BitShares Forum

Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: NewMine on April 05, 2015, 07:53:53 pm

Title: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 05, 2015, 07:53:53 pm
Everybody needs to "vote out" all 100% delegates!

Is the current $800 salary worth the downward pressure and negative perception from both outsiders and the departing faithful?

What are the non-developer delegates actually doing that warrants any pay at this point? 

The marketing teams have had the reverse effects of what was thought or promised; adoption is stagnant and share price has fallen. Max is the only one that has produced anything tangible and maybe the only person amongst the so called marketing people that deserves a slot.

I would easily bet more than half the 100% delegates do absolutely nothing other than working hard at making it seem like they are working hard while holding on to a hope and prayer that BTS launches to the moon and they get a free windfall out of the BTS they have sucked out of the system for free.

The time is now!

Vote these people out!

At least try it out and see what happens to the price.

$800 per month isn't going to make or break anyone who is legitimately doing something for the cause at this point and they should be more than willing to try out something that could bring more benefit to current shareholders who are hurting.
 



Oh wait, I forgot.  The people with the most shares and therefor a majority of the votes are all delegates themselves. 

Well, whatever.  Never mind.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: testz on April 05, 2015, 08:04:24 pm
You really think that downward pressure comes from 100% pay rate delegates (at least 50% of they are developers of BitShares)?  :)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 05, 2015, 08:06:44 pm
I dont believe that the small inflation from 100% delegates, only some of which is sold, is having much impact on the price. 
(The 20% dilution from the 'merger' is another matter, this is 10% a year inflaiton for 2 years, which is a big deal.  And of course there is also the negative effects of people selling because they wanted BTS to be a deflationary coin, and it changed, but thoose people have probably mostly sold by this point, since its been almost 6 months now).

I do think that unilaterally voting out all 100% delegates and thus hurting/killing all projects and dev work that are being worked on in the BTS communtiy is probably a terrible move at this point.
However, if there are specific 100% delegates that are not worth it or have stopped working, then of course they should be voted out!    Make a case for any 100% delegate that you think is a bad idea, and try to get them voted out!  We should be doing this periodically, since its important that all the delegate spots are productive.

Also, we could try to replace 3% delegates with 0-1% delegates, but the effect of this is extremely minor.


Rather than trying to fix things by messing with the system and changing things yet again, what we need is for Bitshares to actually deliver on some promises that were made before, like stable client, etc.  Things that we were told would happen prior to the current date which havent happened yet.  And we need new positive, good news for Bitshares, that is REAL, and not just "her eis a cool thing that we will do a while from now", because those have failed to deliver so many times by now that no one has any trust anymore that they will become real.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: clayop on April 05, 2015, 08:09:27 pm
IMHO aiming arrows of blame on 100% delegates is wrong
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: toast on April 05, 2015, 08:16:12 pm
I'm in favor, but I'm not sure the 100% delegates are all influential. More like a few whales that are lazy and just pick whichever delegates the crowd seems to favor.

I also think the merger dilution has a much worse effect than delegate inflation, but both are pretty terrible.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 05, 2015, 08:28:00 pm
I'm in favor, but I'm not sure the 100% delegates are all influential. More like a few whales that are lazy and just pick whichever delegates the crowd seems to favor.

I also think the merger dilution has a much worse effect than delegate inflation, but both are pretty terrible.

Wow interesting!

What about the positive effects of gaining business partners/funding for projects through delegates?  While the community definitely needs to be careful about who it elects, arent there positive benefits to be had if we elect good delegates?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 05, 2015, 08:34:12 pm
I'm in favor, but I'm not sure the 100% delegates are all influential. More like a few whales that are lazy and just pick whichever delegates the crowd seems to favor.

I also think the merger dilution has a much worse effect than delegate inflation, but both are pretty terrible.

I'll gladly give NewMine the 25% I get for doing what I do as soon as he provides any level of value to our community (we need a community vote, of course).  As I see it, he is pretty much a ball of negative energy that intentionally divides us every time he gets the chance.

I have an idea, Newmine. Rather than blame the lack of value and the downward action price on people who are basically working full time and more behind the scenes on bitshares, why don't you spend some energy on building something of value instead of being a big black hole of negative energy?

Jeez man. Were you beat as a child? Is there nothing positive that goes through your head?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: CryptoPrometheus on April 05, 2015, 08:36:19 pm
I'm in favor, but I'm not sure the 100% delegates are all influential. More like a few whales that are lazy and just pick whichever delegates the crowd seems to favor.

I also think the merger dilution has a much worse effect than delegate inflation, but both are pretty terrible.

Out of curiosity, when you say "both are pretty terrible", are you saying that a delegate dilution model, in your opinion, could never be a beneficial thing? Or are you just observing the current situation in BitShares and commenting strictly on that?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fav on April 05, 2015, 08:38:28 pm
those 100% delegates do the work. how about no?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 05, 2015, 08:39:13 pm
There is a 12 page (12page!) thread of people complaining about the price. I have news for you. If you spent HALF the time it takes you to complain to help ANY of the people trying to stand up as community leaders we would be far better off than focusing on all this ridiculous negativity.  100% delegates is the smartest design decision I have seen.  Hiring people and refusing to pay them with the multiple delegates some of them are worth...and causing extra stress for them just makes things worse. But we know Newmine  isn't here to make things better.

Most of the people getting delegate pay are putting it right back into the bitshares ecosystem. So hilarious.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: clayop on April 05, 2015, 08:40:52 pm
I'm in favor, but I'm not sure the 100% delegates are all influential. More like a few whales that are lazy and just pick whichever delegates the crowd seems to favor.

I also think the merger dilution has a much worse effect than delegate inflation, but both are pretty terrible.

To be fair, I cannot say dilution model is the best option. But it may be a good choice without depending on any external funding and its influences.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: btswildpig on April 05, 2015, 08:43:46 pm
I just need to say this :

putting the words in the center looks like a copycat of someone .
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: TurkeyLeg on April 05, 2015, 08:46:15 pm
There is a 12 page (12page!) thread of people complaining about the price. I have news for you. If you spent HALF the time it takes you to complain to help ANY of the people trying to stand up as community leaders we would be far better off than focusing on all this ridiculous negativity.  100% delegates is the smartest design decision I have seen.  Hiring people and refusing to pay them with the multiple delegates some of them are worth...and causing extra stress for them just makes things worse. But we know Newmine  isn't here to make things better.

Most of the people getting delegate pay are putting it right back into the bitshares ecosystem. So hilarious.

 +5% - Thank you Fuzzy - I couldn't agree more.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: TurkeyLeg on April 05, 2015, 08:47:27 pm
I dont believe that the small inflation from 100% delegates, only some of which is sold, is having much impact on the price. 
(The 20% dilution from the 'merger' is another matter, this is 10% a year inflaiton for 2 years, which is a big deal.  And of course there is also the negative effects of people selling because they wanted BTS to be a deflationary coin, and it changed, but thoose people have probably mostly sold by this point, since its been almost 6 months now).

I do think that unilaterally voting out all 100% delegates and thus hurting/killing all projects and dev work that are being worked on in the BTS communtiy is probably a terrible move at this point.
However, if there are specific 100% delegates that are not worth it or have stopped working, then of course they should be voted out!    Make a case for any 100% delegate that you think is a bad idea, and try to get them voted out!  We should be doing this periodically, since its important that all the delegate spots are productive.

Also, we could try to replace 3% delegates with 0-1% delegates, but the effect of this is extremely minor.


Rather than trying to fix things by messing with the system and changing things yet again, what we need is for Bitshares to actually deliver on some promises that were made before, like stable client, etc.  Things that we were told would happen prior to the current date which havent happened yet.  And we need new positive, good news for Bitshares, that is REAL, and not just "her eis a cool thing that we will do a while from now", because those have failed to deliver so many times by now that no one has any trust anymore that they will become real.

 +5% - Thank you Ander. I agree. We do not need any more 90 degree turns. Like you said, we need progress on previous commitments. And by reading some of Stan's updates - I think that is exactly what is happening.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mdj on April 05, 2015, 08:47:47 pm
No. Why on earth would I fire all of Bitshares' dedicated employees (who I must add are doing an amazing job)?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Frodo on April 05, 2015, 08:50:34 pm
And the worst proposal of the month award goes to ... NewMine. Congrats.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: chryspano on April 05, 2015, 08:51:24 pm
(http://img.prntscr.com/img?url=http://i.imgur.com/HQygAd2.jpg)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 05, 2015, 09:37:07 pm
You really think that downward pressure comes from 100% pay rate delegates (at least 50% of they are developers of BitShares)?  :)
Negative perception too.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 05, 2015, 09:51:24 pm
A lot of these delegates have collected upwards of half a million BTS to this point. Is that enough for what they have done? A lot have had other forms of payment for their contributions whether it was from I3 themselves or are now able to make side profits off the projects the were working on.


Here are the 100's and what it seems they are doing or have done:


market.cn.group101   Chinese marketing group. What effect have they had?

www.bts-hk   Another Chinese marketing team?

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

dev.bitsharesblocks   Created BitsharesBlocks.com Does this warrant a delegate pay forever? Half a million BTS fair enough for that contribution?

bm.payroll.riverhead Lead core Dev. Paid large sums of BTS by I3's AGS funds.

tradebts.gulu    Earns money through exchange fees.

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

del0.cass   he made the logo and other graphics stuff. Again, is half a million enough pay for that contribution?

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

jcalfee1-developer-team.helper.liondani   developer of online wallet paid by I3. No longer full-time Dev.?

developer.vikram   Core Dev actively working, also paid by I3 in large sums of BTS.

delegate-dev1.btsnow       A Dev group paid by I3 who also is making money off exchange fees from blocktrade.us

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

media.bitscape   Earning money from Cryptofresh store. They also have another delegate. Really?

dev-metaexchange.monsterer   Earning money from exchange fees.......

delegate.rgcrypto   Another marketing delegate. Seems to be a lot of talk and no results. Although not as much since his weekly updates ceased and his referrals dried up after the initial delegate push.

valzav.payroll.testz   not sure what he does since PTS is gone bye bye. ??

stan.delegate.xeldal   Stan is a mouthpiece who already has a retirement income and a huge stash of BTS from AGS paid by I3.

delegate-dev4.btsnow        Redundant delegate

delegate-dev3.btsnow           Wow, another redundant delegate.

fuzzy.beyondbitcoin   Mumble chats moderator. Is it worth a 100% delegate, as much pay as a Dev?

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dev.nathanhourt.com    Lightweight Dev paid by I3

dev0.theoretical   Another Dev paid by I3 but with a sad story of being duped into going "all in".

dev.sidhujag   Another Dev paid by I3 for shopping cart plugin support

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

dev-pc.bitcube         Puts in a few hours per month on bugs

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 05, 2015, 10:07:49 pm
I'm in favor, but I'm not sure the 100% delegates are all influential. More like a few whales that are lazy and just pick whichever delegates the crowd seems to favor.

I also think the merger dilution has a much worse effect than delegate inflation, but both are pretty terrible.

Fair enough.

I think some of the Devs should stay but maybe at a lesser percentage. That way the perception is the Devs aren't taking full advantage of what is available. Let's be honest,  whether it's 100% or 50%, none of the Devs are relying on this as their primary income at this point.

If there were a real marketing initiative, they would've picked up on the current controversy with the Bitcoin Foundation and how Bitshares solved the primary concern and original intent of the BF, how to fund core Devs? Bitshares should've been mentioned in every single thread I read on reddit over the past few days on the issue. I scrolled through most of the comments and saw replies from some of the bitcoin celebs concerned about how Devs would get funded and who would administrate those funds. Not a single Bitshares reference. Missed opportunity with a majority of the 100's being marketing delegates.

I hate the dilution too, but you can't change it without killing the entire project. A HardFork deleting what hasn't been claimed or a roll back will negatively affect Bitshares in a way we have never seen.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: jaran on April 05, 2015, 10:12:14 pm
Quote
dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

Wow that's funny and sad if true...
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 05, 2015, 10:15:49 pm
A lot of these delegates have collected upwards of half a million BTS to this point. Is that enough for what they have done? A lot have had other forms of payment for their contributions whether it was from I3 themselves or are now able to make side profits off the projects the were working on.


Here are the 100's and what it seems they are doing or have done:


market.cn.group101   Chinese marketing group. What effect have they had?

www.bts-hk   Another Chinese marketing team?

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

dev.bitsharesblocks   Created BitsharesBlocks.com Does this warrant a delegate pay forever? Half a million BTS fair enough for that contribution?

bm.payroll.riverhead Lead core Dev. Paid large sums of BTS by I3's AGS funds.

tradebts.gulu    Earns money through exchange fees.

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

del0.cass   he made the logo and other graphics stuff. Again, is half a million enough pay for that contribution?

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

jcalfee1-developer-team.helper.liondani   developer of online wallet paid by I3. No longer full-time Dev.?

developer.vikram   Core Dev actively working, also paid by I3 in large sums of BTS.

delegate-dev1.btsnow       A Dev group paid by I3 who also is making money off exchange fees from blocktrade.us

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

media.bitscape   Earning money from Cryptofresh store. They also have another delegate. Really?

dev-metaexchange.monsterer   Earning money from exchange fees.......

delegate.rgcrypto   Another marketing delegate. Seems to be a lot of talk and no results. Although not as much since his weekly updates ceased and his referrals dried up after the initial delegate push.

valzav.payroll.testz   not sure what he does since PTS is gone bye bye. ??

stan.delegate.xeldal   Stan is a mouthpiece who already has a retirement income and a huge stash of BTS from AGS paid by I3.

delegate-dev4.btsnow        Redundant delegate

delegate-dev3.btsnow           Wow, another redundant delegate.

fuzzy.beyondbitcoin   Mumble chats moderator. Is it worth a 100% delegate, as much pay as a Dev?

