Your proposal will not work if you fork Bitshares. Take a look at how many alt coins have over 1k USD of volume in a 24 hour period compared to how many alternative coins have less than that. It is likely this fork will fall into the "less than that" category. Thus, Bitshares as-is will have more liquid Smartcoins than your fork. Not to mention all the negatives that come along with forking a project/community.

'My fork" as in the fork that I have paid for each single share competing with everybody else?

Thanks for the "I predict...cause I predict" statement. We are all very good at that... when we decide to.

Here is rough draft of of how dShares emerges and separates itself from BTS and how it gets initial funding and kick starts itself. I am not married for this proposal, but I do see most of its elements either desirable or the best possible compromise I have thought of.

Distribution of the new shares:
70% to the active BTS shareholders. Active defined as having their shares in their own account (outside of exchanges).
30% crowd fund/kick starter contributors.

Small is beautiful
While I do not see why dShares will not equal or hopefully bigger market cap in the future. I think starting small compact and reasonable is good thing for a start-up co-op. For that reason and to remove as much speculative value from current BTS price I find an initial estimate of  dShares value at 1/7th of BTS a good starting point. This should also give a nice return and incentive for participation for those part taking in the kick starter.

Development fund
All money from the kikstarter sales will go into a (community -and-) contributors to the crowd fund  multi signature account. The funds will be used to pay for development of the features outlined in the "bitSHARES as shares thread", and will continue to pay for any additional feature until it is exhausted.



BitAssets are our main innovation - we should have started using the long-long ago[I mean for both chains

-Kickstarter token will be offered for sale in a period of (say 30 days)
-in dSharesKickstarter/ bitUSD; dSharesKickstarter/ bitCNY and dSharesKickstarter/ TCNY markets ONLY.
-each day 1/30 of the dSharesKikstarter will  be sold to bidders offering the min price or above.
i-f not enough interest exist the unsold shares will carry to the next day(s) and if remaining shares exist on the last day to the dev. fund itself.
-The min price will be 1/7 of BTS price in USD at the start of the funding (alternatively some other prior day)




Some other general explanation clarification:

Community lead crowd funding
If it is not clear my ideas is about the following - 15-20 community volunteers (proxies, committee members etc are strongly encouraged to come forward)  start as controlling multi sig account where the crowd funding money go to. As major donors start to become more clear (say 3 times in the 30 day period) those initial volunteers are replaced by the top 15-20 contributor to the fund. At day 31 all community members controlling the account are replaced by the top 20 contributors.

Distribution to the Active community
I suggest [not married to this part, but find it beneficial] to cap the share-drop amount on exchanges to 10mil BTS. The excess of their holding will be spread to the community that seems to participate - and show it with at least withdrawing its funds from exchanges into his own account. BTW, IF no money are withdrawn and the things remain as of today, everyone will have about equal share in the dShares than is his share of total supply  in BTS.

Min price and currency of the crowd funding
The min price is set low for several reasons one of them being - would be contributor can create say bitCNY and use those for the crowd funding. Even if his short is liquidated and he loses all of the collateral (very very unlikely, as this means near blackswan for this BTS bitAsset), the min price grantees said person 7/2 returns if/when dShares price reaches parity with BTS.
That is to say - while I realize that many bitAsset does not exist as of now, the willing participant will be able to create them for themselves. Preferably with more than the min collateral required.


Slow maturation of the share drop
Even less married to this part, but might be highly beneficial [feedback please]
what else? I do not know, but should be more... I will save the next post just in case.

The share-drop on BTS matures slowly (coin-days approach for say 3 years) This is about only the audibility to sell those dShares. For all other purposes - voting, use as collateral, getting credit toward fees, receiving dividends those are absolutely active/normal shares
 
Some  benefits for BTS that comes to mind
1.Some part of the BTS currently held on exchanges will be withdrawn from.
2. More new bitAssets will be created and a use case for them as well.
3.First truly community lead crowd funding (the transition to funders' owned kickstart  fund is cool and unique IMHO)



Thoughts?

Per Title

Quote from: tonyk on February 20, 2016, 07:11:32 pm

What Shentist and abit said.
You do not have to be  first on the orderbook if you are a whale and the reward is anywhere meaningful. You buy the few small orders before yours (say 200-500USD total) and self-fill your 15-20K USD. The daily reward is mostly yours. You can even replace the orders that you bought at the same prices.

If the reward is not meaningful... well it will not have the impact you want, at all.

If this strategy would be profitable for a whale, it is reasonable to expect another whale will
come to compete with this whale.

if CNX wants to implemet it for free, there is no harm to test it on one asset first ... bitUSD
and see if/how it works.

True but I thought we wanted to stimulate meaningful liquidity and not just give some money to the whales. My bad than - mission accomplished:
Grand Plan:
1. feed the whales by dilution - DONE!
2. ?

I just want to point out that I agree with BM that dShares are indeed more heavy handed in most regards.

What I do not agree, is one sided analyses of pros and cons. He basically picked one of the issues this proposal tries to address, classified it as all it does...and went on to say what is his plan to do it much better. That is to say he refused to address, for example, BTS being left with outdated/inferior feed-backed assets, instead of market-based assets dShares offers. That consequences of this show their ugly head in many aspects of the current system (too many to list here, as well). Many of them are very hard to fix, if at all fixable.example - suggestion of running casper like bets in BTS on the price feed so one might eventually hopefully get a better feed. And to what end? Even with a perfect feed the force liquidation will remain vastly inferior and arbitrary; people will still sell bitAssets at what they deem a fair price (after considering all the factors and risks) no matter what the feed tells them.

dShares are also free (and more often than not) willing to borrow what is good and working from BTS. Being able to defacto earn credit to trade or transfer funds by having enough stake in the co-op is one such very appealing idea that I fully support for dShares. This makes the system free for 95% of the users, if they like it free. Liquidity is king is this week's BM's motto. And while I cannot stress how important is liquidity, I am not sure that just throwing money at the first algo (just cause it is easy to implement) is anywhere near the right approach.That is to say I am a fan of maker in how it tries to reward the market liquidity providers in sensible way, while the new approach seem to just through money proportional to just order size and min time on the books. Very exploitable and inefficient. (for BTS's sake I hope I am wrong. no official response on that yet).

I think knocking those very restrictive 5 BTS/sec cap is in order...
By the beginning of March the dev. alone will have to start in-fights to get above the threshold of being paid or not. Add BM's liquidity spending, and you yourself have 2 ideas in 2 days how to spend those funds. To say nothing that 10% is better than 5% so you can use a little extra.

What is a good number to last us say at lest 6mo? 50 BTS/sec? Sounds good?

On other benefits of dilution read and listen to BM. How to put yourself in 'Dilution (or Delusion) state of mind, read my other posts'.


-----
On this particular proposal - give 50% to shorters and 50% to smartcoin holders. Yield harvesting still yields the same, just some crazy short my sell into this newfound bitAssets demand.

I agree that 10 minutes is too low. The lower the volume the more time the limit should be. During the mumble the period of time that was mentioned was 24h, dunno the origin of these 10 min now.

24h is the max limit.The idea is - you do not get a reward for placing an order way from the price and it gets filled after 1week because the market moved.
10min is the min it must stay on the books - this is to prevent* self filling the order just to get the reward.

*This is the hope at least. With whale size orders the theory fails though.