Ugh =[
Another crowdsale under BitShares name. Dan was pissed when Music did a crowdsale.
I'd ask you use the name "playshare".
If you are going to do a crowd funding campaign can you please do it on the bitshares platform and only accept bitUSD or even bitCNY. This would mean that the funds donated are kept in stable store of value. It also means that there will be greater demand for bitUSD and subsequently BTS. If the play platform is truly apart of the bitshares ecosystem why not fully utilize the advantages that bitshares provides?
If you are going to do a crowd funding campaign can you please do it on the bitshares platform and only accept bitUSD or even bitCNY. This would mean that the funds donated are kept in stable store of value. It also means that there will be greater demand for bitUSD and subsequently BTS. If the play platform is truly apart of the bitshares ecosystem why not fully utilize the advantages that bitshares provides?
If you are going to do a crowd funding campaign can you please do it on the bitshares platform and only accept bitUSD or even bitCNY. This would mean that the funds donated are kept in stable store of value. It also means that there will be greater demand for bitUSD and subsequently BTS. If the play platform is truly apart of the bitshares ecosystem why not fully utilize the advantages that bitshares provides?Support this idea too, by doing this BTS and PLS live together.
If you are going to do a crowd funding campaign can you please do it on the bitshares platform and only accept bitUSD or even bitCNY. This would mean that the funds donated are kept in stable store of value. It also means that there will be greater demand for bitUSD and subsequently BTS. If the play platform is truly apart of the bitshares ecosystem why not fully utilize the advantages that bitshares provides?
If you are going to do a crowd sale it should be in BitCNY / BitUSD. BTC is nice and liquid but is volatile and doesn't help the ecosystem nor help advertize the advantages of your base platform.
All of that said, I think you are much better off avoiding the crowd sale all together and returning all funds received. From a regulatory perspective it is just too messy and adds unnecessary risk when we now have the option of funding via delegate pay. In fact, from a regulatory perspective it would be wiser to launch a simple token like PTS and allocate 20% to you to sell as necessary to fund your operation and then upgrade.
Delegate pay should also be a means to fund operation.
I do understand that BTC is a good crowd funding system because it can attract NEW money from OUTSIDE BTS which is much more than attempting to attract money from INSIDE BTS. In fact raising money in BitUSD would probably result in them dumping all the funds raised for BTC so they can sell for CNY and fund operations. So whether we do it or they do it, BTS must be dumped to invest in PLAY unless the developers of PLAY have incentive to hold BTS.
This sucks...won't send a penny to you.
This sucks...won't send a penny to you.
Mitao will piss in anyone cheerios on any day and provide no reasons. I have come to see him as a true gem in this community. Follow his cryptic words of wisdom, taste the urine as you crunch another spoonful into your mouth...or just ignore him :)
BTC is a better way than BTS or bitUSD for crowdfunding, because there are far more BTC users than BTS. Basically, if you are only a BTS holder, you don't need to invest PLAYSHARES, because PLAYSHARES will be distributed to BTS freely. These 20% of PLAYSHARE is targeted more to BTC users, IMHO.+5%
+5% 8)BTC is a better way than BTS or bitUSD for crowdfunding, because there are far more BTC users than BTS. Basically, if you are only a BTS holder, you don't need to invest PLAYSHARES, because PLAYSHARES will be distributed to BTS freely. These 20% of PLAYSHARE is targeted more to BTC users, IMHO.+5%
BTC is a better way than BTS or bitUSD for crowdfunding, because there are far more BTC users than BTS. Basically, if you are only a BTS holder, you don't need to invest PLAYSHARES, because PLAYSHARES will be distributed to BTS freely. These 20% of PLAYSHARE is targeted more to BTC users, IMHO.
BTC is a better way than BTS or bitUSD for crowdfunding, because there are far more BTC users than BTS. Basically, if you are only a BTS holder, you don't need to invest PLAYSHARES, because PLAYSHARES will be distributed to BTS freely. These 20% of PLAYSHARE is targeted more to BTC users, IMHO.
If you are going to do a crowd sale it should be in BitCNY / BitUSD. BTC is nice and liquid but is volatile and doesn't help the ecosystem nor help advertize the advantages of your base platform.
All of that said, I think you are much better off avoiding the crowd sale all together and returning all funds received. From a regulatory perspective it is just too messy and adds unnecessary risk when we now have the option of funding via delegate pay. In fact, from a regulatory perspective it would be wiser to launch a simple token like PTS and allocate 20% to you to sell as necessary to fund your operation and then upgrade.
Delegate pay should also be a means to fund operation.
I do understand that BTC is a good crowd funding system because it can attract NEW money from OUTSIDE BTS which is much more than attempting to attract money from INSIDE BTS. In fact raising money in BitUSD would probably result in them dumping all the funds raised for BTC so they can sell for CNY and fund operations. So whether we do it or they do it, BTS must be dumped to invest in PLAY unless the developers of PLAY have incentive to hold BTS.
So... January 5 to February 2, yet another period in which BTS will not go up, because the bitshares community is spending their money on yet another crowdsale instead of buying BTS.
So... January 5 to February 2, yet another period in which BTS will not go up, because the bitshares community is spending their money on yet another crowdsale instead of buying BTS.