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dev.nathanhourt.com    Lightweight Dev paid by I3

dev0.theoretical   Another Dev paid by I3 but with a sad story of being duped into going "all in".

dev.sidhujag   Another Dev paid by I3 for shopping cart plugin support

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

dev-pc.bitcube         Puts in a few hours per month on bugs

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

Lol...newmine. you spend so little time behind the scenes. You think content just comes to us begging to connect with the community? Do you think the mumble server is free? Do you know of a free alternative that provides encrypted comms, a press pass and recording equipment for all and doesn't rely on a third party and thus the jurisdiction out of which that third party operates?  Do you know how hard and time consuming is to edit material?  Do you know how hard it is to monetize our content since we are almost exclusively forced to focus on bitshares?
Do you think another ecosystem wouldn't pay us handsomely to leave bitshares and do what we do for them instead?  Do you think I haven't been approached and asked as much by people representing parties that would like to steal value from bitshares?

Oh and for the record, if people want me to stop doing this it would be the EASY path for me (though I would hate to hurt those who work for us at already low pay compared to what thy get for their skills on the open market..

But then again I'm certain the entire team would be far wealthier in terms of $s if we didn't provide this service and instead worked extra jobs in the corrupt fiat world and relegated the rest of our time to come on here and constantly complain.

Of course I'm not the only delegate on this list so please feel free to speak up if you have been called out by the all knowing newmine.

You speak and show how little you know of what is really going on behind the scenes. You think that what is in the surface is all there is.  You are so wrong.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 05, 2015, 10:18:27 pm
Quote
dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

Wow that's funny and sad if true...
Well I hate to call it, but Nikolai really doesn't let anyone know what he is up to. However I can pretty much say for certain he has likely not been paid enough for the services he DID offer in the past, so it is really hard for me to call it.

As a matter of fact, our delegate hangouts are precisely to give the community the ability to come on and ask  difficult questions.  That is why it's there.  Of course lately I'm getting frustrated by newmine because the pattern I see with him is thus: only spend time speaking of the negative, expect to get rich and do nothing in return.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mf-tzo on April 05, 2015, 10:33:42 pm
As much as I want to disagree with Newmine there are some delegates on this list that I think shouldn't be there. In the end of the day we must all vote responsibly. Most of the people on this list should be there though.

However I don't think that this has anything to do with the price even if some are voted out..
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: pendragon3 on April 05, 2015, 10:36:07 pm
Interesting...

http://cointelegraph.com/news/113873/bitcoin-foundation-is-effectively-bankrupt
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: julian1 on April 05, 2015, 10:45:25 pm
Quote
If there were a real marketing initiative, they would've picked up on the current controversy with the Bitcoin Foundation and how Bitshares solved the primary concern and original intent of the BF, how to fund core Devs? Bitshares should've been mentioned in every single thread I read on reddit over the past few days on the issue. I scrolled through most of the comments and saw replies from some of the bitcoin celebs concerned about how Devs would get funded and who would administrate those funds. Not a single Bitshares reference. Missed opportunity with a majority of the 100's being marketing delegates.

 +5% The scarcity of reddit (and hackernews) forum comments  these days is quite noticable. Nul- street would have been on top of that in the past.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 05, 2015, 11:20:36 pm
Quote
If there were a real marketing initiative, they would've picked up on the current controversy with the Bitcoin Foundation and how Bitshares solved the primary concern and original intent of the BF, how to fund core Devs? Bitshares should've been mentioned in every single thread I read on reddit over the past few days on the issue. I scrolled through most of the comments and saw replies from some of the bitcoin celebs concerned about how Devs would get funded and who would administrate those funds. Not a single Bitshares reference. Missed opportunity with a majority of the 100's being marketing delegates.

 +5% The scarcity of reddit (and hackernews) forum comments  these days is quite noticable. Nul- street would have been on top of that in the past.

Why would anyone want to want to be a delegate at a lower marketcap when people like newmine make them out to be freeloaders? 

Sure, there is cleaning up to be done to a degree, but newmine is guaranteed to not be the guy to follow advice on how to clean it up.

If I were newmine. I'd try to add value. I'd say "let's get a team of 10 people and get them all paid by a 100% delegate to zerg reddit threads. Let's have someone we trust head it up and report back to us"

Sincerely wish you'd try to take the solutions angle as opposed to the "hang everybody" angle.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: merivercap on April 06, 2015, 12:33:28 am
I don't believe delegate dilution has much to do with lower prices.   We are in a general bear market for crypto.  The demand side for crypto hasn't been that strong AND the shift from current investor's allocation from alt-coin to Bitcoin is increasing slightly.  Since Bitcoin dominates with 85% of  total market cap of crypto a small shift in favor of Bitcoin will suck a significant amount of the marketcap from the altcoin market.  It's analogous to when sentiment goes from small cap stocks to large cap stocks.  Furthermore I'm a firm believer in selling equity for growth.  That's how all startups and growth companies work. 

Furthermore delegate pay not only brings value to the system, it also gets new people involved as employee/owners and also releases more shares to the public so new investors can come in.  There's already a preception of a 'pre-mine' and the idea that original investors and whales want to just sit on their shares, do nothing and get rich off the technology is not a good business strategy or good for perception.  If that's the plan someone can probably quip: 'Might as well stick a fork in you cuz you're done.'  They would mean this figuratively and literally. 

All companies dilute.  From a seed/angel round to an A-B-C-D round of founding...and then an IPO.  You give up equity for cash in all these stages to grow.... I don't mean you should do it aimlessly, but it's standard practice.   There's also usually a good balance between business & operations/ product & technology/ sales & marketing. 

 
Quote
If there were a real marketing initiative, they would've picked up on the current controversy with the Bitcoin Foundation and how Bitshares solved the primary concern and original intent of the BF, how to fund core Devs? Bitshares should've been mentioned in every single thread I read on reddit over the past few days on the issue. I scrolled through most of the comments and saw replies from some of the bitcoin celebs concerned about how Devs would get funded and who would administrate those funds. Not a single Bitshares reference. Missed opportunity with a majority of the 100's being marketing delegates.

 +5% The scarcity of reddit (and hackernews) forum comments  these days is quite noticable. Nul- street would have been on top of that in the past.

I agree that this would be a perfect opportunity to highlight the DAC model after the whole Bitcoin Foundation debacle.  Of course we probably should work out the kinks a bit and more heavily promote our DAC when operations are humming.  In any case I am fascinated with this DAC experiment and think it can work out very well.   I don't think operations have been that inefficient and relative to traditional startups the cash burn rate has been below average.  However we can always improve and direct resources that will provide the most value in the long run.  I do think product & tech development should be paid more. 

With that said maybe we can put a website together that highlights the delegates & responsibilities and have another section where we can expect weekly progress reports and have some accountability (we can keep this open or private to members).  Eventually I think we need to put a delegate team page with pictures for the bitShares DAC delegates.  I know some may be uncomfortable so it shouldn't be required, but whenever you look at a company you want to know who is behind it.  It brings the human element to the project.  Just like the Peer-to-Peer tour, Stan, Bytemaster etc bring a human element to bitShares.  You gain trust much faster from others that way.  That's an advantage Bitshares will always have over the anonymous guys from NXT, Darkcoin etc.  It would be good to recruit more females and global talent because money is universal and we want everyone involved.   It's great we have a strong Chinese contingent. 

Anyways you can link up a delegate website to the Bitshareblocks.com's delegate page, but keep it running seperately.  It can have real-time financials totally transparent for everyone to see.  When you think about the level of transparency you can have with the DAC compared to regular corporations & governments, this system is definitely revolutionary.  I can grab the domain: btsdac.org if people like that domain?  I can even set up a simple Wordpress site, but we have to have someone build a data feed of delegate info to it.  The website page can read:  BitShares DAC, 'The World's First Decentralized Autonomous Company'...  anyways what do you all think?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: toast on April 06, 2015, 12:37:47 am
Quote
dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

Wow that's funny and sad if true...

That delegate pays for miscellaneous development tasks useful as a dev evaluation, for example recently a bunch of people wrote tests (some not yet paid), and before that zach lym came to visit and it paid for that.

If you all prefer I take it offline instead of using it for discretionary development tasks then let me know, outside this thread I only got positive feedback on it
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: triox on April 06, 2015, 12:45:44 am
+5% The scarcity of reddit (and hackernews) forum comments  these days is quite noticable. Nul- street would have been on top of that in the past.

We've had some success of getting to r/bitcoin and HN in the past and it had zero effect on adoption or price.

Our marketing efforts are simply ineffective and we have no word of mouth effect. Public only listens to people they trust and admire and from the bitcoiner's point of view we're no different from a random alter-coin pushers and there's no incentive to get interested and research Bitshares.

Let's face it: we have a terrible distribution. The whole currency/company has been sold to a bunch of random nobodies like you and me with no reputation and no friends in the industry. Makes me appreciate the genius of Bitcoin's production model: if you wanted to get involved, it's future distribution was more or less a blank slate. With Bitshares anyone serious who wants to get involved will be disproportionately enriching a bunch of unknowns who own it.

What is needed are thought leaders and VCs with their contacts, reputation and clout. People who will integrate BitUSD into their verticals. People who will talk about Bitshares on conferences and in the media. People who can make things happen.

But VCs don't buy shares at market price. In fact it would be simply impossible to buy a substantial position from the market. VCs need to be offered something extra to get involved.

What Bitshares needs to survive and thrive is another funding round. It needs to be negotiated in secret and sadly, it has to screw over the existing shareholders (in the short run).
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 06, 2015, 12:54:40 am
A lot of these delegates have collected upwards of half a million BTS to this point. Is that enough for what they have done? A lot have had other forms of payment for their contributions whether it was from I3 themselves or are now able to make side profits off the projects the were working on.


Here are the 100's and what it seems they are doing or have done:


market.cn.group101   Chinese marketing group. What effect have they had?

www.bts-hk   Another Chinese marketing team?

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

dev.bitsharesblocks   Created BitsharesBlocks.com Does this warrant a delegate pay forever? Half a million BTS fair enough for that contribution?

bm.payroll.riverhead Lead core Dev. Paid large sums of BTS by I3's AGS funds.

tradebts.gulu    Earns money through exchange fees.

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

del0.cass   he made the logo and other graphics stuff. Again, is half a million enough pay for that contribution?

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

jcalfee1-developer-team.helper.liondani   developer of online wallet paid by I3. No longer full-time Dev.?

developer.vikram   Core Dev actively working, also paid by I3 in large sums of BTS.

delegate-dev1.btsnow       A Dev group paid by I3 who also is making money off exchange fees from blocktrade.us

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

media.bitscape   Earning money from Cryptofresh store. They also have another delegate. Really?

dev-metaexchange.monsterer   Earning money from exchange fees.......

delegate.rgcrypto   Another marketing delegate. Seems to be a lot of talk and no results. Although not as much since his weekly updates ceased and his referrals dried up after the initial delegate push.

valzav.payroll.testz   not sure what he does since PTS is gone bye bye. ??

stan.delegate.xeldal   Stan is a mouthpiece who already has a retirement income and a huge stash of BTS from AGS paid by I3.

delegate-dev4.btsnow        Redundant delegate

delegate-dev3.btsnow           Wow, another redundant delegate.

fuzzy.beyondbitcoin   Mumble chats moderator. Is it worth a 100% delegate, as much pay as a Dev?

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dev.nathanhourt.com    Lightweight Dev paid by I3

dev0.theoretical   Another Dev paid by I3 but with a sad story of being duped into going "all in".

dev.sidhujag   Another Dev paid by I3 for shopping cart plugin support

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

dev-pc.bitcube         Puts in a few hours per month on bugs

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

Lol...newmine. you spend so little time behind the scenes. You think content just comes to us begging to connect with the community? Do you think the mumble server is free? Do you know of a free alternative that provides encrypted comms, a press pass and recording equipment for all and doesn't rely on a third party and thus the jurisdiction out of which that third party operates?  Do you know how hard and time consuming is to edit material?  Do you know how hard it is to monetize our content since we are almost exclusively forced to focus on bitshares?
Do you think another ecosystem wouldn't pay us handsomely to leave bitshares and do what we do for them instead?  Do you think I haven't been approached and asked as much by people representing parties that would like to steal value from bitshares?

Oh and for the record, if people want me to stop doing this it would be the EASY path for me (though I would hate to hurt those who work for us at already low pay compared to what thy get for their skills on the open market..

But then again I'm certain the entire team would be far wealthier in terms of $s if we didn't provide this service and instead worked extra jobs in the corrupt fiat world and relegated the rest of our time to come on here and constantly complain.

Of course I'm not the only delegate on this list so please feel free to speak up if you have been called out by the all knowing newmine.

You speak and show how little you know of what is really going on behind the scenes. You think that what is in the surface is all there is.  You are so wrong.

Oh, spare me the self congratulatory, altruistic bull shit Fuzzy. I can  only imagine the number of opportunities raining down upon you in the wake of your under demanded, over valued circle jerk of all the like minded ostriches on the forum. If you have a better gig, take it. Money talks as clearly defined by your defensive response of your necessary 100% pay delegate.

Yes I know you pay for a server.  I am simply asking if your server and time is worth what others are receiving for their contributions? 
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: bytemaster on April 06, 2015, 01:01:08 am
Right now Fuzzy is bringing people together, organizing weekly mumbles, and helping spread information to our community.   I highly value his contributions because his mumble sessions are how many people meet up. 

I think all of this focus on the "price" is a sign that people have lost their way, the price will not start growing until we stop watching it.   Who wants to buy into a community that is in panic about the price when we are all here to do so much more.   

It is about our mission and common interests.   Is there anything else out there that can compete with DPOS and BitAssets?

Assume BTS was worth nothing, this community is still very valuable.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Stan on April 06, 2015, 01:09:42 am
What we need is more good advisors whispering edifying thoughts in our ears.

(http://i.gyazo.com/40b793d076e052f4e6bc545895ff358a.png)

Little is known of Gríma Wormtongue before he became counselor of Théoden in Edoras. His childhood is a mystery. What is known is that Gríma, son of Gálmód, and a native of Rohan, joined the service of Saruman in secret and worked as a spy to weaken Théoden and his kingdom, using his voice to keep the spell intact while Saruman is inside the King.

