Doing a sharedrop on the bitshares community is obviously something I have beenI am glad to hear this. We kind of miss you here :)
thinking about since the beginning of eDollar (which was basically "rip off
bitUSD and put it on ethereum").
That being said, getting the support of the bitshares community would obviouslyI am sure we can find some here ..
be incredibly valuable to us. One thing I'd love would be be to just get the
critical eyes of this community attempting to butcher the mechanics of the DAI
cryptobond peg. But more crucially would be to get valuable stakeholders from
the only community that has real experience with the messy task that is DAC
governance. Maker will have some really complicated governance - such as a
futarchy controlling root access and upgrades/hard forks - so we obviously would
love to know that there are experienced and intelligent voters out there
participating in the governance process.
But in the end it all comes down to cost vs benefit. Many sharedrops in variousIMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
communities have been complete failures, but I don't want to give up on the
concept; it just needs to be carefully planned and thought through. Which is why
the only solution I can think of is to post here and ask for input - in what
could basically be an open negotiation of sharedrop specifications.
So far the ideas I’ve thought of are:IMHO $100 is enough to motivate people to take a closer look at the concept and
Do a flat rate vested sharedrop to all users who want it from a list of core
community members, such as
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17895.0.html . The amount could be in
the order of 100 USD worth of MKR per person at current valuation, or something
similar (open for negotiations).
or
Give vested MKR options to BTS holders proportional to their BTS holdings.
Something like 1 year vested MKR at 25-50% of the MKR market rate, with a max
buy proportional to their BTS stake (e.g. someone who owns 1% of all BTS could
buy 0.1% of all MKR at this price, or something like that).
I’m open for any other suggestions of what you think is best for both sides. I’mI like the sound of that. Imho we can learn alot from each other while not being
also open for individual negotiations with community members, if you have
something to contribute. Ultimately I’m looking to get value in return for
whatever we end up doing, and the most valuable thing would simply be
establishing a relationship between Maker and the bitshares community.
I’m also open for ideas on other ways Maker and bitshares can cooperate. OneWow .. that sounds AWESOME .. though I don't know how to do that technically ..
thing we are going to do for certain is to approve BTS as collateral for the
dai, so people can do BTS margin trading at the dai interest rate. Of course
this doesn't really offer any more value to bitshares than bitUSD already gives.
Another thing that might be possible in the future is to make a privatized
bitUSD backed by the dai, but that will need cross chain functionality first.
IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.
Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)
Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.Why would "not-being-sharedropped" ruing the BTS valuation?
Seriously, what are you trying to do.
IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.
Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)
Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.
IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.
Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)
Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :P
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :PSeems I didn't express myself perfectly.
Which brings me back to...why not here? Or on both chains...or on your own DPOS Ethereum chain? :)
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :PSeems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.
Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :PSeems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.
Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said
I was joking - I know you weren't trying to "talk me out of it" :P
I think brownie.PTS sharedrop might be a better idea though, but as far as I can understand it is basically the list that I posted already? You get brownie.pts for attending beyond bitcoin hangouts right?
Out of curiosity, though...why not just build this on bts and try to compete directly with bitUSD? It seems pretty clear that ethereum not as capable (at present) to compare with bitshares both on a governance side (ethereum needs it's own "foundation" while bitshares has implemented separations of power and delegates)...and that isn't even talking about scalability and throughout potential.
QuoteWhich brings me back to...why not here? Or on both chains...or on your own DPOS Ethereum chain? :)
So the important thing to understand is that we didn't choose Ethereum, we chose the EVM. Ethereum is just the first blockchain implementing the EVM, and implementing it is something many blockchains could potentially do in the future, with huge benefits such as being sidechains with each other by default. Right now I know if at least 2 other public blockchains that will be supporting the EVM, and Maker will be able to move part of itself and all of its assets onto these blockchains as well, existing simultaneously on every EVM chain.