So... January 5 to February 2, yet another period in which BTS will not go up, because the bitshares community is spending their money on yet another crowdsale instead of buying BTS.
You are missing one vital fact....
ANY development that is made and works with the BitShares PLAY Chain will be easily transferrable to infrastructure that can be used by BTS. So your point is actually kind of wrong. If we had a 1000 altchains each with only a few serious Developers, they would still be essentially working part time for BTS, free of charge.
This isn't even talking about the HUGE demographic of future BitShares Users that PLAY could funnel in after it has grown enough. I am constantly floored by how many people see devs who want to build infrastructure for DPOS (just not under the main chain) as a threat. I see them as a blessing--ESPECIALLY if they are sharedropping on us.
So... January 5 to February 2, yet another period in which BTS will not go up, because the bitshares community is spending their money on yet another crowdsale instead of buying BTS.
You are missing one vital fact....
ANY development that is made and works with the BitShares PLAY Chain will be easily transferrable to infrastructure that can be used by BTS. So your point is actually kind of wrong. If we had a 1000 altchains each with only a few serious Developers, they would still be essentially working part time for BTS, free of charge.
This isn't even talking about the HUGE demographic of future BitShares Users that PLAY could funnel in after it has grown enough. I am constantly floored by how many people see devs who want to build infrastructure for DPOS (just not under the main chain) as a threat. I see them as a blessing--ESPECIALLY if they are sharedropping on us.
They'd be a lot more of a blessing if they accepted bitUSD and bitCNY for their crowdfunding.
So... January 5 to February 2, yet another period in which BTS will not go up, because the bitshares community is spending their money on yet another crowdsale instead of buying BTS.
You are missing one vital fact....
ANY development that is made and works with the BitShares PLAY Chain will be easily transferrable to infrastructure that can be used by BTS. So your point is actually kind of wrong. If we had a 1000 altchains each with only a few serious Developers, they would still be essentially working part time for BTS, free of charge.
This isn't even talking about the HUGE demographic of future BitShares Users that PLAY could funnel in after it has grown enough. I am constantly floored by how many people see devs who want to build infrastructure for DPOS (just not under the main chain) as a threat. I see them as a blessing--ESPECIALLY if they are sharedropping on us.
They'd be a lot more of a blessing if they accepted bitUSD and bitCNY for their crowdfunding.
Wouldn't it be fair to say this might be a significant hindrance if the wallet is still buggy for the majority of users?
I can see something like an AGS style campaign where people can choose to invest BTC OR bitUSD, but until the wallet is polished and easy for every user, all I see is a bunch of new people having too difficult a time to invest and simply choosing not to.
So... January 5 to February 2, yet another period in which BTS will not go up, because the bitshares community is spending their money on yet another crowdsale instead of buying BTS.
You are missing one vital fact....
ANY development that is made and works with the BitShares PLAY Chain will be easily transferrable to infrastructure that can be used by BTS. So your point is actually kind of wrong. If we had a 1000 altchains each with only a few serious Developers, they would still be essentially working part time for BTS, free of charge.
This isn't even talking about the HUGE demographic of future BitShares Users that PLAY could funnel in after it has grown enough. I am constantly floored by how many people see devs who want to build infrastructure for DPOS (just not under the main chain) as a threat. I see them as a blessing--ESPECIALLY if they are sharedropping on us.
They'd be a lot more of a blessing if they accepted bitUSD and bitCNY for their crowdfunding.
Wouldn't it be fair to say this might be a significant hindrance if the wallet is still buggy for the majority of users?
I can see something like an AGS style campaign where people can choose to invest BTC OR bitUSD, but until the wallet is polished and easy for every user, all I see is a bunch of new people having too difficult a time to invest and simply choosing not to.
Yes, I meant bitUSD and bitCNY in addition to BTC for the crowdfunding would optimize the ecosystem benefits.
Agreed. The best way to support BTS may be not honoring BTC in PLAY but using bitAssets such as bitUSD and bitCNY for crowdfunding.
Well they could always collect the crowd fund in BTC and then store it in BitCNY. This will do the most for BTS.
Days like today are a good example of why storing the proceeds of a crowd sale in BTC is a problem.
Well they could always collect the crowd fund in BTC and then store it in BitCNY. This will do the most for BTS.
Days like today are a good example of why storing the proceeds of a crowd sale in BTC is a problem.
+5% storing the funds in bitUSD, bitGOLD or bitCNY seems like a good idea, it will provide stability in regard to the invested funds and it is a great use-case to illustrate that market pegged assets work!if they dare let them deal only with BTC :P
here is the link for the information
http://dacx.com/Play/index_en.html
Why don't use agsexplorer for crowfunding just curious ???
Why don't use agsexplorer for crowfunding just curious ???
maybe the guy who made agsexplorer is tied up with other development work such as a Chinese social networking account for Bitshares faucet .
Hackfisher, will you store funded BTC into bitCNY or bitUSD?
when btc drop to zero, who will pay for the lose?
when btc drop to zero, who will pay for the lose?
yeah. The fund is to run the development and the community. the dev team need fiat to run normally. They have to pay dev salary, hardware and other expenses. If kept in fiat, all this may be controllable.when btc drop to zero, who will pay for the lose?
Seriously?