Quote from: gamey on October 20, 2014, 11:51:05 pm

I was happy with 10/10/80.

The problem with this averaging out stuff is that one can make the argument for PTS.  Then people will say but no, PTS obviously had value shaved off during snapshots and future value leading up to snapshots.  Who really knows?  We can get into nested arguments all biased on what we want.

Try to correlate what the value of BTSX was pre-scare and do that with PTS.  Assume efficient markets.  Then chop it up like that.

or

10/10/80 as simple and straightforward.  It will save a lot of bickering and people will move on.

sounds fine with me.

对，BM这样做就是为了3i，因为3i在BTS中占有最多的比例，这样做能够确保3i得到最多的分红和股份，从只有7万个PTS起家，一步一步处心积虑，把大家的钱慢慢地吸进来，再把大家的股份稀释掉，3i用这种空手套的形式，变相地占有了整个社区的财富，违背了去中心化的宗旨！

最好从3i持有的btsx中拿出一部分补偿，虽然3i现在亏，但可以聚拢人心，省的到处都有3i圈钱的言论。

Quote from: arhag on October 18, 2014, 02:21:46 am

So bytemaster, when are you planning on letting us in on the details of this brilliant new way of doing the Voting DAC? The teasing is so painful.

I'm assuming the self-funding for the project will come through dilution of Vote shares? (something that could have been done with BTSX as well if we weren't so foolish to promise a 2 billion BTSX hard cap)

I'm still finding the fact that this could have larger (or even comparable) market cap than BTSX very hard to believe, but I guess I will have to wait for the details. I assume the market cap comes from the demand for BitUSD (I am surprised the only BitAsset planned for that chain is BitUSD). Not sure where the demand for BitUSD comes from though? I don't see how holding more BitUSD would (or even should) give one more voting power in elections. I'm assuming and hoping the Voting DAC is still going to be designed with the capability of supporting traditional elections where each unique human has one vote.

The other thing I want to mention (which may very well not be relevant at all) is that if the DAC's purpose has changed to not just be about voting but to also to act as a decentralized bank and exchange AND means of paying for goods/services in the real world (essentially making BitShares X obsolete), then in my opinion it is only fair for that DAC to snapshot off of BTSX instead of PTS/AGS. But if its purpose truly is only for voting and BitShares X is the DAC meant for a store of value and to hold the BitCurrencies that the world standardizes around to pay for goods/services in the physical world, then the current snapshot of Voting DAC is fair.

1) BTSX hard cap of 2 billion is going to limit its growth potential.
2) BTSX is multi-asset exchange and there will be many clones of it for many different assets... this VOTE DAC cannot support the transaction volume of all of those assets *AND* do everything else we want it to do... thus it will not be competing with BTSX as a store of wealth or exchange with derivatives. 
3) This new DAC will be funding features that will help BTSX holders... ie: my plan to fund BTSX growth without diluting BTSX.   BTSX is just swapping its tech for BitUSD for the tech funded by the other DAC and both sides win.   As a result BTSX development funds will mostly be used for "bug fixes" and "porting features" rather than developing new features.