Another way to put it: Would you pay a premium to have this team snowball right now, over a 50/50 AGS/PTS team sometime in the future? How much?

Yes! Whatever you think is efficient to grow AGS/PTS value long tern.

There's no point in alienating half the political spectrum - just give them the tool that changes their reality and they will learn from that positive. Challenge what they hold dear and you'll scare them into wondering what viewpoint they are supporting.

Any movement (in history) tends (tended) to form an identity by constructing a contradicting opposite.
Telling others that their world view is inferior will hurt their feelings and gives them no chance but to further their opposition to avoid loss of face. Any revolution will end in a new ruling of the one opinion. Making it a political movement (in terms of the power of groups over other groups) will cripple the positive effects of it. Non-polittical in that sense would be person to person in a sense. The one that believes that decentralization and trustlessness/automatizing are possible completely without disadvantages acts irresponsible. Unemployment might be an example https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3387.msg43998#msg43998. A balanced approach that does not exclude any though patterns is worth it in my opinion. It just works together and by talking a lot to each other to understand each others views.
Like with anything there is a disadvantage that comes with this: It leaves no space to construct your own (group) identity (ego) as the only legitimate (historically: divine) source which can be disappointing first and might stay less encouraging/enhancing if you don't have a cause that lies beyong your identity.

Love unites

Quote from: delulo on March 21, 2014, 05:00:13 pm

Polls which dont require the participants to use actual money are worth nothing

Aw lighten up, it's just a fun toy. Sure, some people will be naive enough to think that the results are really meaningful, but I think most people on the forum are intelligent enough to understand the results for what they are.

Cool

Polls which dont require the participants to use actual money are worth nothing

Narrative circa Newsletter 2...

Free Space - The Ever-Receding Frontier

The jurisdiction of governments has always been defined by the land
mass they control by force. Out beyond the "three-mile" limit of their
shores is traditionally viewed as international waters. No government
has sovereignty out there, though many have tried to exert such control.
Their success has been limited to their ability to project power, whether
they have an internationally recognized right to do so or not.

We view the Internet as lying in international waters as well.

Governments and other nefarious enterprises try to exert power by exploiting items of value that
must pass through their control or by seducing or coercing service providers that must
themselves remain exposed in the physical world. But what of the etherial constructs of cryptospace?
Ghost ships that don’t show up on any earthy radar and have no ports of call where they
can be interdicted? Ships with crypto-graphical cloaking devices that can carry their cargo
across the digital high seas with impunity, immune while pirates and tyrants huff and puff in
frustration. Many will want to control this new frontier. But unlike the past frontiers of
freedom, this time they will fail.

When Daniel Boone and Davy Crocket strode into the American Old West they were entering the
Free Space frontier of their day. But soon “civilization” began to encroach and their offspring
fled further West. The Eagles once lamented, “there is no more new frontier, we have got to
make it here”. We disagree. In Free Space, freedom can still flourish - by design.

Bitcoin has opened a portal to Free Space - a land of opportunity.

Bitcoin is just a digital currency worth billions. But the technology behind it is beyond the control of
any government on the planet. There is no central point where tyranny can seduce or coerce the people
who have learned to use it. Instead they interact peer to peer, with no corruptible middlemen. Bitcoin
just works. And it has paved our way to digital freedom. A next generation Internet.

In Free Space, no one can read your mail.
In Free Space, no one can track your purchases.
In Free Space, no one can steal your identity.
In Free Space, no one can inflate away your savings.
In Free Space, no one can confiscate your wealth.

In Free Space, your wealth is all in your head.

Anyone able to infringe on even one of these freedoms has too much power.
The tools needed to defend Free Space are emerging, but the arms race will probably never end.

In my opinion it is not clever to rethorically attack gvernments like this. Just provide the technology that will make it (decentralization, all III stands for) happen and be diplomatic and friendly otherwise The technology is the crucial point which will make things happen. Making yourself  enemies with de facto authorities is just not necessary and might lead to some kind of ban of the ecosystem which supports the technology and will prevent more people from being positive about mass adoption of the technology.
It would be arrogant to assume governments couldnt shut down bitshares/bitcoin. They couldn't shut it down completely but prevent people enough to make real use of it because in the the transition phase p2p systems need to interact with centralized systems (for example centralized BTC/USD exchanges) to get enough people to use and support it!! It is just not neccesary to make yourself enemies with autorities. It is against your cause.

Why do people still do it? Because fighting mode in which a specific enemy is identified and in which roles are clear (I am/we are good, the other side is bad) is calming for humans.

I would pay the least possible. So I'd definitely be able to get more from the guy selling for $5 than you selling at $100.

I think we both agree on this. Bitshares can be a game changer if it works but that is not neccesarily determining the short term price.

If I had unlimited money, I would pay up to $500 per BTS. The reason why is the price I pay to get into BTS isn't so important because if it works as intended I could lock my profits in BitUSD. I don't have to worry about the volatility like I do with Bitcoin. So the initial price doesn't matter, what matters is that I cannot lose money so whatever I paid I would seek to lock in. I would not sell for less than I paid, and I would just buy Bitshares at $200 for instance and then quickly store it as BitUSD at $200 knowing that at some point in the future that $200 will get paid dividends.

If you take all your BTS and buy BitUSD with it it is like selling it for USD at whatever price BTS is at at that point except that the USD are issued by the Bitshares system. You dont have any BTS then anymore and can not profit from the value increase of BTS.

You'll have to look around for those comments on lawyers. But I have seen at least three references that I can remember. As far as Invictus' status as a corporation, I am only reporting what I have read and understood second hand, but my understanding is that it's not going to become nonprofit, but it is acting more as a facilitator for all these DACs by setting up the basic code and then seeking partners or developers to take on the activity itself.