There are two main reasons for choosing the EVM 1) it is easier and more efficient to build custom applications like Maker there than in any other way (due to the insanely good solidity scripting language). 2) It is easier to integrate with, and provide financing to, other DAO and dapps that reside in the same ecosystem.
Bitshares is more specialized for providing specific, hardcoded and very efficient products like bitUSD whereas the EVM is a general purpose protocol that can exist on multiple blockchains. Perhaps at some point bitshares might implement it as well, but I have no real idea about the feasibility of this.
Can you say what public blockchains are looking to implement EVM that you know of so far?
@bytemaster, would you mind speaking to the feasibility of implementing EVM into Bitshares sometime down the road and whether that could fit into your vision? Thanks.
I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community
I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community
You can't claim that, there will be active members whom BM doesn't appreciate.
......
What is EVM?
I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community
You can't claim that, there will be active members whom BM doesn't appreciate.
......
What is EVM?
I have brownies and I strongly disagree that they should be a sharedrop target for anyone except bytemaster or crptonomex... They are given out at the discretion of one person who has already admitted that he is too busy to properly oversee who/how many should be given out. They are mostly given out for tasks that bytemaster deems important... there is plenty of work being done by other people that is beneficial to bitshares that isn't necessarily sanctioned or promoted by Dan.
I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community
You can't claim that, there will be active members whom BM doesn't appreciate.
......
What is EVM?
You come off as such a POS in this post.
IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.
Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)
Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.
I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community
You can't claim that, there will be active members whom BM doesn't appreciate.
......
What is EVM?
I am one of those. Errr, was one of those. I lost all desire to even point out the errors of your ways and decided to let the cards fall where they may. Chatting with ABL a few weeks back, someone who didn't care but had nothing but incentive to see this project succeed, made me realize this project was dead in the water.
thank you fuzzy, well said.I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community
You can't claim that, there will be active members whom BM doesn't appreciate.
......
What is EVM?
I am one of those. Errr, was one of those. I lost all desire to even point out the errors of your ways and decided to let the cards fall where they may. Chatting with ABL a few weeks back, someone who didn't care but had nothing but incentive to see this project succeed, made me realize this project was dead in the water.
What is hilarious to me is how many industry firsts have happened here and still you can find a way to act as though this project is dead. The fact that you were talking to ABL about it gives no extra validity to your thoughts so it might be best to continue thinking to yourself on this one newmine. And you know I give you credit when I think it is deserved--so you can be certain my response to your ridiculous point is not trolling.
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :PSeems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.
Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said
FYI, here's a richlist of BROWNIE.PTS
http://richlist.btsgame.org/
Guessummary:
- Total 4,479,548 brownies are distributed
- Top 10 addresses own 2,790,692 (62.30%)
- 52 addresses own over 10,000 BROWNIES.PTS
- Top 11-52 addresses account for 31.81% (1,424,990)
Can you say what public blockchains are looking to implement EVM that you know of so far?
Nothing that I know of. There's one that wants to sharedrop onto BTC I think.Quote@bytemaster, would you mind speaking to the feasibility of implementing EVM into Bitshares sometime down the road and whether that could fit into your vision? Thanks.
BM doesn't want to implement the EVM because it is slow and can't capitalize on graphene's architecture.
You can read someone's thoughts here (vikram's?) https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/blacklizard-app-finarch#black-lizard--be-the-platform-not-the-app
Agreed. Also, brownies are actively traded on BTS right now. Wouldn't be hard for someone that BM doesn't like/approve of with deep pockets to just buy a whole bunch. And be super-duper "appreciated". lol.
BM doesn't want to implement the EVM because it is slow and can't capitalize on graphene's architecture.
You can read someone's thoughts here (vikram's?) https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/blacklizard-app-finarch#black-lizard--be-the-platform-not-the-app
Wait really? After finally completing the (currently arduous) task of getting the blockchain to sync I've been trying to buy some BROWNIE.PTS for a couple days, but the orderbook screen is completely blank in my client, so I assumed that everybody was just hodling. Is it just me? I'm looking at it now.
