But there is a simple way around it. Create several accounts, distribute your funds among them and set different proxies.

Lets say 5 close friends decide to implement this scheme for 10 dollars for every 7 days. That would mean:

1. week - member A is paid  $40 by the rest of the group (B-$10,  C-$10,  D-$10,  E-$10)
2. week- member B is paid $40 by A,C,D,E
3. week- member C is paid $40 by A,B,D,E
4. week- member D is paid $40 by A,B,C,E
5. week- member E is paid $40 by A,B,C,D

内盘已经可以交易eth了

引入ETH交易是可行的，只要这个交易品种有市场。如果开通ETH/BITCNY交易对的成本不高，那就赶紧搞起来。

Quote from: tonyk on November 23, 2015, 11:07:29 pm

I really do not get 'the no lifetime fees' crowd.

What is up with you people? Someone making too much money, according to you?

If yes go pay it yourselves, or get up and organize it as a UIA funding that you can buy into...


PS
And keep in mind that I say that while I have only 3 prime suspects for this secret investor - CNX being one of those.

So I've been thinking a lot about this and, like most things after further consideration, my opinion is evolving. Stan's parking garage metaphor is good.

I like the idea of crowd funded UIA to pay for features even if it is a crowd of one. It may play out like this (which may have already been posted..this thread really blew up quickly)

1) Someone wants a feature and gets in contact with developers - in this case CNX
2) CNX says they'll do it for $45k and creates a UIA with a market cap of $45k
3) The UIA earns all fees generated by the feature (minus standard network fees) for life
4) The UIA can be bought entirely by one person and they would earn all the royalties.

This gains the following:
1) The person(s) that paid for the feature reap the rewards whenever it is used forever.
2) The engineering resources to maintain the feature going forward are fungible.
3) Since a UIA is liquid it gets away from the "issue" of one person receiving royalties forever.

IMHO this is the perfect solution to crowd funding features, rewarding those that are taking the risk, and leveraging the existing platform to make it all happen.

Your statements are absolutely correct and have been communicated that way for quite some time .. it's called 'floor or parity' ...
It's not really a "flaw" in the system .. it is how it designed and supposed to be working ..

In order to be safe against falling prices you will always need to have more then 1x collateral ..
The only thing that you can do differently is .. also allow other kinds of assets to be used as collateral ... much like what MAKER is doing with the DAI on ethereum ..