I've never liked bitreserve but I have to admit that this page is very impressive: https://bitreserve.org/en/status

OTOH if they were cooking the books a simple third party audit would be able to reveal it.

I having a hard time understanding your metaphore ... Who's the dealer in this case ? [emoji15]

we all can disagree on Follow my vote but we might get a surprise in one of the announcements.

Bought some at .0589.

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on August 23, 2015, 02:42:43 pm

Quote from: d3adh3ad on August 23, 2015, 11:02:19 am

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's absolutely correct. The question investors are trying to answer though is what is BTS worth then?

I've previously described BTS as

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on August 21, 2015, 11:31:46 am

Imagine if the founder of Microsoft left when it was still a struggling start-up, taking all the talent with him to form another company and then told Microsoft shareholders that they would now only receive a free windows license and if they wanted any further work done by Bill Gates or the talent that they would have to pay market rates. How much would Microsoft be worth in that scenario?

(Especially if Microsoft couldn't afford to pay market rates because it was still a struggling start-up and also paying off an expensive merger from just 9 months prior that it had largely engaged in to retain it's founder.)

If BTS has run out of money & the founder and talent of BTS have formed another company and will only work post BTS 2.0 for market rates. It seems like now BTS's main claim to fame is a free windows license (Graphene)

Nobody owes it/you/me anything it's just a question for serious investors of determining why they should put their hard earned money into BTS at this point.

For me the answer is that it's a punt that BitAssets 2.0, the good partnerships and the referral system are going to combine to rapidly gain traction and if they don't, it's curtains. So very speculative at this point.

Windows was not open sourced,  Bitshares is. I think the new licencing stops the likes of IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, or just an start up etc to come here, create a fork, deploy it internally and thanks everyone for giving me this free product. Bitshares can now longer live and developers can be sure that nobody will come up with a competing chain using the same code, hence removing their only way of living and passion.

They will make millions with this, excellent. Good for them.

Newcomers can get cheaper BTS than we did, well thanks for the Brownie points the active community will get some shares. I believe that is has been impossible to be active in the past few months before the 2.0 announcement as the ones in the know could not say anything, and the ones that did not know, there was not opportunity to help. (It makes me wonder why I was testing in DevShares for a while.)

They could not have told everyone that they were working on a better product, it will have been admitting failure on the first one (even if for me works..)

What I want to see is a new bitshares toolkit, with a licensing that is clear and you can pitch to the likes of IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, or just an start up.
For example 20% minimum to BTS, what is considered a competing chain and what is not. Examples of how to extend the toolkit etc. If it cannot be a new chain, but a valid addition to the chain by creating a hard fork, how you ensure revenue for the new company.

I think the built in referral program is a great idea and will result in more marketing success as marketers and third parties will be paid for results they actually achieve. 

I believe this is a powerful marketing solution that besides being decentralised is also cost effective because it rewards results not good intentions or vote wrangling.