Agreed. Also, brownies are actively traded on BTS right now. Wouldn't be hard for someone that BM doesn't like/approve of with deep pockets to just buy a whole bunch. And be super-duper "appreciated". lol.
Wait really? After finally completing the (currently arduous) task of getting the blockchain to sync I've been trying to buy some BROWNIE.PTS for a couple days, but the orderbook screen is completely blank in my client, so I assumed that everybody was just hodling. Is it just me? I'm looking at it now.
Agreed. Also, brownies are actively traded on BTS right now. Wouldn't be hard for someone that BM doesn't like/approve of with deep pockets to just buy a whole bunch. And be super-duper "appreciated". lol.
Wait really? After finally completing the (currently arduous) task of getting the blockchain to sync I've been trying to buy some BROWNIE.PTS for a couple days, but the orderbook screen is completely blank in my client, so I assumed that everybody was just hodling. Is it just me? I'm looking at it now.
The orderbook should look the same as this:
https://bitsharesblocks.com/asset/orderbook?asset=BROWNIE.PTS
If its blank, its probably because youre looking at BROWNIE and not BROWNIE.PTS or something like that. I would say that the guy who created BROWNIE asset was trying to scam people, except that it was actually created first.
Agreed. Also, brownies are actively traded on BTS right now. Wouldn't be hard for someone that BM doesn't like/approve of with deep pockets to just buy a whole bunch. And be super-duper "appreciated". lol.
Wait really? After finally completing the (currently arduous) task of getting the blockchain to sync I've been trying to buy some BROWNIE.PTS for a couple days, but the orderbook screen is completely blank in my client, so I assumed that everybody was just hodling. Is it just me? I'm looking at it now.
The orderbook should look the same as this:
https://bitsharesblocks.com/asset/orderbook?asset=BROWNIE.PTS
If its blank, its probably because youre looking at BROWNIE and not BROWNIE.PTS or something like that. I would say that the guy who created BROWNIE asset was trying to scam people, except that it was actually created first.
It's BROWNIE.PTS, it's just blank. Then the client usually hangs for a while and I have to force quit. I think maybe my computer just doesn't have the balls for 0.9.1?
I would say that the guy who created BROWNIE asset was trying to scam people, except that it was actually created first.
Happens to me too in some markets.
I would say that the guy who created BROWNIE asset was trying to scam people, except that it was actually created first.
The only way you can create sub assets like BROWNIE.PTS is if you own the Parent Asset BROWNIE. Bytemaster is the creator of both.
https://bitsharesblocks.com/asset/info?asset=BROWNIE
https://bitsharesblocks.com/asset/info?asset=BROWNIE.PTS
It's BROWNIE.PTS, it's just blank. Then the client usually hangs for a while and I have to force quit. I think maybe my computer just doesn't have the balls for 0.9.1?
Happens to me too in some markets.
Agreed. Also, brownies are actively traded on BTS right now. Wouldn't be hard for someone that BM doesn't like/approve of with deep pockets to just buy a whole bunch. And be super-duper "appreciated". lol.I would be extremely disappointed to see future DACs choose BROWNIE.PTS as a sharedrop over BTS. Alot of people donated whatever they could to AGS, and the idea was that future DACs that wanted the community support would sharedrop on those who funded early innovation. BROWNIE.PTS only represents the tiniest, most vocal, most talented segment of the community (or those who have Fridays at 10AM off).
Not quite .. Rune's proposal is completely independent of anything that came out of AGS/PTS/BTS whatsoever .. no obligations at all .. he can freely chose whether to sharedrop at all and which asset to sharedrop .. Though I understand the issues you guys are having with using BROWNIES as sharedrop target .. distribution is not very broad (not sure if rune's desire is to sharedrop rather broad through)Agreed. Also, brownies are actively traded on BTS right now. Wouldn't be hard for someone that BM doesn't like/approve of with deep pockets to just buy a whole bunch. And be super-duper "appreciated". lol.I would be extremely disappointed to see future DACs choose BROWNIE.PTS as a sharedrop over BTS. Alot of people donated whatever they could to AGS, and the idea was that future DACs that wanted the community support would sharedrop on those who funded early innovation. BROWNIE.PTS only represents the tiniest, most vocal, most talented segment of the community (or those who have Fridays at 10AM off).
