why establish a big shareholders club and not let every physical person to participate by locking BTS and reward them brownies (or even better another UIA or even better some bitusd) for doing so in proportion to their bts blocked and time blocked?
Locking 1 M for 1 month and get awarded 50k of Brownies is like receiving something worth c$830 for blocking something worth c$3,330 for 1 month...I know that I would definitely go buy 1m BTS on the market and bock them for 1M if I get awarded 50k Brownies and probably dump them as soon as possible...So I don't think this is a good idea since Brownies will become worthless..
I think it would be more normal to earn 5% interest on the bitusd value of the locked BTS. For example, lock 1M BTS for 1 Month will earn c$15 bitusd. The question is from where the bitusd will be found?From the network reserve pool? Is this a good idea?
Imagine I am a whale and lock 5Mil BTS for 1 month and receive within this month 250k Brownies which I dump on the market everytime I receive them..After this 1month (or whatever period) Brownies would be worth much much less now so once my BTS are unlocked I buy up all the Brownies I previously sold and keep them and next month I lock less BTS.
2, I think People are only interested in BTS, Bitcny and Bitusd. Too much other BTS assets may influence BTS development, because for no liquid.
I think a bond market will do the trick. We don't need another token to incentize holding. Give real economic reasons for holding
Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amwhy establish a big shareholders club and not let every physical person to participate by locking BTS and reward them brownies (or even better another UIA or even better some bitusd) for doing so in proportion to their bts blocked and time blocked? If you use another UIA it should still include a percentage of Brownies. I don't know how it would work with another UIA which represents a basket of sharedrop tokens (including Brownies) so I would think Brownies is the easiest way to go about it in the beginning.Brownies is the easiest way for sure in the beginning but changing the rules later on will not make people happy. Also there is always a risk of manipulating the price of Brownies since they can be used by people to get dumped once received by hedging opportunity costs. Market is irrational many times.Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amLocking 1 M for 1 month and get awarded 50k of Brownies is like receiving something worth c$830 for blocking something worth c$3,330 for 1 month...I know that I would definitely go buy 1m BTS on the market and bock them for 1M if I get awarded 50k Brownies and probably dump them as soon as possible...So I don't think this is a good idea since Brownies will become worthless.. You wouldn't get your Brownies all at once. It should be you'd get them slowly over time just as if you're mining with the maximum over a fixed period of time being 50k. If you're only in it for the dollar amount then you'll dump your Brownies but people only in it for the dollar amount will probably not want to lock up 1 million Bitshares for some period of time.I Agree with the steady release of Brownies. As I said above, don't think that market participants won't find ways to mamupulate the price of Brownies.. Also who said it has to be 1 month? The amount of time could have a minimum and a maximum, and be randomly set so that you don't even know for sure if it's going to be 1 month, or more, or less. The length of time could also be a configurable parameter which gets voted on, but in any case once you agree to lock up you can't unlock it prior to the time limit agreed to.The point is if you dump your Brownies then you dump, but the person who doesn't dump would still have a better reputation than the person who does, and the longest locked holders could get additional UIA sharedrops according to the length of time they locked up. You can basically create an economy around reputation for being a whale supporter of BTS.Quote from: mf-tzo on November 15, 2015, 10:49:47 amI think it would be more normal to earn 5% interest on the bitusd value of the locked BTS. For example, lock 1M BTS for 1 Month will earn c$15 bitusd. The question is from where the bitusd will be found?From the network reserve pool? Is this a good idea?I don't think you get the point. The goal isn't to pay people USD. The goal is to encourage people to be long term holders by giving them additional future equity, sharedrops, opportunities, rewards, etc. So people who have a reputation for proving they are willing to lock up their Bitshares for long periods of time should be rewarded.People who just want cash will develop the reputation for immediately cashing out and compared to the people who hold longer, they'd probably not have an equal reputation. So it's kind of like how with Proof of Stake the older coin age means something, the same could be for the amount of time you keep your BTS locked up. If you set it to lock up for 1 month then 50,000 Brownies, and if you go longer than this then you could get priority in sharedrops because people launching new businesses or who are doing sharedrops probably want people who will be willing to lock up and not dump.
Quote from: luckybit on November 15, 2015, 06:32:50 amQuote from: fuzzy on November 15, 2015, 06:14:10 amQuote from: luckybit on November 15, 2015, 06:11:11 amWhy not just give 50,000 Brownies to all who willingly lock up 1 million or more BTS? It would have to be some sort of proof of faith. The blockchain has to be able to prove that the person has a certain amount of net worth locked up in BTS. It has to be able to verify that they cannot unlock it immediately. The stream of Brownies would have to be rewarded in frequent intervals, like with mining. Then it could work sort of like Proof of Stake in a way, where as long as you lock it up, and you continuously prove it, the Brownies get unlocked and released to you and the others according to the length of time they locked up.This would reward people for taking opportunity costs.Wow...i love this...and i would love it if another UIA did it too...
Quote from: fuzzy on November 15, 2015, 06:14:10 amQuote from: luckybit on November 15, 2015, 06:11:11 amWhy not just give 50,000 Brownies to all who willingly lock up 1 million or more BTS? It would have to be some sort of proof of faith. The blockchain has to be able to prove that the person has a certain amount of net worth locked up in BTS. It has to be able to verify that they cannot unlock it immediately. The stream of Brownies would have to be rewarded in frequent intervals, like with mining. Then it could work sort of like Proof of Stake in a way, where as long as you lock it up, and you continuously prove it, the Brownies get unlocked and released to you and the others according to the length of time they locked up.This would reward people for taking opportunity costs.
Quote from: luckybit on November 15, 2015, 06:11:11 amWhy not just give 50,000 Brownies to all who willingly lock up 1 million or more BTS?
Why not just give 50,000 Brownies to all who willingly lock up 1 million or more BTS?