各位好:目前在英文区正在进行关于第三方配股权的民意投票,我觉得我们的中文社区也应该举行这样的投票,请各位投出自己的票,手人一票,投票时间为期一周(7天),看看支持哪种方案的人会多一点。同时,你最好也去英文区参与投票,让外国人也知道我们中文社区的真实民意。选项的顺序和英文社区是一样的。
请投出你的票的时候,也尽量留下你的观点,以便大家讨论哪种方案更优。
之所以举行这个投票,是因为合并DAC后,第三方应用究竟是应该尊巡什么样的共识来配股没有明确说明。有的人错过了AGS,但他们投资了PTS,因为他们投资的是未来的DAC收益。
如果合并后配股权并入BTS中,那无形也是对于2月28日捐赠AGS以及现有PTS投资者造成利益冲突,但是却简化了新投资者对于股权分配的认识,有助于推广BTS。
请各位投票时文明讨论,不过激,客观不偏袒。
英文社区的投票贴子为:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10511.0以下是英文社区贴主的内容:
One of the pressing questions we face in the long-term is the issue of 3rd-party DAC developers and who they should airdrop to. Here are the options that I've seen discussed (my favorite option is #3 or #4, btw):
1. We could leave AGS as-is, and port only PTS into GENESIS (user-issued asset on BTS). That way, GENESIS is essentially PTS 2.0, and we preserve the idea that AGS is the illiquid share class, PTS is the liquid one.
2. There have been at least two proposals (by Shentist and emski, I believe) to create a user-issued asset on the new BTS called GENESIS and snapshot it 50/50 AGS/PTS. Then new DACs would honor GENESIS with a 20% snapshot. I'm not crazy about combining AGS with anything like that. IMO, AGS should be left alone (disclosure: I own only 12 AGS; I'm not speaking from dishonest bias here).
3. Let PTS end, but preserve AGS. Now, 3rd-party devs would be recommended to honor 10% AGS and 10% BTS. It does still give a slight preference to pre-Feb28 donators, but only a slight one, and preserves the original intentions of AGS. It ends PTS, which simplifies the marketing message (PTS was always a weird idea, don't you think?).
4. Invictus has floated the idea that they should honor the new BTS with 20%. The rationale is that the new BTS snapshotted AGS/PTS and thus honoring BTS is like honoring AGS/PTS. The dramatic flaw in this proposal is that it gives a huge preference to pre-Feb28 AGS donators. For that reason, I strongly oppose this option because it's severely unfair to those who donated after the original BTSX snapshot.
Discuss.
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
第一选项和第二选项其实是都是支持配股给AGS\PTS,只不过是在流通性上的不同。如果单从对立面上来看:
1+2 VS 4
当然其它方案内也可能有包含1+2或是4的观点。