BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: fuzzy on December 03, 2015, 08:44:10 am
-
I am wondering if it would be better for the community if instead of me giving out BROWNIE.PTS directly to community members (and missing many in the process), if instead I gave a specific amount to Committee members each month to distribute to those in the community who they believe are helping bitshares.
In this way, it would largely take me out of direct distribution and put it into the hands of individuals who have been voted in by the community (and can be voted out in an instant---which would be a wonderful check to the power). I personally think this might be the best way to distribute brownies and I would have no problems with distributing the tokens to them each month.
As I see it, Brownies are a good way for Bytemaster to put some power back into the hands of people actually working in bitshares as opposed to the current lopsided system where it seems only a few exchanges and whales (many of whom likely are not active community members) will have voting power worth anything. It is DKP...after all.
-
It should be you. The fewer people we have to trust to that task, the more fair the distribution will likely be.
So far you've been very fair but who knows how the committee will do things. It represents a risk.
I think to decentralize it just use bots and faucets, which distribute by algorithm, but then why would we need the committee to control that? As a precedent it's only fair if you and the people Bytemaster selected to distribute his personal token are the one's distributing it.
Putting it in the hands of the committee will make it seem like a community token when it's really Bytemaster's personal token to do as he pleases with. It would also set a precedent because what if other people want their token distributed by the committee someday in the future?
-
It should be you. The fewer people we have to trust to that task, the more fair the distribution will likely be.
So far you've been very fair but who knows how the committee will do things. It represents a risk.
I think to decentralize it just use bots and faucets, which distribute by algorithm, but then why would we need the committee to control that? As a precedent it's only fair if you and the people Bytemaster selected to distribute his personal token are the one's distributing it.
Putting it in the hands of the committee will make it seem like a community token when it's really Bytemaster's personal token to do as he pleases with. It would also set a precedent because what if other people want their token distributed by the committee someday in the future?
Well you certainly have some valid points (though DKP is a community token...and I think we will have many :P). One thing I am personally thinking right now (which might open up other issues) is that we SHOULD have sponsors who distribute their tokens to committee members and others for participating in various events and community-building activities that will serve all bitshares projects.
So for instance, let's say METAFEES wanted to be a sponsor for a committee townhall (which I assure you we desperately need)--they could simply use the Sharebot to distribute tokens to the same people who received BROWNIE.PTS that week. I could do the same for Beyond Bitcoin tokens (or Greenpoints) and @Tuck Fheman could give FISTBUMPs like he loves to do...etc etc. It would basically be free advertising to those who are among the most active community participants. And of course, when Metaexchange sharedrops some tokens on community members in this way, they could also post a nice image along with links to their site, tutorials on how to use it--or maybe even community initiatives they need support on...etc.
However, I can't deny that you are right when bm basically said it is his personal token to send out how he wishes, and I am positive he doesn't have time to do it himself. DKP man...that is what I know. I also know that I never was called a brown noser for handing DKP out...because people considered it payment for something they otherwise would have been forced to do free of charge (or not at all).
Thanks for your input luckybit. It is always respectful and attempting to look at the problems while focusing on solutions. Such a blessing to have you be the first to respond.
-
Committee is busy with important core issues, they shouldn't waste time with giveaways in my opinion
-
I think it will be very difficult for them to agree on any donation .. simply because different people have different opinions and perceptions of work and "fair".
And since Committee members are unpaid, I would put an extra burden on them
-
Committee is busy with important core issues, they shouldn't waste time with giveaways in my opinion
It's not exactly a "giveaway".
For most receiving them it's their "pay check" for work done and the only funds they receive.
-
I think it will be very difficult for them to agree on any donation .. simply because different people have different opinions and perceptions of work and "fair".
And since Committee members are unpaid, I would put an extra burden on them
bytemaster has already put that extreme burden on one man, fuzzy ... and he never asked for it. ;)
Spreading that burden around would free up fuzzy to do more work at Beyond Bitcoin and spread out the complaints among several people instead of pointed at one man that never asked to be in that position in the first place.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/O0oo0.gif)
-
I think it will be very difficult for them to agree on any donation .. simply because different people have different opinions and perceptions of work and "fair".
And since Committee members are unpaid, I would put an extra burden on them
bytemaster has already put that extreme burden on one man, fuzzy ... and he never asked for it. ;)
Spreading that burden around would free up fuzzy to do more work at Beyond Bitcoin and spread out the complaints among several people instead of pointed at one man that never asked to be in that position in the first place.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/O0oo0.gif)
I respect bm so much it is a bit ridiculous...it is apparent (though it is obvious to those who pay attention that I don't always agree with him). However, I can't say "I didn't ask for it"...but that is a long story. However, when it came to me I battled in my brain whether or not to do it...and to be honest my acceptance of it probably played a huge role in motivating me to get ShareBits brought online. So it is like a beautiful thing but a double-edged sword.