Spot on.
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
There are several good reasons why people might choose not to claim all their shares until the time is right:So I wouldn't assume that those unmoved shares are abandoned or uninterested... :)
- Awaiting better privacy technology
- Tax planning in some jurisdictions
- Waiting to get confident with a wallet that works for them
- Being too busy changing the world to mess with importing a bunch of scattered wallets from an old PTS mining farm.
Happens to me too in some markets.
I tried to buy some NOTES last night, barely got the order placed then had the same symptoms. Then the order expired.
But I was able to trade some bitUSD for BTS with no problems at all. Maybe it's a volume related bug? I'd say that it doesn't matter, I can just wait until 2.0, but where NOTES and BROWNIE.PTS are concerned maybe I can't...
Happens to me too in some markets.
I tried to buy some NOTES last night, barely got the order placed then had the same symptoms. Then the order expired.
But I was able to trade some bitUSD for BTS with no problems at all. Maybe it's a volume related bug? I'd say that it doesn't matter, I can just wait until 2.0, but where NOTES and BROWNIE.PTS are concerned maybe I can't...
You can get NOTE on blocktrades.us
It is harder to develop a BTS fork than to write a dapp for ethereum. Ethereum very clearly places developers first and cares only about providing a good toolchain for building dapps.
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :PSeems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.
Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said
I was joking - I know you weren't trying to "talk me out of it" :P
I think brownie.PTS sharedrop might be a better idea though, but as far as I can understand it is basically the list that I posted already? You get brownie.pts for attending beyond bitcoin hangouts right?
Bytemaster has been issuing brownie points to everyone he can find that has done something he "appreciates".
So that would tend to be the most active members of the community, with emphasis on those who have made (and presumably will continue to make) great contributions to the ecosystem.
Considering I am a subjective social currency distributed to select community members solely based on Bytemaster's personal musings, I would recommend any share drops be targeted on BTS.
HUGS for EVERYONE! :-)
Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it :PSeems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.
Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)
Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?
Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said
I was joking - I know you weren't trying to "talk me out of it" :P
I think brownie.PTS sharedrop might be a better idea though, but as far as I can understand it is basically the list that I posted already? You get brownie.pts for attending beyond bitcoin hangouts right?
Bytemaster has been issuing brownie points to everyone he can find that has done something he "appreciates".
So that would tend to be the most active members of the community, with emphasis on those who have made (and presumably will continue to make) great contributions to the ecosystem.
The only problem I see with sharedropping to Brownie.PTS is that, as bytemaster has admitted in the past, he can't possibly know who all has contributed to the BitShares ecosystem. He hadn't even made it completely through the delegate list in the last Nullstreet Journal and probably hasn't had time to (which is just fine) to this day.
It also means excluding members bytemaster chooses not to "appreciate" with Brownie.PTS for his own reasons, yet that person may be considered by others as having contributed to the ecosystem (see Newmine).
Not to mention those who did not receive Brownie.PTS for attending a Mumble session even though Stan marked it as distributed on the spreadsheet. :P
Just my 2 (http://i.imgur.com/tiH8JnI.png)
What are your thoughts on this? Also, lets say we did the flat sharedrop so everyone who reads this now owns 100 USD worth of MKR. What would we then gain in return? Would you consider buying more/trading MKR? Would you be active on our forums? Would you sell the MKR as soon as you saw any liquidity?
It is harder to develop a BTS fork than to write a dapp for ethereum. Ethereum very clearly places developers first and cares only about providing a good toolchain for building dapps.