Gríma, called (the) Wormtongue, is a fictional character in J. R. R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings. He appears in the second and third volumes of the work, The Two Towers and The Return of the King, and his role is expanded upon in Unfinished Tales. He is introduced in The Two Towers as the chief advisor to King Théoden of Rohan and henchman of Saruman. Gríma serves as an archetypal sycophant, flatterer, liar, and manipulator.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Tuck Fheman on April 06, 2015, 01:10:32 am
(https://38.media.tumblr.com/934e1cc143ca501eeac16f8525f61bf2/tumblr_n04m44Ca381s02vreo1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 06, 2015, 01:41:41 am
(https://38.media.tumblr.com/934e1cc143ca501eeac16f8525f61bf2/tumblr_n04m44Ca381s02vreo1_400.gif)
Epic.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mint chocolate chip on April 06, 2015, 01:55:06 am
Thank you Newmine for speaking-up on this topic. We should seriously as a community look at his list and pick out a couple each week to focus our efforts on evaluating and removing if necessary. At the same time we should be actively discussing who we should be voting to get in.  It is telling that something like this https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=14887.0 run by a guy who has a proven track record cannot get voted in within a reasonable time frame and yet we likely have a few freeloaders who enjoy the lack of outspokenness about their efforts, results and transparency.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 06, 2015, 02:12:10 am
Thank you Newmine for speaking-up on this topic. We should seriously as a community look at his list and pick out a couple each week to focus our efforts on evaluating and removing if necessary. At the same time we should be actively discussing who we should be voting to get in.  It is telling that something like this https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=14887.0 run by a guy who has a proven track record cannot get voted in within a reasonable time frame and yet we likely have a few freeloaders who enjoy the lack of outspokenness about their efforts, results and transparency.

Wow...looks like I missed one for hangouts.  Or rather I was too late.  I reached out to him just this week :/

And for the record I have nothing against Newmine bringing things up, it is the way he brings it up. 

@Newmine: it is not just the server bro.  It is doing it every week.  Week in and week out, lining people up, organizing them behind the scenes, having a social media presence and trying to connect the bitshares community with new actors who want to bring value so they can more accurately assess if the services will accept bitAssets.
It is also about hiring someone from the community who does server upkeep and helps with new initiatives we are trying out.  And the people who edit the content.  This takes time. 
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 06, 2015, 02:43:56 am
Thank you Newmine for speaking-up on this topic. We should seriously as a community look at his list and pick out a couple each week to focus our efforts on evaluating and removing if necessary. At the same time we should be actively discussing who we should be voting to get in.  It is telling that something like this https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=14887.0 run by a guy who has a proven track record cannot get voted in within a reasonable time frame and yet we likely have a few freeloaders who enjoy the lack of outspokenness about their efforts, results and transparency.

There have been three exposed 100% delegate frauds so far. 2 from Yunbi and 1 from blackwavelabs. It would seem that the Eastern side of the world has the most voting power as they easily voted them in and out. Unfortunately the voting power is controlled by two groups, the Dev group and the Chinese group, and if you are not "in" with either of them, you're out of the loop, groups and system as minebitshares appears to be. Perhaps the anti POW sentiment held by those groups is what's holing him down.
Although, if minebitshares is profiting from mining fees in any way I would be against them having a 100% delegate. Maybe a 10% or less would be okay for his funneling of people to the sites.


+5% The scarcity of reddit (and hackernews) forum comments  these days is quite noticable. Nul- street would have been on top of that in the past.

We've had some success of getting to r/bitcoin and HN in the past and it had zero effect on adoption or price.

Our marketing efforts are simply ineffective and we have no word of mouth effect. Public only listens to people they trust and admire and from the bitcoiner's point of view we're no different from a random alter-coin pushers and there's no incentive to get interested and research Bitshares.

Let's face it: we have a terrible distribution. The whole currency/company has been sold to a bunch of random nobodies like you and me with no reputation and no friends in the industry. Makes me appreciate the genius of Bitcoin's production model: if you wanted to get involved, it's future distribution was more or less a blank slate. With Bitshares anyone serious who wants to get involved will be disproportionately enriching a bunch of unknowns who own it.

What is needed are thought leaders and VCs with their contacts, reputation and clout. People who will integrate BitUSD into their verticals. People who will talk about Bitshares on conferences and in the media. People who can make things happen.

But VCs don't buy shares at market price. In fact it would be simply impossible to buy a substantial position from the market. VCs need to be offered something extra to get involved.

What Bitshares needs to survive and thrive is another funding round. It needs to be negotiated in secret and sadly, it has to screw over the existing shareholders (in the short run).

You're probably right about the funding round except that if the existing shareholders are screwed over, that would be the end of everything as the project would get forked or die. The only way to survive a funding is to give someone the keys to AK's BTS windfall that is slowly vesting. The 28 million shares or whatever is still vesting would be a nice incentive for someone in the class of an Overstock or NewEgg or bigger company to incorporate bitUSD payments into their online services.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: ffwong on April 06, 2015, 03:14:22 am
In addition to the *manual* vote out mechanism, why not introduce an *automatic* expiration period to each 100% delegates?

Like a company offering contract (with a duration) to each employee, I don't see why we cannot introduce a similar contract period to each 100% delegate.  After the contract, if the 100% delegate is under-performed, he/she will be simply downgraded to low-pay delegate. Near the end of each contract period, shareholders can decide whether the 100% delegate deserves a contract extension or not. This should be more effective than *manual* vote out. Different 100% delegate can have different contract period depend on their task nature.

Well, just my little suggestion.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 06, 2015, 03:18:56 am
In addition to the *manual* vote out mechanism, why not introduce an *automatic* expiration period to each 100% delegates?

Like a company offering contract (with a duration) to each employee, I don't see why we cannot introduce a similar contract period to each 100% delegate.  After the contract, if the 100% delegate is under-performed, he/she will be simply downgraded to low-pay delegate. Near the end of each contract period, shareholders can decide whether the 100% delegate deserves a contract extension or not. This should be more effective than *manual* vote out. Different 100% delegate can have different contract period depend on their task nature.

Well, just my little suggestion.

I like the idea.  +5%
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: testz on April 06, 2015, 03:21:24 am
@NewMine: I understand that it's not so interesting for you to look closely to every delegate, but please fix in your records:

valzav.payroll.testz   not sure what he does since PTS is gone bye bye. ??

to:
valzav.payroll.testz   Core Dev actively working, also paid by I3 in large sums of BTS.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=12625
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 06, 2015, 03:54:27 am
What this thread looks like to me::


Price goes down.  Community reaction:  "Aaaaaah, panic!  Change things randomly with no plan".


Market reaction:  "They look like they have no plan and no idea what they are doing.  Also things keep changing so I have no idea whats going to happen next.  I'll avoid this".
Therefore price goes down.    Community reaction:  "Aaaaaa, panic!  Change things yet again with no plan".


Etc.



Selling from paid delegates is at most a few percent of the sell pressure which is causing the price to drop.  And yet the response is that some people want to fire every single delegate, that is, just kill off every single project that anyone in the bitshares community is working on.  What do you expect would happen THEN, if you killed off all the promising projects?  How will anything then come out in the future and help the price?


Its a great idea to evaluate delegates and see if they are still working on something valuable, and remove delegates that are not.  That's necessary!      But its silly to suggest that every single paid delegate in existence right now is worthless. 

I would love to see some other people run through every delegate and give opinions on their worthiness.  Maybe there are some that should be voted out.  This is a process that should always be taking place!
But throwing out everything isnt going to do anything positive at this point.



Main reasons for the price decline imo:
1) PTS/etc vesting shares dilution.  This is a MUCH bigger dilution than the paid delegates.  Its a way bigger factor.  Also, its not supporting projects to further the development of Bitshares.  It was merely a bonehead move where Bytemaster proclaimed: "I will murder BTSX, my own creation, using Vote, muahahahah!  Unless we decide to issue 500M more shares instead".  And then we issued 500M shares.

2) Chinese whales and others being pissed off about the dilution, because they wanted a deflationary coin, and thus selling.  Eliminating paid delegates doesnt change this, because the merger shares were the worst of it.

3) General crypto bear market continued.  This wouldve dragged us down some anyway, but without the above issues we would probably have maintained ground in terms of number of satoshi per BTS, and we wouldnt be bitching, we would just be waiting for the whole sector to turn around.


I don't think there is any easy solution to the price decline problem other than:

A) Wait and save some money/BTC/altcoins until BTS gets super cheap, and then the few remaining believers buy out all the bears for cheap.  Once all the shares are into strong hands the downtrend stops.
and
B) Execute well on all Bitshares projects, such as getting out a stable client, improving trading interface, getting moonstone wallet, etc.  (As opposed to us being promised "1.0 by Christmas!  Fiat gateways!  Marketing!" and then fail on every promise).
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: btswildpig on April 06, 2015, 03:55:59 am
www.bts-hk (www.bts.hk) is built and funded by a college student since one year ago .

It pays hundreds of dollars every month in the last year for writers , to produce articles that is related to BitShares : Extensive Tutorials , News , promotion articles ....

I haven't seen one single member from this community who wasn't surprised by their effort and wished there was something similar in the western side .

Everything that's published on www.bts.hk will be published by btc38 exchange on their news page too .

Yep , I know the almighty Newmine may not understand why a website is that important . But I know for a fact that if this site is closed , many Chinese people including me will left BitShares for good .

Also FYI , www.bts-hk only got voted in after several months . So before you bragging theories about how two groups holding minebitshares back by anti POW sentiment , know the reality : The wallet is so buggy , voter with substantial amounts are not willing to open their wallet frequently .

It's sad that you can't read Chinese . In the Chinese side , people are talking about how the dev team has the single biggest voting power to get delegates in .

And the market responsible of the majority of the volume has only 4 full paid delegate  position now . Greedy for them .
I have the same reservation about the way of dilution to pay workers . But as long as this mechanism exist , I doubt anyone with their right mind couldn't see the importance of supporting these 4 full paid delegates .

Let me boil it down for you in case you're lack of information .
The contribution of these full paid delegates is the major reason why many people still has hope .
If any single one of them left the system , the sentiment alone could destroy the remaining confidence the market has .

In fact , if you want the price of BitShares drops further , all you have to do is to hack www.bts.hk and put "We decide to close this site" , then this news alone would be used by the dumpers and one day later you would be looking at 30-40% drop .

Their contributions are there , whether you like to award them with delegate pay or not  . I also know that they've been doing these contributions for a long time without delegate pay in the first place , and they'll keep doing that even without delegate pay . That being said , if you want to single them out as one of those people "sucking blood from the system",

Newmine , you would be out of your damn mind .
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: btswildpig on April 06, 2015, 05:05:52 am
elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.


Nope , elmato is the developer of a cellphone app version of wallet , who happens to be one of the people helping out the marketing in Argentina .
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: betax on April 06, 2015, 05:52:43 am
I believe this is rather sad.

1. We have many delegates that we don't have a clear idea of what are they doing.
2. We have many delegates that started something and currently not doing anything.
3. We have people that do much work and not get 100% (ie xeroc who helps everyone on the forum, no day off).
4. We have delegates that are getting paid by other means and do not need to be financed by the delegate model.

I like the concept mentioned of 100% contract duration. Ie not a lifetime delegate for a 1 month contribution.
If your contribution is not going to be open sourced (MIT) and you are starting a business, I don't understand why it should be financed by the delegate model.
It will be beneficial to know what each delegate is doing, track progress, and major shareholders (ie I3) will vote them out.

And finally mumbles are great BUT it will be fantastic to have a progress / direction sticky page, maybe outcome from the mumble chats, maybe before hand. I find it hard to have to listen to the mumble to get an idea of what is going on, I work during those hours so i cannot collaborate. I guess members who cannot speak English might find it impossible.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: jsidhu on April 06, 2015, 06:31:44 am
In addition to the *manual* vote out mechanism, why not introduce an *automatic* expiration period to each 100% delegates?

Like a company offering contract (with a duration) to each employee, I don't see why we cannot introduce a similar contract period to each 100% delegate.  After the contract, if the 100% delegate is under-performed, he/she will be simply downgraded to low-pay delegate. Near the end of each contract period, shareholders can decide whether the 100% delegate deserves a contract extension or not. This should be more effective than *manual* vote out. Different 100% delegate can have different contract period depend on their task nature.

Well, just my little suggestion.

I like the idea.  +5%
+5%
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: gamey on April 06, 2015, 06:32:06 am
The few Delegates that were 'outright frauds' or whatever were found out very quickly and received minimal free BTS in the grand scheme of things.

The Delegate system might have problems, but they're not that severe.  Reversing them at this point would likely have a negative effect.

Newmine likes to sit around and complain about anyone who does work for money but has likely done nothing himself. His views border on absurd if you were to actually take them that seriously.

This is an interesting discussion, Shareholders need to have it in order to keep on top of things.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode on April 06, 2015, 06:37:37 am
Wonder what would happen if we could 'vote out' users in forums.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: btswildpig on April 06, 2015, 06:53:06 am
Wonder what would happen if we could 'vote out' users in forums.

No , you want to keep Newmine in here .
Otherwise , he'll move his complaints to every part of the world .  :o
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: btswildpig on April 06, 2015, 07:06:44 am
The few Delegates that were 'outright frauds' or whatever were found out very quickly and received minimal free BTS in the grand scheme of things.

The Delegate system might have problems, but they're not that severe.  Reversing them at this point would likely have a negative effect.

Newmine likes to sit around and complain about anyone who does work for money but has likely done nothing himself. His views border on absurd if you were to actually take them that seriously.

This is an interesting discussion, Shareholders need to have it in order to keep on top of things.

Newmine made some valid points in the past , during the merger . Had I have contact with Newmine at that time , I would know more about the merger than watching the forum .

The issue is ,  he likes to make his point through a big entrance kind of style , and even move those styles to BTT .
In the end , it becomes the game where people ignores him even if he made some valid point and considered him the enemy .

If he is just blowing off the steam and never want anything to change , then I won't blame his style .
But if he is actually trying to influence the community  , then he should do it in a way that people would take his advice instead of ignoring it .

By the way . I think the first thing Newmine should do , is to hire some guy who is capable of doing worthless things and could paint it in a beautiful way , then apply for a 100% delegate . He can pay 10% to the worthless guy , let him do some worthless work to satisfy the community , and pocket the 90% .

And if he can get this delegate voted in an actually run for several months , then he can finally come out and say :  Hey , this system is crap , I earned 90% by doing nothing .

