I was there too, and signed the guest book.  Mumble: lovejoy, btstalk: lovejoy
bitscape. 

I would very much like to see fewer rash and hateful words here.
I'm extremely disappointed with certain members of this community based on the tone of their posts in this thread.
While others are standing out for their clear and genuine efforts at reaching some understanding.

I understand a certain degree of skepticism and mistrust here, but we mustn't let it get the best of us.  We can solve this issue, like so many before it.

I for one stand to benefit greatly from the referral program, yet I wish for a solution to the great fee debate which gives the Chinese members of our community the tools they need to succeed, and therefore the tools we need for all of us to succeed.  Others have already pointed out the obvious, and I will reiterate, we are a global blockchain, a global community.  We need to look after the interests of as many members of our community as we can manage.  We will be as strong as our diversity, and we haven't yet begun to exhaust options for devising a plan which can accommodate the many communities of which we are comprised.  Let's not let haste, or greed, for our little piece of the pie, distract us from the greater purpose here.

I'm generally in the don't change things until we've had a chance to see what's really happening as a result of current parameters camp, but we are faced with a situation in which a significant portion of our community is expressing a strong desire for another way of doing business, and we would do well to listen.  Try to understand where bitcrab is coming from, and respond accordingly... don't just react.  @merivercap and @abit, among others,  are really keeping it real on this front.  Respect.

We must have real dialogue between all interested parties, not just throwing stones. There must be a way to resolve this issue to the benefit of everyone involved.  May reason and goodwill prevail.

C'mon, we're only on page 19 of this thread.. I think we'll have it around page 34.  Someone start a prediction market for the fee debate already. 

The whole world is counting on us... no pressure. 
@bytemaster alluded to some thoughts on the matter in the last mumble... I'm curious when he will weigh in... page 20?

  Great work!  I need to read this again tomorrow and look at it with clear eyes.
The only thing that immediately jumps out to me is the conclusion.

I would say this differently, but I haven't figured out how exactly yet.

9.  Conclusion

We have described a peer-to-peer payment and monetary asset system that enables users to make payments in assets that are pegged to local currencies.  We start with the framework of Bitcoin and other coin systems that use cryptographic digital signatures to securely transfer ownership.  Bitcoin is currently not widely used as a unit of account and may take many years or decades before it becomes the standard monetary unit of account.  Hence the proposed system provides a framework to enable users to create monetary assets that are pegged to local fiat currencies for more convenient use. The system begins with a delegated-proof-of-stake protocol (DPOS) to allow stakeholders to vote on the operations of the network just like traditional organizations and companies.  DPOS also enables stakeholders to select witness nodes to produce blocks and record the transaction history into the blockchain.  Stakeholders can also create monetary assets that are collateralized by shares in the network and use internal and external exchange prices to value the collateral so each monetary asset remains sufficiently backed over time.

My issues begin with: "We start with the framework of Bitcoin and..." "...may take many years or decades before..." and "the proposed system"

I'd suggest naming the "proposed system" within the document.  The Graphene Toolkit, BitShares, or an effective generic descriptor.  The "proposed system" is somewhat confusing and weaker than need be since the system is in fact operational currently, and that's a majorly strong point, it does exist not just in theory... As demonstrated by, and so forth.

I can't really think clearly about how to reformulate this right now, I'll look again tomorrow, but that's my 2bts.

What you think this is all just some big experiment? 

Seems appropriate somehow...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JaLjwSpZ6Cs

Edit: roadscape thinks this is creepy. I always found it highly amusing... One man obsessively speculating about what his neighbor is building... So crypto space. Lol.

Voted.

I for one would like to see much more development on the bitshares.org website, which imo should really serve as a trustworthy hub of up to date information and resources on what's happening and what's possible across the entire bts ecosystem, as well as a portal for all related projects, and thoughtful social media integration.  Thoughts on development priorities @cass?

It's not hard to imagine that a startup of our nature could easily benefit from having multiple full time people working on the web dev and social media integration alone.  Given all the shifting sands we travel through, it would be immensely helpful for us to be presenting a consistent user experience from here on out.

Maybe someday in the not to distant future we will be able to use the committee and worker model to effortlessly delegate development to small teams of trusted and qualified workers.  The tools are being forged, as the terrain is being mapped.  Bit by bit.

For now, let's put cass in the Web Dev seat, and let him run point on this.