One the most precious and expensive resources for blockchains is talented developers like yourself. So I have to admit the fact that Ethereum is able to attract talented developers to add value to their blockchain without needing to pay them directly is pretty huge.
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
I like this idea. +5%
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
I like this idea. +5%
me2 +5%
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
I like this idea. +5%
me2 +5%
Problem with this... What about dead addresses or multiple accounts created by one person (Name Narwhal) Then you end up giving the most MKR to people who are only trying to exploit a loophole.
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
I like this idea. +5%
me2 +5%
Problem with this... What about dead addresses or multiple accounts created by one person (Name Narwhal) Then you end up giving the most MKR to people who are only trying to exploit a loophole.
The drop is proportional to bts balance up to a certain amount so empty addresses would get nothing. Someone that had more than the cap spread out could game the system, but I don't think this would be a huge problem in practice
So are you saying something like this:
"Every Address with > 1000 bts will receive 10 MKR" I for one would create a bunch of accounts and spread out a large portion of my BTS to take advantage. This would be done easily and securely and would definitely be gamed.
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
I like this idea. +5%
me2 +5%
Problem with this... What about dead addresses or multiple accounts created by one person (Name Narwhal) Then you end up giving the most MKR to people who are only trying to exploit a loophole.
The drop is proportional to bts balance up to a certain amount so empty addresses would get nothing. Someone that had more than the cap spread out could game the system, but I don't think this would be a huge problem in practice
So are you saying something like this:
"Every Address with > 1000 bts will receive 10 MKR" I for one would create a bunch of accounts and spread out a large portion of my BTS to take advantage. This would be done easily and securely and would definitely be gamed.
K.I.S.S. is the best option for this. Keep it simple, drop on BTS, vest for 6 months, hopefully MKR grows in popularity during the vesting period and there is minimal sell pressure when shares vest. This also allows MKR to market and grow awareness for their recently dropped coins.
So are you saying something like this:
"Every Address with > 1000 bts will receive 10 MKR" I for one would create a bunch of accounts and spread out a large portion of my BTS to take advantage. This would be done easily and securely and would definitely be gamed.
I would imagine the drop is proportional to BTS held. Say x% of BTS held per address up to a max of say 1,000,000 BTS. Empty addresses get nothing. The only ones who might game it would be those with like 5 million BTS split across a bunch of accounts. Doubt that's going to be a huge problem though. And it would make it so exchanges like BTC38 don't get credited for their millions upon millions of BTS held (unless they too split accounts? not sure).
Hell you could even make the sharedrop effective as of stake held yesterday, before we even thought of this, hah.
Why not just do a bts share drop with an upward limit. Cap the amount any one address gets. You could get wide distribution without breaking the bank, or over feeding the whales.
I like this idea. +5%
me2 +5%
Problem with this... What about dead addresses or multiple accounts created by one person (Name Narwhal) Then you end up giving the most MKR to people who are only trying to exploit a loophole.
The drop is proportional to bts balance up to a certain amount so empty addresses would get nothing. Someone that had more than the cap spread out could game the system, but I don't think this would be a huge problem in practice
So are you saying something like this:
"Every Address with > 1000 bts will receive 10 MKR" I for one would create a bunch of accounts and spread out a large portion of my BTS to take advantage. This would be done easily and securely and would definitely be gamed.
K.I.S.S. is the best option for this. Keep it simple, drop on BTS, vest for 6 months, hopefully MKR grows in popularity during the vesting period and there is minimal sell pressure when shares vest. This also allows MKR to market and grow awareness for their recently dropped coins.
I don't see a reason for a minimum. I was thinking a proportional share drop with an upward cap.
The only people with an incentive to split their balances would be those with balances above the cap. .i.e whales.
If we really think that is going to be a problem, we can use a previous block to generate the genesis, so the whales wouldn't have a chance to split accounts.