By then , I think the community would agree the system is bad .
Why not go for a run ? (I noticed many delegates has none prior relationships with the developers or the whales , I really believe Newmine may pull this off if the system is in fact flawed  . Of course , he needs to register a new name to avoid perception)

Mission Undercover is on ..
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: svk on April 06, 2015, 08:11:25 am
I also thought the merger was a terrible idea, I thought so at the time and still do, but I also think it was forced by large parts of the community overreacting to Bytemaster's comments. He has a tendency of overselling things, and the alleged VOTE secret sauce coming to rule the world was definitely an example of that, apparently there was no such thing.. It joins other incredible developments like imminent fiat on-ramps and "marketing push".

Even so, I still think delegate dilution was a good idea, and blaming delegates for the fall in price is just retarded. NewMine's list of what delegates do just shows how little he actually follows things around here, he does not know who the main developer for the GUI is, he doesn't know that elmato is developing a mobile wallet etc..

So let's look at the facts of delegate dilution: We currently have 29 100% delegates who collectively make 124000 BTS per day. If all of them were to dump it every day (which is not the case), that adds an incredible 700$ of selling pressure. Daily volumes for BTS in this current dry period is around 40k$, so we're talking 1.75% of daily volume.. So can everyone please shut up about delegates dumping being the cause of the price decline? IMO if they (we) weren't here, things would be looking far worse.

For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: cass on April 06, 2015, 10:15:45 am
I also thought the merger was a terrible idea, I thought so at the time and still do, but I also think it was forced by large parts of the community overreacting to Bytemaster's comments. He has a tendency of overselling things, and the alleged VOTE secret sauce coming to rule the world was definitely an example of that, apparently there was no such thing.. It joins other incredible developments like imminent fiat on-ramps and "marketing push".

Even so, I still think delegate dilution was a good idea, and blaming delegates for the fall in price is just retarded. NewMine's list of what delegates do just shows how little he actually follows things around here, he does not know who the main developer for the GUI is, he doesn't know that elmato is developing a mobile wallet etc..

So let's look at the facts of delegate dilution: We currently have 29 100% delegates who collectively make 124000 BTS per day. If all of them were to dump it every day (which is not the case), that adds an incredible 700$ of selling pressure. Daily volumes for BTS in this current dry period is around 40k$, so we're talking 1.75% of daily volume.. So can everyone please shut up about delegates dumping being the cause of the price decline? IMO if they (we) weren't here, things would be looking far worse.

For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.

this  +5% +5% +5% +5%
Completely 2nd that!!!!!!
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: cass on April 06, 2015, 10:19:00 am
For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.

LOF = Lack Of Focussing :)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Stan on April 06, 2015, 01:09:31 pm
I also thought the merger was a terrible idea, I thought so at the time and still do, but I also think it was forced by large parts of the community overreacting to Bytemaster's comments. He has a tendency of overselling things, and the alleged VOTE secret sauce coming to rule the world was definitely an example of that, apparently there was no such thing.. It joins other incredible developments like imminent fiat on-ramps and "marketing push".

Even so, I still think delegate dilution was a good idea, and blaming delegates for the fall in price is just retarded. NewMine's list of what delegates do just shows how little he actually follows things around here, he does not know who the main developer for the GUI is, he doesn't know that elmato is developing a mobile wallet etc..

So let's look at the facts of delegate dilution: We currently have 29 100% delegates who collectively make 124000 BTS per day. If all of them were to dump it every day (which is not the case), that adds an incredible 700$ of selling pressure. Daily volumes for BTS in this current dry period is around 40k$, so we're talking 1.75% of daily volume.. So can everyone please shut up about delegates dumping being the cause of the price decline? IMO if they (we) weren't here, things would be looking far worse.

For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.

It all ties up together.

Vote and DNS would have had funding from paid delegates and the remainder of the post 2/28/14 AGS donations.  We could not fairly honor those later donors by spending their money improving BTSX, so we had to work on VOTE and DNS.  Fair is fair.  So without the merger, BTSX, VOTE and DNS would all have had competing BitAssets splitting the market depth.  And BTSX would have not had ongoing funding like VOTE and DNS.  They would be what BitShares is today (self-funding with all the talent working as their delegates).

Without revealing the still-potent, still secret Vote "secret sauce", the astute student has been given lots of opportunities to read between the lines:   https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15180.msg196071.html#msg196071

One could also argue that the decline is because we stopped promising.  Without constant reminding, people tend to forget that we are still committed to the grand vision and working on it without talking more about it till it's done.
As for underdelivering, go back and look at what we were promising when the AGS program started.  We have WAY overdelivered since those days.

We are in a transition period where we are moving from talking about great stuff months in advance to talking about it only once its delivered.  This naturally causes a multi-month lull in excitement until things that were once out on the horizon move into our rear view mirror.

But nothing stops those of you with good memories from talking about it.   :)





Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: gamey on April 06, 2015, 02:54:51 pm
Perhaps others can learn from these mistakes.

I don't think DNS's bitassets were ever going to compete with BitShares.  You can have someone telling you that, but look at the liquidity of those markets in the past 1/2 a year.  I don't even think DNS would have used bitassets. There was too much important stuff being done that BTS is not even touching.  There are not that many businesses a DAC can actually do that are nailed so wonderfully like DNS and related services.

See everyone talked about how a merging made sense in a general business sense... "network effect" they all say .. but they appeared to forget why the D and A in DAC are useful.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 06, 2015, 03:11:08 pm
Perhaps others can learn from these mistakes.

I don't think DNS's bitassets were ever going to compete with BitShares.  You can have someone telling you that, but look at the liquidity of those markets in the past 1/2 a year.  I don't even think DNS would have used bitassets. There was too much important stuff being done that BTS is not even touching.  There are not that many businesses a DAC can actually do that are nailed so wonderfully like DNS and related services.

See everyone talked about how a merging made sense in a general business sense... "network effect" they all say .. but they appeared to forget why the D and A in DAC are useful.

Otherwise agreed.  We don't see PLAY or MUSIC having their own version of bitUSD.  In fact, you see them using the BitShares version.  I see no reason why this would not have been the case with Vote and DNS.  In fact, I think it would have left it open for the market to fairly value each separate chain AND the service it planned to provide.  You also would have had people like Toast working on DNS and bringing in a team of people very passionate about one thing: Decentralized DNS.  That DAC would have funded the building of Decentralized DNS DACs that easily plug into future BitShares browsers, wallets, apps...etc.  Each would have drawn in different demographics and then as they all grew, they could start implementing feature sets employed in other DACs.  And each chain would have its own marketing delegates with their own focused message. 

The merger was a mistake in my mind and always has been, but you can already see the consensus on it and it hasn't killed BitShares at all.  So lets look at what we see already:
Marketcap is down lower.
Toast is working on a BitShares-related project that will strengthen the entire ecosystem overall anyway.  I would personally like him to resurrect DNS through a sharedrop on the old DNS tokens.
Adam is still working separately on Vote. I would like to see him sharedrop shares from follow my vote on the shareholders that helped fund him with a good few BTS (even at current prices)...and then we would be back to square one, only with things like mining real Gold and Silver with the BitShares Flagship DAC.
The merger confused all of us and even the marketing delegates as to what our identity was.  It was a move I believe made out of fear, but literally none of the BitShares based DACs have died.  They all exist, just waiting to be dusted off like an old, mean race car that sat in the shed a couple years too long. 

Lets face it...they would all work together because a pack is more powerful than flying solo in an ocean with big sharks.  If those two things happened, and all parties worked together to make it work for at least a designated period of time, I think each chain would become ridiculously valuable and in return would bring more people to fight for the cause building tools that would be useful for all BitShares-based DACs.

I'd honestly prefer Toast's and Adam's opinion on it though.  I mean, would they have tried to make their own USD?  And if they would have, would it have been like 10 years down the road or did they plan on competing in the same space?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: svk on April 06, 2015, 03:15:03 pm
I also thought the merger was a terrible idea, I thought so at the time and still do, but I also think it was forced by large parts of the community overreacting to Bytemaster's comments. He has a tendency of overselling things, and the alleged VOTE secret sauce coming to rule the world was definitely an example of that, apparently there was no such thing.. It joins other incredible developments like imminent fiat on-ramps and "marketing push".

Even so, I still think delegate dilution was a good idea, and blaming delegates for the fall in price is just retarded. NewMine's list of what delegates do just shows how little he actually follows things around here, he does not know who the main developer for the GUI is, he doesn't know that elmato is developing a mobile wallet etc..

So let's look at the facts of delegate dilution: We currently have 29 100% delegates who collectively make 124000 BTS per day. If all of them were to dump it every day (which is not the case), that adds an incredible 700$ of selling pressure. Daily volumes for BTS in this current dry period is around 40k$, so we're talking 1.75% of daily volume.. So can everyone please shut up about delegates dumping being the cause of the price decline? IMO if they (we) weren't here, things would be looking far worse.

For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.

It all ties up together.

Vote and DNS would have had funding from paid delegates and the remainder of the post 2/28/14 AGS donations.  We could not fairly honor those later donors by spending their money improving BTSX, so we had to work on VOTE and DNS.  Fair is fair.  So without the merger, BTSX, VOTE and DNS would all have had competing BitAssets splitting the market depth.  And BTSX would have not had ongoing funding like VOTE and DNS.  They would be what BitShares is today (self-funding with all the talent working as their delegates).

Without revealing the still-potent, still secret Vote "secret sauce", the astute student has been given lots of opportunities to read between the lines:   https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15180.msg196071.html#msg196071

One could also argue that the decline is because we stopped promising.  Without constant reminding, people tend to forget that we are still committed to the grand vision and working on it without talking more about it till it's done.
As for underdelivering, go back and look at what we were promising when the AGS program started.  We have WAY overdelivered since those days.

We are in a transition period where we are moving from talking about great stuff months in advance to talking about it only once its delivered.  This naturally causes a multi-month lull in excitement until things that were once out on the horizon move into our rear view mirror.

But nothing stops those of you with good memories from talking about it.   :)

I'm sorry but you're doing it again, hinting at something great on the horizon without providing anything of substance to back it up. We've been made promises like that for the last 6 months at least and personally I'm getting tired of it. The VOTE video in that comment has a grand total of 260 views, at least three of which are mine.. I don't like being all negative but considering the negative impact the merger of VOTE has had, as well as the major financial "donation" made to AK through the merger, I really don't think we got a good deal..

I have to add that I also feel you're rewriting history when you present the merger as something nice and orderly like that, at least to me it felt more like a knee-jerk reaction to a market panic caused by an offhand remark by Bytemaster. An important part of the original vision died in that knee-jerk reaction, the idea of a multitude of DACs fiercely competing or peacefully coexisting, focusing on different niches in a darwinian environment where only the strongest would survive. I for one loved that vision and was sad to see it disappear.

Now I'm not saying we have a bad product or that you haven't delivered with Bitshares, I love Bitshares and use the client almost every day and generally think it's an amazing product. But claims such as the alleged VOTE secret sauce and how DNS was super-easy and would be implemented in no time at all are where I think you over-promised.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: nomoreheroes7 on April 06, 2015, 03:28:17 pm
It all ties up together.

Vote and DNS would have had funding from paid delegates and the remainder of the post 2/28/14 AGS donations.  We could not fairly honor those later donors by spending their money improving BTSX, so we had to work on VOTE and DNS.  Fair is fair.  So without the merger, BTSX, VOTE and DNS would all have had competing BitAssets splitting the market depth.  And BTSX would have not had ongoing funding like VOTE and DNS.  They would be what BitShares is today (self-funding with all the talent working as their delegates).

Without revealing the still-potent, still secret Vote "secret sauce", the astute student has been given lots of opportunities to read between the lines:   https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15180.msg196071.html#msg196071

One could also argue that the decline is because we stopped promising.  Without constant reminding, people tend to forget that we are still committed to the grand vision and working on it without talking more about it till it's done.
As for underdelivering, go back and look at what we were promising when the AGS program started.  We have WAY overdelivered since those days.

We are in a transition period where we are moving from talking about great stuff months in advance to talking about it only once its delivered.  This naturally causes a multi-month lull in excitement until things that were once out on the horizon move into our rear view mirror.

But nothing stops those of you with good memories from talking about it.   :)

I'm sorry but you're doing it again, hinting at something great on the horizon without providing anything of substance to back it up. We've been made promises like that for the last 6 months at least and personally I'm getting tired of it. The VOTE video in that comment has a grand total of 260 views, at least three of which are mine.. I don't like being all negative but considering the negative impact the merger of VOTE has had, as well as the major financial "donation" made to AK through the merger, I really don't think we got a good deal..

I have to add that I also feel you're rewriting history when you present the merger as something nice and orderly like that, at least to me it felt more like a knee-jerk reaction to a market panic caused by an offhand remark by Bytemaster. An important part of the original vision died in that knee-jerk reaction, the idea of a multitude of DACs fiercely competing or peacefully coexisting, focusing on different niches in a darwinian environment where only the strongest would survive. I for one loved that vision and was sad to see it disappear.

Now I'm not saying we have a bad product or that you haven't delivered with Bitshares, I love Bitshares and use the client almost every day and generally think it's an amazing product. But claims such as the alleged VOTE secret sauce and how DNS was super-easy and would be implemented in no time at all are where I think you over-promised.

 +5%. Enough with the teasing, we need concrete details/clear vision. Constantly being told to "think bigger" and that "things are happening" simply doesn't instill confidence, since we've seen for months now that these things may very well not be true.

I know I never would have bought so many BTS around October-November last year if I would've known so many promises were just hot air. Really irksome and truly feels like I've been lied to. Still hodling BTS because I've got nothing better to hold at this point (and all my BTS are stuck in a 0.8.0 glitch, still waiting on that fix in 0.9.0 for over a month now. Ugh). Just sucks.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 06, 2015, 03:37:11 pm
I'm still silly in love with the entire project though.  Being a founding member in a budding organization...is definitely not easy.  And mistakes will be made.
Looking at improving is the only way to go forward.  Anything else is a stubborn waste of time. 
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Akado on April 06, 2015, 03:41:02 pm
My only problem with the "non-merger" option is actually the resources we have. We don't have a dev team that big. Imagine that spread over 3 DACs.. progress would be so much slower, we probably wouldn't have nothing to show by now. If you think the BitShares client is taking too long, imagine having the team working on that divided in 3 or more. We don't have the luxury to waste resources and time on other DACs at the moment.