I just want to make bitshares rock...and HOPEFULLY try to make the foundational members who will fight for the original vision of bitshares to become the reality wealthy enough that they can still keep a great deal of control even during the attempt for a hostile takeover. The saddest day in my mind would be some tech giant with a horrible track record of human rights and privacy violations (ironically the ones that Ethereum now has "helping" them---Microsoft and IBM) coming in and displacing those people simply by buying bitshares, laughing and controlling it.
I love brownies (and would love and support them EVEN IF I wasn't asked to distribute them), but you definitely are right that it can be bit of a burden too. Unlike DKP, giving out Brownies seems to also seems to make enemies ::). One thing I can say is that running guilds didn't prepare me for everything in crypto--I would have certainly scratched my head if people would have attended raids and then complained about me giving DKP to everyone in attendance :P
-
Give elected positions in Bitshares a currency of actual value (trading for BTS) to freely distribute at their discretion to voters that could/would give those representatives favour? What could possibly go wrong?
-
Give elected positions in Bitshares a currency of actual value (trading for BTS) to freely distribute at their discretion to voters that could/would give those representatives favour? What could possibly go wrong?
It depends on how it is done. If it's done by a formula or with a bot then maybe it could work but when humans make judgement on other humans that is a bad recipe.
-
Give elected positions in Bitshares a currency of actual value (trading for BTS) to freely distribute at their discretion to voters that could/would give those representatives favour? What could possibly go wrong?
It depends on how it is done. If it's done by a formula or with a bot then maybe it could work but when humans make judgement on other humans that is a bad recipe.
Yes you are right. it depends on how it is done. @clout had a great idea, for instance (at least imo) at one point to distribute tokens to accounts for every $100 of volume they produce on the exchange.
If clout was a comittee member that would be a great way for him to work closely with the community and receive real time feedback for what his project is accomplishing that could considerably help bitshares. Perhaps
Also, there would be nothing keeping competitors from coming in and distributing a competing token of their own on the same people who received brownies, or everyone who does not hold or want brownies. This is the beauty of Town Halls like i want to have with committee members and community together. Attendance is awarded for both sides and participants never know who will take an appreciation for a comment made or question asked...and sharedrop on them with their own personal (or business) token. The guaranteed reward (brownies) + the variable reward (bunkershares?) together are a VERY POWERFUL psychological tool for incentivizing participation.
Now....as for "what could possibly go wrong". Everything...always. Murphy's Law buddy... :P
Which is precisely why I post polls like this looking for honest feedback. It is because I have ideas (constantly) about how to better improve our community, but always like to receive productive input before making any rash decisions on my own--it would be silly of me to think I know all angles and just ignore this part of the process. (thanks for participating in the poll btw :))
-
I think it will be very difficult for them to agree on any donation .. simply because different people have different opinions and perceptions of work and "fair".
And since Committee members are unpaid, I would put an extra burden on them
bytemaster has already put that extreme burden on one man, fuzzy ... and he never asked for it. ;)
Spreading that burden around would free up fuzzy to do more work at Beyond Bitcoin and spread out the complaints among several people instead of pointed at one man that never asked to be in that position in the first place.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/O0oo0.gif)
I respect bm so much it is a bit ridiculous...it is apparent (though it is obvious to those who pay attention that I don't always agree with him). However, I can't say "I didn't ask for it"...but that is a long story. However, when it came to me I battled in my brain whether or not to do it...and to be honest my acceptance of it probably played a huge role in motivating me to get ShareBits brought online. So it is like a beautiful thing but a double-edged sword.
I just want to make bitshares rock...and HOPEFULLY try to make the foundational members who will fight for the original vision of bitshares to become the reality wealthy enough that they can still keep a great deal of control even during the attempt for a hostile takeover. The saddest day in my mind would be some tech giant with a horrible track record of human rights and privacy violations (ironically the ones that Ethereum now has "helping" them---Microsoft and IBM) coming in and displacing those people simply by buying bitshares, laughing and controlling it.
I love brownies (and would love and support them EVEN IF I wasn't asked to distribute them), but you definitely are right that it can be bit of a burden too. Unlike DKP, giving out Brownies seems to also seems to make enemies ::). One thing I can say is that running guilds didn't prepare me for everything in crypto--I would have certainly scratched my head if people would have attended raids and then complained about me giving DKP to everyone in attendance :P
IBM AND Microsoft come to bitshares and buy all the BTS .....wow ..... that's absurd .
they could just issue their own token , own 10000000000 times more network effect than BTS .... with developers more capable than every crypto project in the world ...why would they buy BTS ? any reason at all ?
-
I think it will be very difficult for them to agree on any donation .. simply because different people have different opinions and perceptions of work and "fair".
And since Committee members are unpaid, I would put an extra burden on them
bytemaster has already put that extreme burden on one man, fuzzy ... and he never asked for it. ;)
Spreading that burden around would free up fuzzy to do more work at Beyond Bitcoin and spread out the complaints among several people instead of pointed at one man that never asked to be in that position in the first place.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/O0oo0.gif)
I respect bm so much it is a bit ridiculous...it is apparent (though it is obvious to those who pay attention that I don't always agree with him). However, I can't say "I didn't ask for it"...but that is a long story. However, when it came to me I battled in my brain whether or not to do it...and to be honest my acceptance of it probably played a huge role in motivating me to get ShareBits brought online. So it is like a beautiful thing but a double-edged sword.