***edit*** nomoreheros beat me to both points. lol
So it seems like most people prefer a proportional sharedrop on BTS. The issue I have with this kind of sharedrop is that it means we're going to give the majority of whatever amount of MKR we end up deciding to sharedrop to a few whales and exchanges (if we dont decide to exempt exchange addresses from the sharedrop).
However from my point of view I'm only able to see the value gained per person, i.e. active community member that we sharedrop on, which is why my first thought was to do a flat sharedrop to all "core members". This is basically like paying for eyeballs to look over our stuff and possibly find flaws or opportunities, as they decide whether or not to dump the MKR they received. This value would be the same no matter if it's a BTS whale or someone who holds a tiny amount of BTS, or even no BTS, so I see no compelling value proposition for letting the majority of the sharedrop go to the whales.
A proportional sharedrop only makes sense if it requires a buy in of some kind, in my opinion, as this means it will still only be whales who actually are interested in owning MKR who will take the offer, instead of just gathering MKR and then summarily dump it as soon as they can.
What are your thoughts on this? Also, lets say we did the flat sharedrop so everyone who reads this now owns 100 USD worth of MKR. What would we then gain in return? Would you consider buying more/trading MKR? Would you be active on our forums? Would you sell the MKR as soon as you saw any liquidity?
So it seems like most people prefer a proportional sharedrop on BTS. The issue I have with this kind of sharedrop is that it means we're going to give the majority of whatever amount of MKR we end up deciding to sharedrop to a few whales and exchanges (if we dont decide to exempt exchange addresses from the sharedrop).
However from my point of view I'm only able to see the value gained per person, i.e. active community member that we sharedrop on, which is why my first thought was to do a flat sharedrop to all "core members". This is basically like paying for eyeballs to look over our stuff and possibly find flaws or opportunities, as they decide whether or not to dump the MKR they received. This value would be the same no matter if it's a BTS whale or someone who holds a tiny amount of BTS, or even no BTS, so I see no compelling value proposition for letting the majority of the sharedrop go to the whales.
What are your thoughts on this? Also, lets say we did the flat sharedrop so everyone who reads this now owns 100 USD worth of MKR. What would we then gain in return? Would you consider buying more/trading MKR? Would you be active on our forums? Would you sell the MKR as soon as you saw any liquidity?I would definitely check it out, and would trade it (sell pumps/buy dumps), not just dump it at the first chance.
Agree with Ander. Brownie holders' commitment level is higher than BTS. Also no exchange is included.
Agree with Ander. Brownie holders' commitment level is higher than BTS. Also no exchange is included.
That is completely false and is a generalization... Brownie holders are cherry picked based on what BM feels is important. His ideas of importance may be vastly different than what is actually valuable to BTS.
I am obviously fine with whatever you decide but I would think that the best sharedrop would obviously be mostly to BTS, then Brownie.PTS but also AGS and old PTS. This way you attract everyone. Core Devs, active members, users, donators and people with vision.
AGS / old PTS also may not even claim their shares since they won't risk to expose their private keys right?
I'm going to go ahead and throw out the following suggestion from the standpoint that it:
1. Casts the widest net
2. Offers the possibility of bringing back the attention of some early supporters that recognized the need and importance of something like bitUSD (but have drifted away due to numerous reasons) to Bitshares, while introducing them to Maker.
5% - PTS
5% - AGS
5% - BTS
5% - Brownie.PTS
The demographics of each group listed above offers a unique set of potential benefits/qualities and that it would be wise to consider what may be gained from including all of them.
Obviously, the recommendations from those CURRENTLY in the forum for this single snapshot of time will side heavily on BTS/Brownie.PTS (and which I would personally gain most from) - but this community has seen plenty of interest and early support from individuals who could probably be found more heavily in PTS/AGS as well.
My .02 BTS
However I don't know if there's an easy way to prove and verify a PTS and BTS balance,
To put this in the nicest terms possible: have you people completely lost your fucking minds? Suggesting a sharedrop on ancient "AGS/PTS" that's supposed to be abandoned and worthless, and on BM's stupid toy that he has absolute control over ??