I'm not saying the merger didn't have an impact. It certainly did, obviously and honestly I'm still divided between the 2 options, but think about it for a moment, where would you be now with a dev team divided and working on different projects? You wouldn't have the same focus, things would be much slower and like I said, at the moment we just can't have that luxury if we want to stay on the game. We don't have the time, the resources or the money to do that.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode on April 06, 2015, 04:05:19 pm
Didn't like this.. didn't iike that.. this was your mistake.. I told you so... Could'a Should'a Would'a Didn't... looking back you did this wrong.

Ok.. I covered everything for everyone just now.. so how about talking about what to do next?

What can YOU do next that will make BitShares Better?

Whether the points or valid or not.. where do we go from 'here'?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: BTSdac on April 06, 2015, 04:27:07 pm
Everybody needs to "vote out" all 100% delegates!

Is the current $800 salary worth the downward pressure and negative perception from both outsiders and the departing faithful?

What are the non-developer delegates actually doing that warrants any pay at this point? 

The marketing teams have had the reverse effects of what was thought or promised; adoption is stagnant and share price has fallen. Max is the only one that has produced anything tangible and maybe the only person amongst the so called marketing people that deserves a slot.

I would easily bet more than half the 100% delegates do absolutely nothing other than working hard at making it seem like they are working hard while holding on to a hope and prayer that BTS launches to the moon and they get a free windfall out of the BTS they have sucked out of the system for free.

The time is now!

Vote these people out!

At least try it out and see what happens to the price.

$800 per month isn't going to make or break anyone who is legitimately doing something for the cause at this point and they should be more than willing to try out something that could bring more benefit to current shareholders who are hurting.
 



Oh wait, I forgot.  The people with the most shares and therefor a majority of the votes are all delegates themselves. 

Well, whatever.  Never mind.
yes you are right we should vote out all 100% pay delegate now , at least all marketing delegate.  i admit the up words with  temper ,
but
why the price of bts always dump and dump, what the 100% pay delegate bring to bts?


 
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 06, 2015, 04:30:36 pm
I know I never would have bought so many BTS around October-November last year if I would've known so many promises were just hot air. Really irksome and truly feels like I've been lied to.
Yes this.  None of us wouldve bought as much BTS as we did if we knew those things werent true.
This is probably the biggest reason the price has declined, because of the need for the market to find the correct value of BTS given that these things are either not happening or not happening until later down the road.  (Dilution shares + anger over dilution is the other big reason). 

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: BTSdac on April 06, 2015, 04:50:02 pm
Right now Fuzzy is bringing people together, organizing weekly mumbles, and helping spread information to our community.   I highly value his contributions because his mumble sessions are how many people meet up. 

I think all of this focus on the "price" is a sign that people have lost their way, the price will not start growing until we stop watching it.   Who wants to buy into a community that is in panic about the price when we are all here to do so much more.   

It is about our mission and common interests.   Is there anything else out there that can compete with DPOS and BitAssets?

Assume BTS was worth nothing, this community is still very valuable.
do you  satisfied with marketing delegates, you don`t need to tell me ,but we can get data from new register account ,it is never increase。 we know you control many bts include ags fund ,   also I suggest that you cannot use ags fund to vote any 100% pay rate delegate?
how to do you think ,this suggestion.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: oldman on April 06, 2015, 05:20:09 pm
Anyone want a job?

Put up a website that tracks the 100% delegates: who they are, what they promised to do, what they've done and what they are doing.

Your job is to shine a light on the delegates.

I and many others will vote you in as a 100% paid delegate.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mdj on April 06, 2015, 05:41:18 pm
Anyone want a job?

Put up a website that tracks the 100% delegates: who they are, what they promised to do, what they've done and what they are doing.

Your job is to shine a light on the delegates.

I and many others will vote you in as a 100% paid delegate.

 +5% This certainly need consolidating. Would also be great to see delegates burning updates on their walls which we would quickly be able to see as a kind of status update in the client?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: liondani on April 06, 2015, 05:47:23 pm
Don't blame me, but posts like that are for me a big buy signal...  Sadly I am out of fiat...   :)

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 997D

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: xeroc on April 06, 2015, 05:55:54 pm
Quick quote from #bitcoin:
Quote
= 11:44:18|  tuneinturnout> https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-documentation <-- Where is the config file documentation?
= 11:47:05|  wumpus> tuneinturnout: try bitcoind --help
= 11:47:15|  wumpus> tuneinturnout: or the example config file here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/debian/examples/bitcoin.conf
= 12:02:03|  tuneinturnout> wumpus: I can't get it documented other than those ways?
= 12:08:20|  wumpus> tuneinturnout: why?
= 13:08:06|  tuneinturnout> wumpus: Because I want it to be official and linkable.
= 13:08:12|  tuneinturnout> wumpus: Not some random GitHub page.
= 13:08:19|  wumpus> there is nothing official
= 13:08:19|  tuneinturnout> Or having to deal with an awful man page in SSH.
= 13:08:32|  wumpus> it's all a volunteer effort, if you think it's not enough, improve it
= 13:08:45|  tuneinturnout> I don't have unlimited time.
= 13:08:48|  wumpus> no one has
= 13:08:57|  tuneinturnout> The ones who should be doing it should be doing it.
= 13:09:05|  wumpus> no one 'should be doing' this
= 13:09:10|  wumpus> no one is paid to do it
= 13:09:15|  tuneinturnout> Yes, they are.
= 13:09:38|  tuneinturnout> And yes, they should.
= 13:09:39|  wumpus> no, they're not. The documentation site is a volunteer, open source effort.
= 13:09:49|  wumpus> it's not up to you to decide what anyone else should do
= 13:10:32|  tuneinturnout> Getting info is very hard.
= 13:10:42|  wumpus> you should be happy that there is any documentation at all

guess what ... they are talking "documantation" only ..
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: gamey on April 06, 2015, 06:02:32 pm
My only problem with the "non-merger" option is actually the resources we have. We don't have a dev team that big. Imagine that spread over 3 DACs.. progress would be so much slower, we probably wouldn't have nothing to show by now. If you think the BitShares client is taking too long, imagine having the team working on that divided in 3 or more. We don't have the luxury to waste resources and time on other DACs at the moment.

I'm not saying the merger didn't have an impact. It certainly did, obviously and honestly I'm still divided between the 2 options, but think about it for a moment, where would you be now with a dev team divided and working on different projects? You wouldn't have the same focus, things would be much slower and like I said, at the moment we just can't have that luxury if we want to stay on the game. We don't have the time, the resources or the money to do that.

We would have significantly more resources if the price had stayed higher. DNS may have kept a market cap close to that of namecoin. Toast could have likely hired other developers. No one really knows.

The difference between BitShares and other "coins" is not that significant. DNS was a DAC with an immediate demand and little competition.  What competition it did have has 0 ways to fund itself.

Bitcoiners would not necessarily be threatened by it since it was not a competing currency, but more of a pure DAC.  Oh well.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: svk on April 06, 2015, 06:39:21 pm
Didn't like this.. didn't iike that.. this was your mistake.. I told you so... Could'a Should'a Would'a Didn't... looking back you did this wrong.

Ok.. I covered everything for everyone just now.. so how about talking about what to do next?

What can YOU do next that will make BitShares Better?

Whether the points or valid or not.. where do we go from 'here'?

Personally I am working almost every day to make Bitshares better by improving the wallet or adding features to Bitsharesblocks.

I agree we need to look forward and contribute positively, but it's hard to figure out how to go forward if one does not know the past and analyzes what went wrong. That being said, harping on about old mistakes is not constructive either.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mint chocolate chip on April 06, 2015, 07:11:55 pm

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: onceuponatime on April 06, 2015, 07:16:09 pm

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Empirical1.2 on April 06, 2015, 07:32:02 pm
Let's all move to BitShares PTS!   :P

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Geneko on April 06, 2015, 07:33:13 pm
Congratulations to NewMine! He opened some questions (reason not quite impressing) about voting mechanism that is not so obvious. And it is about one thing, does it work or not.

Model of collecting funds is the one that state has, in form of invisible tax imposed by dilution. And it is quite good, much better, much more acceptable then direct taxation. But on the spending side it is real mess.
 
Imagine a company that has hired its employees and leave them organize by itself. Their work accomplishment has little or nothing to do with its salary. What would they do? How long before everyone recognize that with effort or not your music is playing. Those positions are like paid positions of some bureaucrat. What does he need to do to earn his salary? He only need to jump position ones and he is set.

Now, most of delegates are honest highly valued employees. They are all here because they share higher cause (and to make some buck along). But don’t underestimate the forces of nature (aka Game Theory). Over time system will make them lazy and corrupt. They will face two options. Those that value honesty above all will leave and those stubborn will have to adopt to crowds nature. So voting system sucks. Does it need improvement? I have no doubt.

This price decline is so depressing. It is overall sample of present project situation.
There is only one thing that concerns me. There is lot of pressure on BM and the team lately. I think they are not conscious of this, but those pressures could make them make mistake(again) if they are not careful enough. On the other hand if they lose courage to make tough decisions and adopt this project could face valley of dead.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mint chocolate chip on April 06, 2015, 08:07:33 pm

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)

http://bitsharesblog.com
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Pheonike on April 06, 2015, 08:27:10 pm
Its alright to have a decentralize source of raising funds through delegates, but in in order have accountability on spending there needs to be some kind of centralize body for oversight. If you have a thousand ppl with a thousands ideas of success then  there's nothing but confusion.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: xh3 on April 06, 2015, 08:36:49 pm
disorganized
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: arhag on April 06, 2015, 08:45:57 pm
We don't see PLAY or MUSIC having their own version of bitUSD.  In fact, you see them using the BitShares version.

I haven't been following Play lately, but who says they, especially Music, aren't/won't be using their own version of BitUSD? The Music blockchain isn't ready yet, so how can you make that claim? Unless there is some huge news I somehow missed, I am sure Music will have its own version of BitUSD.

I see no reason why this would not have been the case with Vote and DNS. In fact, I think it would have left it open for the market to fairly value each separate chain AND the service it planned to provide.  You also would have had people like Toast working on DNS and bringing in a team of people very passionate about one thing: Decentralized DNS.  That DAC would have funded the building of Decentralized DNS DACs that easily plug into future BitShares browsers, wallets, apps...etc.  Each would have drawn in different demographics and then as they all grew, they could start implementing feature sets employed in other DACs.  And each chain would have its own marketing delegates with their own focused message. 

Yeah that's great except they all need a stable foundation blockchain to build on and also all either need or greatly benefit from the BitAsset system as well. Bidding on domain names isn't that great when you have to account for the price volatility of your DNS token over the 30 day bid period, for example. Using BitUSD would be better. Music lovers would rather pay 99 cents for a song rather than 1500 NOTE today but then 1800 NOTE tomorrow, for example. Great so they can each have their own BitAssets except now they split liquidity across many chains making each of the BitAssets worse than they would be if they were all on the same chain.

Okay, so let's have them all use the same BitAsset as the one on the BitShares X chain. Well this is a technically tricky but doable with some trade-offs. I have discussed a way this could be done in the past and have since become a stronger and stronger advocate of this approach. But even then, it takes lots of coding and testing before such functionality would be available for use. So then core devs need to work on that. But that work is reusable on all other blockchains, so it would make the most sense for the BitShares X devs to work on that and then when it is done all the other chains can adopt that technology. And their chains aren't really 1.0 ready until that feature is ready. They can work on the other business logic of the chain in parallel though if they can get the funding to do so.

So now you have BitShares X devs working on improving the foundations of the blockchain and BitAsset system. They are improving the performance, eliminating bugs, improving the market engine, and developing the new features needed to allow other chains to use BTSX's BitAssets. How long would this take and what resources would it require? Well we know at least how long it would take all of our core devs working on all but the last thing. That is because that is exactly what they are working on right now and they are still not done. It all took WAY longer than originally promised. That's what happens in software development. Also, it basically took all of the money I3 had raised (in fact, with all the price drops, how much longer do the core devs have before their year-end bonuses aren't enough to even pay them an unsustainably low wage for their services?) and some small additional money from delegate dilution pay.

Would there be enough money available to allow them to finish that task much less any extra to devote to OTHER devs working on VOTE and DNS functionality in parallel? Where would that money come from? Crowdfunding similar DPOS blockchain related projects would likely just be taking away buy pressure from BTSX, which would reduce the delegate dilution pay for the core devs working on the foundation of the blockchain. We are a small group and not growing fast enough. But to grow fast enough we need a compelling product to sell to others who haven't bought into the vision yet. That means going after the really high value services and providing those services in a very high quality way. A decentralized exchange on a very robust platform with a fast lightweight client that looks beautiful and is easy to use is what is required. This is part of the foundation that other DACs depend on. It makes no sense to waste limited resources (money and dev talent) on things that are not going to grow the token's value fast enough. We need the token value to grow because that is the source of revenue to pay for more devs who will then be able to work on many interesting different blockchain services and features in parallel.

So the way I see it, the economics of the situation would have forced DNS and VOTE to languish anyway until enough of the BitShares X foundation was built. What is worse is that they would have avoided paying for the cost of the foundation that they use since the dilution would have been for BTSX only and not of the other DACs' tokens. I think the BitShares ecosystem would have not looked very differently in terms of functionality available or user adoption at this point in time, and I would even say we would have most likely been worse off than we currently are.

At this point, I think we just need to finish getting the core blockchain technology and the client software polished to get user adoption to increase and hopefully have the price of BTS increase, and then use those extra resources paid for through delegate dilution of the higher BTS price to build the functionality necessary to allow third-parties to concurrently build DApps and/or child DACs on the BitShares platform with minimal effort while using BTS's BitAssets and even leveraging the consensus/networking systems of the BTS blockchain (basically "Turing complete scripts" but done by allowing the validators or "child DAC delegates" to run arbitrary sandboxed executable code that implements the business logic of their DAC/DApp and uses the BTS blockchain and optionally their own nested blockchains, which are committed to the BTS parent blockchain, as the persistent data store for their DAC/DApp). Once this foundation is set, my hope is that we can have developer resources explode and see many third-parties concurrently working on new features like prediction markets, bond markets, voting, DNS, etc.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: onceuponatime on April 06, 2015, 08:48:32 pm

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)

http://bitsharesblog.com

I would be interested in seeing  your analysis of the value of the "selected group of delegates" above being placed on http://bitsharesblog.com

I keep up to date with delegates and take my vote away from those I consider to not be adding potential to BitShares.