I just want to make bitshares rock...and HOPEFULLY try to make the foundational members who will fight for the original vision of bitshares to become the reality wealthy enough that they can still keep a great deal of control even during the attempt for a hostile takeover. The saddest day in my mind would be some tech giant with a horrible track record of human rights and privacy violations (ironically the ones that Ethereum now has "helping" them---Microsoft and IBM) coming in and displacing those people simply by buying bitshares, laughing and controlling it.
I love brownies (and would love and support them EVEN IF I wasn't asked to distribute them), but you definitely are right that it can be bit of a burden too. Unlike DKP, giving out Brownies seems to also seems to make enemies ::). One thing I can say is that running guilds didn't prepare me for everything in crypto--I would have certainly scratched my head if people would have attended raids and then complained about me giving DKP to everyone in attendance :P
IBM AND Microsoft come to bitshares and buy all the BTS .....wow ..... that's absurd .
they could just issue their own token , own 10000000000 times more network effect than BTS .... with developers more capable than every crypto project in the world ...why would they buy BTS ? any reason at all ?
Because is cheap, but I would buy Cryptonomex instead.
-
I think it will be very difficult for them to agree on any donation .. simply because different people have different opinions and perceptions of work and "fair".
And since Committee members are unpaid, I would put an extra burden on them
bytemaster has already put that extreme burden on one man, fuzzy ... and he never asked for it. ;)
Spreading that burden around would free up fuzzy to do more work at Beyond Bitcoin and spread out the complaints among several people instead of pointed at one man that never asked to be in that position in the first place.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/O0oo0.gif)
I respect bm so much it is a bit ridiculous...it is apparent (though it is obvious to those who pay attention that I don't always agree with him). However, I can't say "I didn't ask for it"...but that is a long story. However, when it came to me I battled in my brain whether or not to do it...and to be honest my acceptance of it probably played a huge role in motivating me to get ShareBits brought online. So it is like a beautiful thing but a double-edged sword.
I just want to make bitshares rock...and HOPEFULLY try to make the foundational members who will fight for the original vision of bitshares to become the reality wealthy enough that they can still keep a great deal of control even during the attempt for a hostile takeover. The saddest day in my mind would be some tech giant with a horrible track record of human rights and privacy violations (ironically the ones that Ethereum now has "helping" them---Microsoft and IBM) coming in and displacing those people simply by buying bitshares, laughing and controlling it.
I love brownies (and would love and support them EVEN IF I wasn't asked to distribute them), but you definitely are right that it can be bit of a burden too. Unlike DKP, giving out Brownies seems to also seems to make enemies ::). One thing I can say is that running guilds didn't prepare me for everything in crypto--I would have certainly scratched my head if people would have attended raids and then complained about me giving DKP to everyone in attendance :P
IBM AND Microsoft come to bitshares and buy all the BTS .....wow ..... that's absurd .
they could just issue their own token , own 10000000000 times more network effect than BTS .... with developers more capable than every crypto project in the world ...why would they buy BTS ? any reason at all ?
Ooo wait. so you mean IBM and Microsoft issue their own token that is Decentralized during a time of great conflict and financial strife in the world? They will likely do this to Ethereum...lol. But they will also likely end up hiring the devs from those chains too because it will help them greatly to do so both in terms of PR and perhaps even a level of expertise that would still take a brilliant coder with zero knowledge of blockchain tech to pick it up and run with it. I don't care how smart they are--none of them will come up with it overnight. Taulant, for instance, has told me of his talks with big banks to consult for them and teach their own IT teams the merits and how to use it.
Now as for the network effect. It will only take them so far as they will never let a system be controlled by the people---while bitshares does. I still think it is a possibility though--as all tactics are valuable in warfare, and all wars are economically-based. So even though I don't agree with every one of your points,
-
IBM AND Microsoft come to bitshares and buy all the BTS .....wow ..... that's absurd .
... why would they buy BTS ? any reason at all ?
Bill would buy it for teh childrens, cuz he's always thinking of teh childrens!
He would then force each BTS hodling child to be subjected to a round of speshul vaccinations.
This would generate huge +PR for Mr. Bill ... and a few years later he could reclaim all of those BTS when the kids die.
:P
-
Congratulations, you chose Door #3!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVViFOQXIAAaUiY.jpg)
-
Where is " They should drop everything else. and do just that" ?
-
IBM AND Microsoft come to bitshares and buy all the BTS .....wow ..... that's absurd .
... why would they buy BTS ? any reason at all ?
Bill would buy it for teh childrens, cuz he's always thinking of teh childrens!
He would then force each BTS hodling child to be subjected to a round of speshul vaccinations.
This would generate huge +PR for Mr. Bill ... and a few years later he could reclaim all of those BTS when the kids die.
:P
lol...great truth to end this on. thanks for the feedback :)