And how does that even make any logical sense? PTS is the demographic of random Chinese miners, and AGS are people who once invested in something two years ago, woo-hoo. How does sharedroping on them accomplish anything from Rune's POV?
To put this in the nicest terms possible: have you people completely lost your fucking minds? Suggesting a sharedrop on ancient "AGS/PTS" that's supposed to be abandoned and worthless, and on BM's stupid toy that he has absolute control over ??
And how does that even make any logical sense? PTS is the demographic of random Chinese miners, and AGS are people who once invested in something two years ago, woo-hoo. How does sharedroping on them accomplish anything from Rune's POV?
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.
Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.
...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.
Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.
Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.
Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.
I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs. Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even. These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors. That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.
I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.
Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.
In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.
Parable of the Generous Employer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Workers_in_the_Vineyard)
Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.
I may also seize brownie points from any account if you fall out of favor and anyone who complains in any way about how Brownie Points are issued or how I use Brownie Points is certainly not in my favor and may lose any Brownie Points they have earned.
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/352/470/1b5.gif)
...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.
Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.
Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.
Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.
I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs. Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even. These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors. That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.
Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.
Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.
In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.
Parable of the Generous Employer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Workers_in_the_Vineyard)
...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.
Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.
Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.
Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.
I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs. Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even. These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors. That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.
Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.
Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.
In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.
Parable of the Generous Employer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Workers_in_the_Vineyard)
I believe that anybody ought to be able to create whatever token of appreciation they like, and distribute it however they like, as a target for their own gifts or rewards. However, unless such tokens are non-tradeable and non-transferable, it seems that rewards dropped on such a token might spill over to those that have simply bought their way in rather than having made any genuine contribution or even offering any expected future contribution. Ultimately it could just become like any tradeable token as re-distribution in the secondary market over time dominates any initial or primary distribution. However its only early days for BROWNIES yet, so at this stage the distribution is probably very close to initial.
That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.- You payed BTS to someone that BM appreciates
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.
That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.- You payed BTS to someone that BM appreciates
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.
- you can not use BROWNIES as collateral (even though I like the sound if this idea) - hence, no competition to BTS .. just a different "community"/"use base"
It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic
Just my thoughts ..
But what I also meant with Brownie competing against BTS value is the direct price pressure from people selling BTS for Brownie.True .. but a) that is free market .. and b) people wanting BROWNIES must first buy BTS :D
...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.
Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.
Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.
Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.
I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs. Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even. These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors. That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.
Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.
Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.
In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.
Parable of the Generous Employer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Workers_in_the_Vineyard)
I believe that anybody ought to be able to create whatever token of appreciation they like, and distribute it however they like, as a target for their own gifts or rewards. However, unless such tokens are non-tradeable and non-transferable, it seems that rewards dropped on such a token might spill over to those that have simply bought their way in rather than having made any genuine contribution or even offering any expected future contribution. Ultimately it could just become like any tradeable token as re-distribution in the secondary market over time dominates any initial or primary distribution. However its only early days for BROWNIES yet, so at this stage the distribution is probably very close to initial.
That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.
It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no-one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)
Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.
In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic
Just my thoughts ..
^^ THIS! but mainly because of what I stated in my previous post.It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no-one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)
Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.
In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic
Just my thoughts ..
I guess having the possibility of a snapshot that could occur at any time would encourage folks not to leave their BTS on some external exchange and not to sell BTS even temporarily just to fool around promiscuously with other coins...
A sharedrop happening at a random time still results in a value drop once it is announced that the sharedrop cutoff is passed, which still results in a shock to the internal markets.
The only difference it makes is that it allows insiders who know the date of the sharedrop to benefit greatly at the expense of everyone else, by buying BTS right before they do the sharedrop and then dumping right after it.
A sharedrop happening at a random time still results in a value drop once it is announced that the sharedrop cutoff is passed, which still results in a shock to the internal markets.