That involves a lot of work on my part. I was on Marketing conference calls with some of the delegates for many hours this past Easter weekend.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: jaran on April 06, 2015, 10:04:09 pm
We don't see PLAY or MUSIC having their own version of bitUSD.  In fact, you see them using the BitShares version.

I haven't been following Play lately, but who says they, especially Music, aren't/won't be using their own version of BitUSD? The Music blockchain isn't ready yet, so how can you make that claim? Unless there is some huge news I somehow missed, I am sure Music will have its own version of BitUSD.


Ya I wonder where that info is coming from as well.  It sounds like MUSIC is being designed to not rely on bitshares or bitcoin based on the last minor update.  Maybe we will find out this friday when they tell us a little more about what NOTES actually are.

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mint chocolate chip on April 07, 2015, 01:56:47 am

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)

http://bitsharesblog.com

I would be interested in seeing  your analysis of the value of the "selected group of delegates" above being placed on http://bitsharesblog.com

I keep up to date with delegates and take my vote away from those I consider to not be adding potential to BitShares.

That involves a lot of work on my part. I was on Marketing conference calls with some of the delegates for many hours this past Easter weekend.

What we need to do is encourage dialogue to evaluate the delegates. I picked out a handful from Newmine's list and would love to hear your opinions on them as well as everyone else's. This is something we should be doing, it is more constructive than simply bemoaning the price.

What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode on April 07, 2015, 02:14:35 am
We don't see PLAY or MUSIC having their own version of bitUSD.  In fact, you see them using the BitShares version.

I haven't been following Play lately, but who says they, especially Music, aren't/won't be using their own version of BitUSD? The Music blockchain isn't ready yet, so how can you make that claim? Unless there is some huge news I somehow missed, I am sure Music will have its own version of BitUSD.

I see no reason why this would not have been the case with Vote and DNS. In fact, I think it would have left it open for the market to fairly value each separate chain AND the service it planned to provide.  You also would have had people like Toast working on DNS and bringing in a team of people very passionate about one thing: Decentralized DNS.  That DAC would have funded the building of Decentralized DNS DACs that easily plug into future BitShares browsers, wallets, apps...etc.  Each would have drawn in different demographics and then as they all grew, they could start implementing feature sets employed in other DACs.  And each chain would have its own marketing delegates with their own focused message. 

Yeah that's great except they all need a stable foundation blockchain to build on and also all either need or greatly benefit from the BitAsset system as well. Bidding on domain names isn't that great when you have to account for the price volatility of your DNS token over the 30 day bid period, for example. Using BitUSD would be better. Music lovers would rather pay 99 cents for a song rather than 1500 NOTE today but then 1800 NOTE tomorrow, for example. Great so they can each have their own BitAssets except now they split liquidity across many chains making each of the BitAssets worse than they would be if they were all on the same chain.

Okay, so let's have them all use the same BitAsset as the one on the BitShares X chain. Well this is a technically tricky but doable with some trade-offs. I have discussed a way this could be done in the past and have since become a stronger and stronger advocate of this approach. But even then, it takes lots of coding and testing before such functionality would be available for use. So then core devs need to work on that. But that work is reusable on all other blockchains, so it would make the most sense for the BitShares X devs to work on that and then when it is done all the other chains can adopt that technology. And their chains aren't really 1.0 ready until that feature is ready. They can work on the other business logic of the chain in parallel though if they can get the funding to do so.

So now you have BitShares X devs working on improving the foundations of the blockchain and BitAsset system. They are improving the performance, eliminating bugs, improving the market engine, and developing the new features needed to allow other chains to use BTSX's BitAssets. How long would this take and what resources would it require? Well we know at least how long it would take all of our core devs working on all but the last thing. That is because that is exactly what they are working on right now and they are still not done. It all took WAY longer than originally promised. That's what happens in software development. Also, it basically took all of the money I3 had raised (in fact, with all the price drops, how much longer do the core devs have before their year-end bonuses aren't enough to even pay them an unsustainably low wage for their services?) and some small additional money from delegate dilution pay.

Would there be enough money available to allow them to finish that task much less any extra to devote to OTHER devs working on VOTE and DNS functionality in parallel? Where would that money come from? Crowdfunding similar DPOS blockchain related projects would likely just be taking away buy pressure from BTSX, which would reduce the delegate dilution pay for the core devs working on the foundation of the blockchain. We are a small group and not growing fast enough. But to grow fast enough we need a compelling product to sell to others who haven't bought into the vision yet. That means going after the really high value services and providing those services in a very high quality way. A decentralized exchange on a very robust platform with a fast lightweight client that looks beautiful and is easy to use is what is required. This is part of the foundation that other DACs depend on. It makes no sense to waste limited resources (money and dev talent) on things that are not going to grow the token's value fast enough. We need the token value to grow because that is the source of revenue to pay for more devs who will then be able to work on many interesting different blockchain services and features in parallel.

So the way I see it, the economics of the situation would have forced DNS and VOTE to languish anyway until enough of the BitShares X foundation was built. What is worse is that they would have avoided paying for the cost of the foundation that they use since the dilution would have been for BTSX only and not of the other DACs' tokens. I think the BitShares ecosystem would have not looked very differently in terms of functionality available or user adoption at this point in time, and I would even say we would have most likely been worse off than we currently are.

At this point, I think we just need to finish getting the core blockchain technology and the client software polished to get user adoption to increase and hopefully have the price of BTS increase, and then use those extra resources paid for through delegate dilution of the higher BTS price to build the functionality necessary to allow third-parties to concurrently build DApps and/or child DACs on the BitShares platform with minimal effort while using BTS's BitAssets and even leveraging the consensus/networking systems of the BTS blockchain (basically "Turing complete scripts" but done by allowing the validators or "child DAC delegates" to run arbitrary sandboxed executable code that implements the business logic of their DAC/DApp and uses the BTS blockchain and optionally their own nested blockchains, which are committed to the BTS parent blockchain, as the persistent data store for their DAC/DApp). Once this foundation is set, my hope is that we can have developer resources explode and see many third-parties concurrently working on new features like prediction markets, bond markets, voting, DNS, etc.

Well said and great analysis  +5%
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Stan on April 07, 2015, 02:51:31 am
What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

Another way your could choose to look at it is that, as we grow, delegates are destined to become small businesses funding perhaps several people to accomplish their tasks.  Under that model, people might come and go while the business remains in good graces.  If that is not philosophically objectionable to you, then having delegates find someone to "take over" for them on the mission they were hired to do (as a proto-business) seems like it could be perfectly natural.

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Stan on April 07, 2015, 03:04:23 am
We don't see PLAY or MUSIC having their own version of bitUSD.  In fact, you see them using the BitShares version.

I haven't been following Play lately, but who says they, especially Music, aren't/won't be using their own version of BitUSD? The Music blockchain isn't ready yet, so how can you make that claim? Unless there is some huge news I somehow missed, I am sure Music will have its own version of BitUSD.

I see no reason why this would not have been the case with Vote and DNS. In fact, I think it would have left it open for the market to fairly value each separate chain AND the service it planned to provide.  You also would have had people like Toast working on DNS and bringing in a team of people very passionate about one thing: Decentralized DNS.  That DAC would have funded the building of Decentralized DNS DACs that easily plug into future BitShares browsers, wallets, apps...etc.  Each would have drawn in different demographics and then as they all grew, they could start implementing feature sets employed in other DACs.  And each chain would have its own marketing delegates with their own focused message. 

Yeah that's great except they all need a stable foundation blockchain to build on and also all either need or greatly benefit from the BitAsset system as well. Bidding on domain names isn't that great when you have to account for the price volatility of your DNS token over the 30 day bid period, for example. Using BitUSD would be better. Music lovers would rather pay 99 cents for a song rather than 1500 NOTE today but then 1800 NOTE tomorrow, for example. Great so they can each have their own BitAssets except now they split liquidity across many chains making each of the BitAssets worse than they would be if they were all on the same chain.

Okay, so let's have them all use the same BitAsset as the one on the BitShares X chain. Well this is a technically tricky but doable with some trade-offs. I have discussed a way this could be done in the past and have since become a stronger and stronger advocate of this approach. But even then, it takes lots of coding and testing before such functionality would be available for use. So then core devs need to work on that. But that work is reusable on all other blockchains, so it would make the most sense for the BitShares X devs to work on that and then when it is done all the other chains can adopt that technology. And their chains aren't really 1.0 ready until that feature is ready. They can work on the other business logic of the chain in parallel though if they can get the funding to do so.

So now you have BitShares X devs working on improving the foundations of the blockchain and BitAsset system. They are improving the performance, eliminating bugs, improving the market engine, and developing the new features needed to allow other chains to use BTSX's BitAssets. How long would this take and what resources would it require? Well we know at least how long it would take all of our core devs working on all but the last thing. That is because that is exactly what they are working on right now and they are still not done. It all took WAY longer than originally promised. That's what happens in software development. Also, it basically took all of the money I3 had raised (in fact, with all the price drops, how much longer do the core devs have before their year-end bonuses aren't enough to even pay them an unsustainably low wage for their services?) and some small additional money from delegate dilution pay.

Would there be enough money available to allow them to finish that task much less any extra to devote to OTHER devs working on VOTE and DNS functionality in parallel? Where would that money come from? Crowdfunding similar DPOS blockchain related projects would likely just be taking away buy pressure from BTSX, which would reduce the delegate dilution pay for the core devs working on the foundation of the blockchain. We are a small group and not growing fast enough. But to grow fast enough we need a compelling product to sell to others who haven't bought into the vision yet. That means going after the really high value services and providing those services in a very high quality way. A decentralized exchange on a very robust platform with a fast lightweight client that looks beautiful and is easy to use is what is required. This is part of the foundation that other DACs depend on. It makes no sense to waste limited resources (money and dev talent) on things that are not going to grow the token's value fast enough. We need the token value to grow because that is the source of revenue to pay for more devs who will then be able to work on many interesting different blockchain services and features in parallel.

So the way I see it, the economics of the situation would have forced DNS and VOTE to languish anyway until enough of the BitShares X foundation was built. What is worse is that they would have avoided paying for the cost of the foundation that they use since the dilution would have been for BTSX only and not of the other DACs' tokens. I think the BitShares ecosystem would have not looked very differently in terms of functionality available or user adoption at this point in time, and I would even say we would have most likely been worse off than we currently are.

At this point, I think we just need to finish getting the core blockchain technology and the client software polished to get user adoption to increase and hopefully have the price of BTS increase, and then use those extra resources paid for through delegate dilution of the higher BTS price to build the functionality necessary to allow third-parties to concurrently build DApps and/or child DACs on the BitShares platform with minimal effort while using BTS's BitAssets and even leveraging the consensus/networking systems of the BTS blockchain (basically "Turing complete scripts" but done by allowing the validators or "child DAC delegates" to run arbitrary sandboxed executable code that implements the business logic of their DAC/DApp and uses the BTS blockchain and optionally their own nested blockchains, which are committed to the BTS parent blockchain, as the persistent data store for their DAC/DApp). Once this foundation is set, my hope is that we can have developer resources explode and see many third-parties concurrently working on new features like prediction markets, bond markets, voting, DNS, etc.

A much appreciated dose of clear thinking!

BitShares will prosper most if it can act as a platform where many business models drive demand for BitShares and generate transaction fees.

There are many benefits to integrating multiple business models onto one block chain.  Remember all these?

What is a SuperDAC?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/tinkerbb/1932%20hoods/superduck.jpg)

Quote
SuperDAC - noun - soup-er-dak
A Decentralized Autonomous Company (DAC) providing common services that support layering of other DAC business models onto a common public ledger for the sake of shared network effect.
The need to merge our various DACs into a single "SuperDAC" was based on the realization that they all needed a whole bunch of common services that are much less effective if they aren't common services:
New business developers (DAC engineers) shouldn't want to reinvent these things any more than I would want to reinvent my computer's device drivers and operating system.  And what sense would it make to have different competing operating systems, each with a subset of drivers and services?




Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: zerosum on April 07, 2015, 03:27:27 am

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)
Which is not correct. The research I have done. 1,2 5 and 6 seem pretty accurate!

Which one is not correct ?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Tuck Fheman on April 07, 2015, 03:27:38 am
Wonder what would happen if we could 'vote out' users in forums.

I wonder if there's some historic precedence we could research and find out? hmmm
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: zerosum on April 07, 2015, 03:33:16 am
I also thought the merger was a terrible idea, I thought so at the time and still do, but I also think it was forced by large parts of the community overreacting to Bytemaster's comments. He has a tendency of overselling things, and the alleged VOTE secret sauce coming to rule the world was definitely an example of that, apparently there was no such thing.. It joins other incredible developments like imminent fiat on-ramps and "marketing push".

Even so, I still think delegate dilution was a good idea, and blaming delegates for the fall in price is just retarded. NewMine's list of what delegates do just shows how little he actually follows things around here, he does not know who the main developer for the GUI is, he doesn't know that elmato is developing a mobile wallet etc..

So let's look at the facts of delegate dilution: We currently have 29 100% delegates who collectively make 124000 BTS per day. If all of them were to dump it every day (which is not the case), that adds an incredible 700$ of selling pressure. Daily volumes for BTS in this current dry period is around 40k$, so we're talking 1.75% of daily volume.. So can everyone please shut up about delegates dumping being the cause of the price decline? IMO if they (we) weren't here, things would be looking far worse.

For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.

It all ties up together.

Vote and DNS would have had funding from paid delegates and the remainder of the post 2/28/14 AGS donations.  We could not fairly honor those later donors by spending their money improving BTSX, so we had to work on VOTE and DNS.  Fair is fair.  So without the merger, BTSX, VOTE and DNS would all have had competing BitAssets splitting the market depth.  And BTSX would have not had ongoing funding like VOTE and DNS.  They would be what BitShares is today (self-funding with all the talent working as their delegates).

