I am an empirical idealist. I have much greater appreciation and enthusiasm for BitShares knowing the primary motivation for it's creation and continued evolution is founded on principles I believe in.
But I also recognize I'm not one of the masses. Marketing to me is much different than to the masses.
I am also extremely grateful BM is so tuned into this forum and the BitShares community as there is a lot of wisdom expressed here.
I'm not a marketing expert but I think if BM doesn't get from this thread the need to provide a value proposition and utility for the masses (while sticking to the principles stated in his OP) he'll be doing the community a disservice by missing the wisdom expressed here.
Part of that wisdom was this, which I just finished watching (
matt):
Ted vid: "People buy what you believe not how you do it"
http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action#t-55892
In particular I see this
balance being put to the test with VOTE. As great an opportunity as it is perceived to be and may actually be to bring widespread awareness and adoption of BitShares to the masses, the implementation of the VOTE DAC must not sacrifice or compromise the underlying principle of freedom from violence that voting in a statist society represents.
I personally choose to withhold my support of statism by refusing to participate in the voting process, not on principle alone but also based on the strong empirical evidence that it doesn't do anything to effect fundamental change and is highly manipulated and corrupt in so many ways. Just check out Bev Harris' "Blackbox Voting" documentary / organization for some of this evidence.
I'm NOT saying you should refrain from moving forward with the VOTE DAC and the California initiative, only to be very cautious as you do and don't loose sight of what you said in your OP.