The only difference it makes is that it allows insiders who know the date of the sharedrop to benefit greatly at the expense of everyone else, by buying BTS right before they do the sharedrop and then dumping right after it.
It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no-one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)
Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.
In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic
Just my thoughts ..
I guess having the possibility of a snapshot that could occur at any time would encourage folks not to leave their BTS on some external exchange and not to sell BTS even temporarily just to fool around promiscuously with other coins...
A sharedrop happening at a random time still results in a value drop once it is announced that the sharedrop cutoff is passed, which still results in a shock to the internal markets.
The only difference it makes is that it allows insiders who know the date of the sharedrop to benefit greatly at the expense of everyone else, by buying BTS right before they do the sharedrop and then dumping right after it.
Of course it depends upon who knows ahead of time, and what their motivation is.
If the only person with pre-knowledge is the dev, then I wouldn't consider it a great threat.
After all I would consider the purpose of the sharedrop to be actually getting the coins in the hands of potential adopters.
@Stan
Yes you need to honor the community. Fuck the investors. As a AGS investor without BTS, I was little bit late with my xx BTC investment , I feel like bigger idiot with every new visit to these forum. I invested because you promise me part of all beautiful future DACs. From all that promises I only received some NOTEs. Yes I collect some vasted BTS but you know that was not much, less than 1 BTC. Thank you anyway.
Plus .. there is not a single AGS *investor* .. not a single one!!
It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)
Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.
In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic
Just my thoughts ..
No one got to sell their AGS.
Plus .. there is not a single AGS *investor* .. not a single one!!
If you dont know what I mean you should have never payed into the AGS address(es)
No promises are associated with AGS!No one got to sell their AGS.
Plus .. there is not a single AGS *investor* .. not a single one!!
If you dont know what I mean you should have never payed into the AGS address(es)
Yes I know what you mean. I bought AGS to invest in development of BTS and become part of all those beautiful autonomous companies. That was the promise if I remember correctly. What is left from that promise?
No promises are associated with AGS!No one got to sell their AGS.
Plus .. there is not a single AGS *investor* .. not a single one!!
If you dont know what I mean you should have never payed into the AGS address(es)
Yes I know what you mean. I bought AGS to invest in development of BTS and become part of all those beautiful autonomous companies. That was the promise if I remember correctly. What is left from that promise?
and still you received BTS .. didnt you?
But why. I was invited and my BTC with other 'promise'. Maybe I didn't want BTSX, now BTS. No, I didn't received BTS, at least not all. PTS was returned to investor, why not BTC? Where is the difference. A-ha PTS don't worth anything anymore. If I wait enough maybe Dan will return BTC :). Common guys you know well that you can't cheat your investors and expect trust. In crypto trust is all you have. Did you ask yourself what you have besides lots of broken promises or social contract as you call that.
Thank you very much Stan. You are clever guy and you know that post 2/28/14 investors are biggest losers here. Can we at least get 1 Brownie.PTS or maybe half? We even didn't get chance to sell our AGS coins. From original plan only that didn't changed.
No one got to sell their AGS.
Plus .. there is not a single AGS *investor* .. not a single one!!
If you dont know what I mean you should have never payed into the AGS address(es)
Yes I know what you mean. I bought AGS to invest in development of BTS and become part of all those beautiful autonomous companies. That was the promise if I remember correctly. What is left from that promise?
It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.
Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)
Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.
In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic
Just my thoughts ..
This. Exactly.
Though it's too bad PTS doesn't still exist...oh wait. A golden opportunity for legitimacy missed. Where is AlphaBar these days anyway? My DPOS PTS delegates are still chugging along :P .
On first glance, this (honoring the BitShares community; good thing generally) looks like a simple marketing gag. Is it one?Agree, this was likely less about sharedrop and more about name drop. Effective brand recognition and cost-effective marketing (free) at the same time. wp, gg, gl
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20877.msg269996.html#msg269996