Without revealing the still-potent, still secret Vote "secret sauce", the astute student has been given lots of opportunities to read between the lines:   https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15180.msg196071.html#msg196071

One could also argue that the decline is because we stopped promising.  Without constant reminding, people tend to forget that we are still committed to the grand vision and working on it without talking more about it till it's done.
As for underdelivering, go back and look at what we were promising when the AGS program started.  We have WAY overdelivered since those days.

We are in a transition period where we are moving from talking about great stuff months in advance to talking about it only once its delivered.  This naturally causes a multi-month lull in excitement until things that were once out on the horizon move into our rear view mirror.

But nothing stops those of you with good memories from talking about it.   :)

I'm sorry but you're doing it again, hinting at something great on the horizon without providing anything of substance to back it up. We've been made promises like that for the last 6 months at least and personally I'm getting tired of it. The VOTE video in that comment has a grand total of 260 views, at least three of which are mine.. I don't like being all negative but considering the negative impact the merger of VOTE has had, as well as the major financial "donation" made to AK through the merger, I really don't think we got a good deal..

I have to add that I also feel you're rewriting history when you present the merger as something nice and orderly like that, at least to me it felt more like a knee-jerk reaction to a market panic caused by an offhand remark by Bytemaster. An important part of the original vision died in that knee-jerk reaction, the idea of a multitude of DACs fiercely competing or peacefully coexisting, focusing on different niches in a darwinian environment where only the strongest would survive. I for one loved that vision and was sad to see it disappear.

Now I'm not saying we have a bad product or that you haven't delivered with Bitshares, I love Bitshares and use the client almost every day and generally think it's an amazing product. But claims such as the alleged VOTE secret sauce and how DNS was super-easy and would be implemented in no time at all are where I think you over-promised.

+1
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Tuck Fheman on April 07, 2015, 03:33:46 am
large parts of the community overreacting to Bytemaster's comments.

For what it's worth, I feel the continued decline in the price is simply a result of continually over-promising and under-delivering, of being unable to clearly communicate what Bitshares is and how it works (hello whitepapers?), and a lack of focus on making the client performance as good as possible.

+110%
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: onceuponatime on April 07, 2015, 03:38:43 am

dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)
Which is not correct. The research I have done. 1,2 5 and 6 seem pretty accurate!

Which one is not correct ?

Even if he gave some (but not all) correct information on 4, spreading FUD on the other 3 is counterproductive to building confidence in BitShares. However, building confidence, or helping correct problems, has not been his motivation in my estimation.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: cube on April 07, 2015, 04:28:31 am
Didn't like this.. didn't iike that.. this was your mistake.. I told you so... Could'a Should'a Would'a Didn't... looking back you did this wrong.

Ok.. I covered everything for everyone just now.. so how about talking about what to do next?

What can YOU do next that will make BitShares Better?

Whether the points or valid or not.. where do we go from 'here'?

Personally I am working almost every day to make Bitshares better by improving the wallet or adding features to Bitsharesblocks.

I agree we need to look forward and contribute positively, but it's hard to figure out how to go forward if one does not know the past and analyzes what went wrong. That being said, harping on about old mistakes is not constructive either.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana. 

Although the words from NewMine are hash, they induce the community into self-reflection.  Recognising and facing up to past mistakes help us to make a better future.

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 07, 2015, 07:21:05 am
We don't see PLAY or MUSIC having their own version of bitUSD.  In fact, you see them using the BitShares version.

I haven't been following Play lately, but who says they, especially Music, aren't/won't be using their own version of BitUSD? The Music blockchain isn't ready yet, so how can you make that claim? Unless there is some huge news I somehow missed, I am sure Music will have its own version of BitUSD.

As far as play goes, they have already said they will not be making their own version of USD.  I speak with Hackfisher frequently enough and have already asked him this question in a Mumble hangout. 
As far as MUSIC, it is NDA (so honestly we do not know what their plan is).  Howeve Taulant is a signatory on that NDA and he is making MUSIC liquid on BitShares to help boot up liquidity on the platform and get NOTES trading now.  If these things are all the case, there is more reason to believe they are a benevolent ally to BitShares...at least in the short/medium term.   


Yeah that's great except they all need a stable foundation blockchain to build on and also all either need or greatly benefit from the BitAsset system as well. Bidding on domain names isn't that great when you have to account for the price volatility of your DNS token over the 30 day bid period, for example. Using BitUSD would be better. Music lovers would rather pay 99 cents for a song rather than 1500 NOTE today but then 1800 NOTE tomorrow, for example. Great so they can each have their own BitAssets except now they split liquidity across many chains making each of the BitAssets worse than they would be if they were all on the same chain.
It only matters what shows on the user interface.  Transactions can be made behind the scenes with something like MetaExchange (with expanded features) to give front-end service providers (like Peertracks and the many others that will pop up for separate DACs) the ability to quickly and cheaply change NOTES for bitUSD on purchase.  The user still sees "I am paying $.99/1302N for Track Number 1 on Snoopdawg's new record" and bitUSD ends up with more organic volume.  I see nothing going wrong on this personally, but am open to opinions.



Okay, so let's have them all use the same BitAsset as the one on the BitShares X chain. Well this is a technically tricky but doable with some trade-offs. I have discussed a way this could be done in the past and have since become a stronger and stronger advocate of this approach. But even then, it takes lots of coding and testing before such functionality would be available for use. So then core devs need to work on that. But that work is reusable on all other blockchains, so it would make the most sense for the BitShares X devs to work on that and then when it is done all the other chains can adopt that technology. And their chains aren't really 1.0 ready until that feature is ready. They can work on the other business logic of the chain in parallel though if they can get the funding to do so.
See above.  As said before, what happens on the back end and what happens on the front end are two different things. 
As far as reusability of code, I completely agree.
As for working on the business logic of another chain in parallel...this is actually my preferred way of doing it.  If the original Devs still have a Delegate in the BitShares ecosystem, that means they will be more likely to use their chain's resources to help all the baby bitshares chains at least get to a point where they can start competing on some level with each other (but that, in my mind, is still a little ways away).

So now you have BitShares X devs working on improving the foundations of the blockchain and BitAsset system. They are improving the performance, eliminating bugs, improving the market engine, and developing the new features needed to allow other chains to use BTSX's BitAssets. How long would this take and what resources would it require? Well we know at least how long it would take all of our core devs working on all but the last thing. That is because that is exactly what they are working on right now and they are still not done. It all took WAY longer than originally promised. That's what happens in software development. Also, it basically took all of the money I3 had raised (in fact, with all the price drops, how much longer do the core devs have before their year-end bonuses aren't enough to even pay them an unsustainably low wage for their services?) and some small additional money from delegate dilution pay.
If we had other DACs floating around...if they were even a million in marketcap they could hire people who are passionate about things like DNS and simply give them multiple delegates.  Early on, the person heading the project up could use the initial voting stake to pretty much guarantee a trusted group of developers over time.  As the system matures, they would shed their "masters" and become truly far more decentralized.  So they would be able to fund themselves.  What's more.  There might be devs who have no interest in helping with a decentralized exchange (and so our marketing efforts would be wasted on them), but who might have a great deal of passion for decentralized DNS to the point where getting delegate positions is just a bonus.  So resources shouldn't be too much of an issue. 

Would there be enough money available to allow them to finish that task much less any extra to devote to OTHER devs working on VOTE and DNS functionality in parallel? Where would that money come from? Crowdfunding similar DPOS blockchain related projects would likely just be taking away buy pressure from BTSX, which would reduce the delegate dilution pay for the core devs working on the foundation of the blockchain. We are a small group and not growing fast enough. But to grow fast enough we need a compelling product to sell to others who haven't bought into the vision yet. That means going after the really high value services and providing those services in a very high quality way. A decentralized exchange on a very robust platform with a fast lightweight client that looks beautiful and is easy to use is what is required. This is part of the foundation that other DACs depend on. It makes no sense to waste limited resources (money and dev talent) on things that are not going to grow the token's value fast enough. We need the token value to grow because that is the source of revenue to pay for more devs who will then be able to work on many interesting different blockchain services and features in parallel.
I disagree it would likely be taking away that much buying pressure from bitshares.  If you look at most of these coins out there, it is not the coin, but the protocol that wins out.  We are in a stage where every single one of our "altcoins" can actually have unique value propositions.  No other protocol allows for that.  If we stop looking at the protocol as the foundation of all of this, I think we miss the big picture.  The market is already showing this with Counterparty spreading to different coins and I believe this is the market telling us we need to have many networks tying themselves together with the same common foundational protocols. 

So the way I see it, the economics of the situation would have forced DNS and VOTE to languish anyway until enough of the BitShares X foundation was built. What is worse is that they would have avoided paying for the cost of the foundation that they use since the dilution would have been for BTSX only and not of the other DACs' tokens. I think the BitShares ecosystem would have not looked very differently in terms of functionality available or user adoption at this point in time, and I would even say we would have most likely been worse off than we currently are.
It is also possible that we would be worse off than now.  However, I still seriously doubt it.  Just ask the marketing people here if it would be easier to sell BitShares if it had a solid and focused identity.  In turn the message would have been simpler to teach and people would have likely learned about bitshares far more easily.  That message spread by word of mouth would bring people interested in blockchain technology to us over time. 
And lets face it man...really.  What do we have now?  Toast working for another project and Adam still with Follow My Vote going on the side. 
No matter what we think, the decision seems made already. 


At this point, I think we just need to finish getting the core blockchain technology and the client software polished to get user adoption to increase and hopefully have the price of BTS increase, and then use those extra resources paid for through delegate dilution of the higher BTS price to build the functionality necessary to allow third-parties to concurrently build DApps and/or child DACs on the BitShares platform with minimal effort while using BTS's BitAssets and even leveraging the consensus/networking systems of the BTS blockchain (basically "Turing complete scripts" but done by allowing the validators or "child DAC delegates" to run arbitrary sandboxed executable code that implements the business logic of their DAC/DApp and uses the BTS blockchain and optionally their own nested blockchains, which are committed to the BTS parent blockchain, as the persistent data store for their DAC/DApp). Once this foundation is set, my hope is that we can have developer resources explode and see many third-parties concurrently working on new features like prediction markets, bond markets, voting, DNS, etc.
Well...now. If it worked out this way, that would be pretty nice.  I'll agree there.  Interesting thoughts.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode on April 07, 2015, 12:42:01 pm
Didn't like this.. didn't iike that.. this was your mistake.. I told you so... Could'a Should'a Would'a Didn't... looking back you did this wrong.

Ok.. I covered everything for everyone just now.. so how about talking about what to do next?

What can YOU do next that will make BitShares Better?

Whether the points or valid or not.. where do we go from 'here'?

Personally I am working almost every day to make Bitshares better by improving the wallet or adding features to Bitsharesblocks.

I agree we need to look forward and contribute positively, but it's hard to figure out how to go forward if one does not know the past and analyzes what went wrong. That being said, harping on about old mistakes is not constructive either.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana. 

Although the words from NewMine are hash, they induce the community into self-reflection.  Recognising and facing up to past mistakes help us to make a better future.

No... this is just taking pot shots.. the remember the past statement is directed to looking at current events that relate and remembering past events that relate. All of the stuff being talked about in the past have nothing to do with the current state of affairs or offer any insight to avoid being 'condemned to repeat it'.

That's why I said.. what about 'now'.. because what is missing from the potshot gallery is a clear and balanced look at where things are today.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: merivercap on April 07, 2015, 09:05:26 pm
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: jaran on April 07, 2015, 10:19:52 pm
Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

Exactly.  Now we have this weird situation where we issued all of these shares then gave the majority of them to a few key stakeholders - the majority holders of PTS, DNS, and VOTE...So all those new shares did not help our situation and now we have to slowly issue more which is not enough to keep the devs happy.  So behind the scenes they are having to do other deals to keep people around.



   

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 07, 2015, 11:15:19 pm
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

Pretty sure all three of those guys were totally "pro" merger once they all went to the mumble chat and "all 23" came to a consensus of how great it "actually" was going to be.

I made a proposal to increase delegate pay here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14379.msg187215.html#msg187215 but nobody remembers that or mentions that.



Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: carpet ride on April 08, 2015, 01:11:49 am

Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

The 'merger' wasn't so much a merger as it was a buyout for time bytemaster owed to other interest groups.  The merged technology or Super DAC is a byproduct.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 08, 2015, 01:35:14 am
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

Pretty sure all three of those guys were totally "pro" merger once they all went to the mumble chat and "all 23" came to a consensus of how great it "actually" was going to be.

I made a proposal to increase delegate pay here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14379.msg187215.html#msg187215 but nobody remembers that or mentions that.

You act newmine as though you are kept from joining up and being a part of the process. Mumble is available to everyone. Including you. Why don't you join up and become the 24th of our "elite group" of exclusive, largely underpaid boat-rowers. 
There is no reason you or anyone else can't be a part in our hangouts online and offline.  Instead you choose to come on here and show everyone your true character...behavior, not words, is the mark of a person's values, and value. 
It's easy to yell at the captain and call mutiny, when you refuse to take any level of responsibility yourself.

And for the record, I've never been for the merger...but I am not all knowing and I know we are all experimenting with what is best so I try to be an adult and recognize That many of these "problems" will naturally find resolution and we will over time gain insight into best practice and access to new tools. So I try to give constructive criticism and let others do the same as we walk together through this cuncharted territory.

So the best question at this point is: why are you part of this community when you obviously dislike bitshares. Or better yet, why aren't you looking to create a competitor?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 08, 2015, 02:12:58 am
Pretty sure all three of those guys were totally "pro" merger once they all went to the mumble chat and "all 23" came to a consensus of how great it "actually" was going to be.

Yes, I was at the time.  I think the two key factos in us all making that mistake were:
1) Not realizing how much the chinese community was going to be opposed to it. 
2) Bytemaster essentially threatening to kill BTSX with Vote. 

That said, most altcoins have gotten destroyed over the same time period as well, except for whatever has been recently pumped (right now its anonymity coins - Darkcoin/Dash and Monero), but the focus of the pumps changes.  Even without the merger we would be way down from where we were, though it would probably be something like a 25M market cap not 14M.   
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: liondani on April 08, 2015, 02:18:43 am
except for whatever has been recently pumped (right now its anonymity coins - Darkcoin/Dash and Monero), but the focus of the pumps changes. 

and we want to abandon TITAN(?)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 08, 2015, 03:11:42 am
except for whatever has been recently pumped (right now its anonymity coins - Darkcoin/Dash and Monero), but the focus of the pumps changes. 

and we want to abandon TITAN(?)

Well, no one ever thought of Bitshares as an anonymity coin anyway, and the anonymity pump is already over. 
We needed to go away from titan to attract gateways / exchanges.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 08, 2015, 03:29:44 am
except for whatever has been recently pumped (right now its anonymity coins - Darkcoin/Dash and Monero), but the focus of the pumps changes. 

and we want to abandon TITAN(?)

Well, no one ever thought of Bitshares as an anonymity coin anyway, and the anonymity pump is already over. 
We needed to go away from titan to attract gateways / exchanges.

It is always possible to add that stuff on later if the need arises. And if it isn't added to bts, then it will likely be added on to a sharedropped competitor.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 08, 2015, 03:32:05 am
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

This ^ about says it all.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: oldman on April 08, 2015, 03:33:01 am
except for whatever has been recently pumped (right now its anonymity coins - Darkcoin/Dash and Monero), but the focus of the pumps changes. 

and we want to abandon TITAN(?)

Well, no one ever thought of Bitshares as an anonymity coin anyway, and the anonymity pump is already over. 
We needed to go away from titan to attract gateways / exchanges.

What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:

Step 1: Fiat value migrates to BTS via kyc/aml compliant gateways.

Step 2. Fiat value stays in BTS (via bitAssets) and never leaves... when folks want something to hold in their hands cryptosmith and other services allows direct conversion to tangible assets (bitGold -> gold).

Step 3. Everyone suddenly realizes their wealth is sovereign unto themselves.

Step 4. Change the world.

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: oldman on April 08, 2015, 03:38:44 am
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

This ^ about says it all.


Am I the only one outside of the core devs that understands BTS, VOTE and DNS are the holy trinity?

Together these things form and incomprehensibly powerful tool that can change the course of human history.

Separate they are a passing novelty in a far flung and rarely visited corner of the internet.

The devs, particularly BM, are hunting much bigger game than most folks think.

Bitshares is not about bitAssets or banking...

Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: svk on April 08, 2015, 08:05:57 am
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

Pretty sure all three of those guys were totally "pro" merger once they all went to the mumble chat and "all 23" came to a consensus of how great it "actually" was going to be.

I made a proposal to increase delegate pay here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14379.msg187215.html#msg187215 but nobody remembers that or mentions that.

For the record I was never in that mumble chat nor did I really agree with the merger, but it all happened during a time I was on vacation travelling and as a result I was not very vocal, which I regret. I did try to speak out against the allocations, especially for DNS and VOTE which felt very unfair to me, but didn't get much traction.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 08, 2015, 12:24:54 pm
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

Pretty sure all three of those guys were totally "pro" merger once they all went to the mumble chat and "all 23" came to a consensus of how great it "actually" was going to be.

I made a proposal to increase delegate pay here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14379.msg187215.html#msg187215 but nobody remembers that or mentions that.

For the record I was never in that mumble chat nor did I really agree with the merger, but it all happened during a time I was on vacation travelling and as a result I was not very vocal, which I regret. I did try to speak out against the allocations, especially for DNS and VOTE which felt very unfair to me, but didn't get much traction.

You should speak your mind more. Silence is taken as conformity here. But being vocal is also the enemy, regardless of intention.

Here, https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,10148.msg132915.html#msg132915 Gentso1 clued in to what was really happening and BM stated the finances were fine even though we got paid delegate dilution because finances were not in fact fine. I agreed with Gentso1.

I also was demanding one sentence why VOTE was all of a sudden some became a "secret sauce" and I never got a response to the question. Only some BS about how voting is corrupt and BM has to try and change it blah blah blah.....VOTE merger was a scam and will alway be a scam. It will never work. DNS had a chain and Toast was the lead developer. BM didn't have to split time with DNS. So this was all about getting VOTE, the DAC least potential to become the reason we needed to give i3 more shares and Adam a huge stake.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: speedy on April 08, 2015, 12:59:37 pm
You should speak your mind more. Silence is taken as conformity here. But being vocal is also the enemy, regardless of intention.

Here, https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,10148.msg132915.html#msg132915 Gentso1 clued in to what was really happening and BM stated the finances were fine even though we got paid delegate dilution because finances were not in fact fine. I agreed with Gentso1.

I also was demanding one sentence why VOTE was all of a sudden some became a "secret sauce" and I never got a response to the question. Only some BS about how voting is corrupt and BM has to try and change it blah blah blah.....VOTE merger was a scam and will alway be a scam. It will never work. DNS had a chain and Toast was the lead developer. BM didn't have to split time with DNS. So this was all about getting VOTE, the DAC least potential to become the reason we needed to give i3 more shares and Adam a huge stake.

Newmine is right in at least that VOTE is never going to work. Its just a fantasy that you can convince governments to move voting systems over to a blockchain that they dont even have a stake in.

Am I the only one outside of the core devs that understands BTS, VOTE and DNS are the holy trinity?

Together these things form and incomprehensibly powerful tool that can change the course of human history.

DNS is not going to work either, at least not as a self-sustaining profitable business.

For blockchain-based DNS to work, browsers need to be integrated with the software to lookup ips from the blockchain. That means getting the likes of Mozilla and Google Chrome on board. Does anyone think they would ever care about anything we have to be incentivized to partner with us? No. In the remote possibility that more than a few geeks started to care about looking up websites from blockchains, Google or Mozilla would just add their own blockchain into their browser. Again they have no stake in BTS either. Even if BTS had a $1 billion market cap they wouldnt care.

Once the core BitAssets take off then yes it might be worth it to add on DNS into BTS later, but this was never going to be a catalyst for large user growth.

Just my opinion.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: nomoreheroes7 on April 08, 2015, 01:13:52 pm
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:

Step 1: Fiat value migrates to BTS via kyc/aml compliant gateways.

Step 2. Fiat value stays in BTS (via bitAssets) and never leaves... when folks want something to hold in their hands cryptosmith and other services allows direct conversion to tangible assets (bitGold -> gold).

Step 3. Everyone suddenly realizes their wealth is sovereign unto themselves.

Step 4. Change the world.

Am I the only one outside of the core devs that understands BTS, VOTE and DNS are the holy trinity?

Together these things form and incomprehensibly powerful tool that can change the course of human history.

Separate they are a passing novelty in a far flung and rarely visited corner of the internet.

The devs, particularly BM, are hunting much bigger game than most folks think.

Bitshares is not about bitAssets or banking...

All of this. Obviously these are ambitious goals, but it's exactly where BTS needs to position itself and exactly how BTS will absolutely explode. All of this is possible. Thank you OldMan for your wise words. You help remind me why I'm here in the first place.

(Are you really that old? Hah.)
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: betax on April 08, 2015, 01:34:50 pm
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: NewMine on April 08, 2015, 04:48:12 pm
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange

Wrong. Who is going to verify identity? Dont forget you have more than just the US identities to deal with. Oh, and dont forget, whoever controls the identity verification system is corruptable and centralized. VOTE will never work beyond a simple polling place no different than the value of the polls here on this form.
Title: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: carpet ride on April 08, 2015, 05:01:31 pm


What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange

Wrong. Who is going to verify identity? Dont forget you have more than just the US identities to deal with. Oh, and dont forget, whoever controls the identity verification system is corruptable and centralized. VOTE will never work beyond a simple polling place no different than the value of the polls here on this form.

For vote to work there would need to be multiple centralized identity services competing against one another, cross verifying identities, and calling out bad performance.

Also, I loosely understand that politicians would eventually need to pay voters directly to incentive voting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: testz on April 08, 2015, 05:24:35 pm

I also was demanding one sentence why VOTE was all of a sudden some became a "secret sauce" and I never got a response to the question. Only some BS about how voting is corrupt and BM has to try and change it blah blah blah.....VOTE merger was a scam and will alway be a scam. It will never work. DNS had a chain and Toast was the lead developer. BM didn't have to split time with DNS. So this was all about getting VOTE, the DAC least potential to become the reason we needed to give i3 more shares and Adam a huge stake.

Do you know the meaning of the word "secret"?
VOTE will never work because NewMine says "It will never work."? What if other shareholders think different?
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: Ander on April 08, 2015, 05:40:57 pm
Do you know the meaning of the word "secret"?
VOTE will never work because NewMine says "It will never work."?

True, but we also shouldn't believe it will magically work just because Bytemaster says it will.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: testz on April 08, 2015, 05:48:23 pm
Do you know the meaning of the word "secret"?
VOTE will never work because NewMine says "It will never work."?

True, but we also shouldn't believe it will magically work just because Bytemaster says it will.

True.
My personal opinion about VOTE based at some information from forum, https://followmyvote.com and mumble sessions - I think it's will work, at least much better and will be more transparent when current voting process.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: xeroc on April 08, 2015, 06:26:48 pm
https://followmyvote.com/follow-my-vote-and-the-pirate-party-make-plans-for-the-future-of-voting/
Seem Norwegian pirate party thinks it will work too ..
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: betax on April 08, 2015, 06:31:37 pm
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange

Wrong. Who is going to verify identity? Dont forget you have more than just the US identities to deal with. Oh, and dont forget, whoever controls the identity verification system is corruptable and centralized. VOTE will never work beyond a simple polling place no different than the value ngeof the polls here on this form.

I was referring to ALM, at the moment you need to provide a form of identification to register in exchanges (at least in Europe). Bitshares could introduce a similar way of identity verification (Keyhotee) that could provide the same functionality. Now with that in place, you could also implement voting. At thel beginning yes, this will be just a poll, but once is demonstrated the reliability and trust, will be easy to sell.

Lets wait and see the roadmap.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: xh3 on April 08, 2015, 11:59:54 pm
Opportunity, kids.  I'm buying at least one K @ half a cent, and 5 more if it reaches a third. I doubt I'm the only one with this plan.  I've been hoping for half a cent prices for some time now.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: mint chocolate chip on April 10, 2015, 02:22:47 am
What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

Another way your could choose to look at it is that, as we grow, delegates are destined to become small businesses funding perhaps several people to accomplish their tasks.  Under that model, people might come and go while the business remains in good graces.  If that is not philosophically objectionable to you, then having delegates find someone to "take over" for them on the mission they were hired to do (as a proto-business) seems like it could be perfectly natural.
That makes sense.
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fuzzy on April 10, 2015, 05:29:17 am
Opportunity, kids.  I'm buying at least one K @ half a cent, and 5 more if it reaches a third. I doubt I'm the only one with this plan.  I've been hoping for half a cent prices for some time now.

Oh I am going to buy some if I can get my hands on some spare cash.  Public fountain time baby... :P
Title: Re: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1
Post by: fran2k on April 14, 2015, 07:06:34 am
elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

Nope , elmato is the developer of a cellphone app version of wallet , who happens to be one of the people helping out the marketing in Argentina .

elmato, is effectively the dev, along with dargonar, of the first iOS and Android bitAsset wallets, called BitWallet, next version will be renamed to LimeWallet. Main thread: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,11902.0.html

elmato has also participated in several BitShares talks we had done in the Bitcoin Center Buenos Aires. This was in coordination with the argentina.marketing.matt608 delegate team, from which he is part.

Our past meetups:
[2015-03-20] Buenos Aires - Paperwallets Giveaway and Install Workshop (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15584.0.html)
[2015-02-19] Buenos Aires - Bitcoin 2.0: Bitshares, Sidechains y Ethereum (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14238.0.html)
[2015-01-22] Buenos Aires - bitShares & bitUSD, DACs, Blockchain Based Apps &+  (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,13381.0.html)
[2014-12-11] Buenos Aires - bitShares & bitUSD Meetup (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,12082.0.html)

With that said maybe we can put a website together that highlights the delegates & responsibilities and have another section where we can expect weekly progress reports and have some accountability (we can keep this open or private to members).  Eventually I think we need to put a delegate team page with pictures for the bitShares DAC delegates.  I know some may be uncomfortable so it shouldn't be required, but whenever you look at a company you want to know who is behind it.  It brings the human element to the project.  Just like the Peer-to-Peer tour, Stan, Bytemaster etc bring a human element to bitShares.  You gain trust much faster from others that way.  That's an advantage Bitshares will always have over the anonymous guys from NXT, Darkcoin etc.  It would be good to recruit more females and global talent because money is universal and we want everyone involved.   It's great we have a strong Chinese contingent. 

Anyways you can link up a delegate website to the Bitshareblocks.com's delegate page, but keep it running seperately.  It can have real-time financials totally transparent for everyone to see.  When you think about the level of transparency you can have with the DAC compared to regular corporations & governments, this system is definitely revolutionary.  I can grab the domain: btsdac.org if people like that domain?  I can even set up a simple Wordpress site, but we have to have someone build a data feed of delegate info to it.  The website page can read:  BitShares DAC, 'The World's First Decentralized Autonomous Company'...  anyways what do you all think?

This will be very useful. Delegates should use more their walls to burn comments and updates.


dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)

http://bitsharesblog.com

I would be interested in seeing  your analysis of the value of the "selected group of delegates" above being placed on http://bitsharesblog.com

I keep up to date with delegates and take my vote away from those I consider to not be adding potential to BitShares.

That involves a lot of work on my part. I was on Marketing conference calls with some of the delegates for many hours this past Easter weekend.

What we need to do is encourage dialogue to evaluate the delegates. I picked out a handful from Newmine's list and would love to hear your opinions on them as well as everyone else's. This is something we should be doing, it is more constructive than simply bemoaning the price.

What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

Another way your could choose to look at it is that, as we grow, delegates are destined to become small businesses funding perhaps several people to accomplish their tasks.  Under that model, people might come and go while the business remains in good graces.  If that is not philosophically objectionable to you, then having delegates find someone to "take over" for them on the mission they were hired to do (as a proto-business) seems like it could be perfectly natural.

Thanks Stan, that resumes whats actually happening with the argentina.marketing.matt608 delegate, which will be 'argentina.team' delegate. We are in a transition period, and we are planing to switch to this new delegate during the next three months. Here is the post where matt608 clarifies the situation: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,11847.msg198849.html#msg198849

We will be posting some more info about this in the coming days.