Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Samupaha

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 32
1
I suggest Samupaha has turned into a troll and a bully and should have his account suspended.  He's obviously trying to blame people for his own personal investment decisions and calling Stan's religious beliefs into question is crossing the line.  This should not be tolerated.

I'm not blaming anybody for my personal investments. So far I have successfully avoided all scam schemes. The reason why I warn other people is because it's the right thing to do. "Buyer beware" is good advice, but even better is to tell others when they should be especially beware. I don't care only about my money, I care about other people, too. I dislike to see other people scammed and deceived, that's why I try to warn them before it happens.

And the religious stuff? Well...


2
a talent-rich company that just trained 150 of the most successful internet marketers in the world on all the latest techniques in gameification and augmented reality and real time blockchain integration

If they are so talented and great, why did their launch fail miserably? If they really know what they are doing, why they decided to use very low quality marketing technique? If they had any experience from internet marketing, they should have foreseen how things will go in the internet if they try to do something like that.

earning several million dollars in one weekend.

Where did the money come from? Was it ethical business? Did they actually produce a real and valuable service for their customers?

a company that has all those marketers' and partners' passionate  support despite his hour-long confession of his past mistakes at the start of his epic Hollywood Event.

It's very common manipulation technique to talk about own mistakes to get other people's trust. Scammers are using it every day to deceive people.

a company capable of single handedly defeating some of the greatest celebrity teams in the world

What does this even mean?

and winning the Billion Dollar Prize in our upcoming Billion Hero Challenge - all on its own with its new technologies

They design the game themselves so they can win? Sounds exactly like scammers would do it.

a company that will have billions to support funding a Steemit competitor and making it more popular than Steemit in every way, attracting current Steem users away from the current toxic evil-whale environment with a multi-million dollar share drop on everyone who is not an evil whale, and leveraging all the traffic from people competing for our billion dollar prize

As you saw, Steemians don't like scammers. Now that the guy has lost his reputation, why would anybody follow him to a new platform?

a company that is perfectly capable of leveraging all that Billion Hero Challenge traffic to make Steemit vanish from Google SEO rankings completely

LOL, I highly doubt this.

But those living in glass houses who throw stones at other people's projects without taking time to understand them deserve whatever they get.

Do those people deserve to lose their money who will buy into a scam because of you? Are you willing to admit that you were wrong and pay them back from your own pocket?

I really can't understand your thinking. You seem to be a nice guy but your business actions are confusing. I remember that you have claimed to be a devout christian. Is this just a conspiracy to make people poor so they can get to heaven?

3
Stan, I don't think you understand how serious the situation is.

Even if the Mogul game wasn't a scam, it should have been kicked out from Steem. Why? Because it would have attracted other real scammers to the platform.

Like many others besides me have noticed, the language Trainer used and the marketing style that he had chosen was pretty much straight from some kind of get-rich-quick scheme guidebook. If he has a real business, he doesn't need to use scamming marketing style. Just watch him after this... If he learned from this incident, he understands that his marketing style must change if he wants to make some real business. If he continues with the same style, he is either a scammer or unable to learn from mistakes.

But let's just assume that no backlash happened in the case of Mogul. What if Trainer had been able to launch the game as he wanted?

Two possible outcomes:

1) The game was a scam and you, Stan, would have lost even more of your reputation because you fully endorsed it. What would you say to the people who lost thousands of dollars for nothing? Would you pay them back with your own money (because scammers don't give back any refunds)?

2) The game wasn't a scam but it would have attracted several real scams to Steem. You, Stan, would be still indirectly responsible for the losses of people who would invest to those scams. Would you pay them back with your own money?

5
"Black swan" is incorrect term in this context. It refers to an event that is impossible or at least very difficult to foresee. Global settlement is very well known risk so it's not a black swan event. Please change the terminology or Nassim Taleb will laugh at you.

6
Oh, he'll still do it.  Steemit just won't be the one to benefit from it.

So you still haven't learned anything from this? Whenever you are involved in "something big" it always fails. By now you should be able to see some patterns. Like, for example, every time you cooperate with Michael Taggart, nothing works out.

Well, no one ever let us fully develop the concept.

You had all the chances to fully develop the business. When you fail, take some responsibility, don't blame others.

Instead of being in the bubble with get-rich-quick scammers, you should have done your own research. It wouldn't have been hard to ask around about the idea and plans. Ask feedback – what could go wrong? It would have been very quickly pointed out that making this kind of business with a man with very low reputation will be pretty much impossible to market efficiently. If you ruin the brand in the beginning, it will require a lot of unnecessary work to build it later.

This is not rocket science, this is just very simple basics of business.

7
Oh, Stan, when you will learn that get-rich-quick online marketers are the lowest scum of internet business? You can't ever win if you work with them.

BTS and Steemit to the moon? Yeah, right. This guy didn't last even 24h. He edited the original post, all there is left is this: "Bye steemit. You're not ready for this."


8
Again some serial scammer? Come on man, this is not helping at all.

9
General Discussion / Re: Dan's Next Project - EOS Rears its Head
« on: May 17, 2017, 01:28:24 am »
It's like moving our store from inside our own house to the shopping mall of someone else to operate under their new rules and not ours.
Today BitShares shareholders do have 100% control over the application, the blockchain itself and its settings. That's power we would probably lose running on EOS.
It's like moving a centralized exchange to BitShares ^^
Not saying it does not come with benefits but also not without risks.
I've known this to be true for years but right now is the first time I truly appreciate 100% shareholder control.
Is BTS 2.0 the first company in history to be able to say that with 100% confidence?

But think a little while how well Bitshares has worked so far... From technical standpoint there shouldn't be anything that prevents it being a TOP5 blockchain. But the community hasn't been able to use the technology to grow the ecosystem.

Would it be really a bad thing if a community like that would lose some of the control? What's the point of having control if it's used ineffectively?

The "invisible hand" guides the market, are you suggesting you have forsight greater than an omnipotent all-knowing "entity" that represents the aggregate subjective decisions made by an economic community?

What I'm trying to say is that markets clearly don't appreciate Bitshares. That's not because the technology sucks, so it must be because the community sucks.

Where's the proof it's the fault of the current shareholders?
Even if it was their fault, who's to say that a current shareholder would not learn from their mistakes and have knowledge that a newly appointed receiver of stolen goods would not possess?

Are the shareholders learning from their mistakes? So far I haven't seen much evidence.

The whole essence of this project, the real asset that brings BitShares' monumental growth potential, is in it's founding principles and enablance of freedom.

I should hope that the Freedom from sneaky rug-pulling is included.

I'm interested in freedom, too, and that's why I'm willing to let Bitshares to die if it can't help with the financial revolution that the world really needs. If Bitshares doesn't want to integrate to EOS and the community will keep progressing very slowly, eventually somebody else will start to build financial platform in EOS ecosystem. That might be so much better that it will take the market share from Bitshares.

If that ever happens, the question is: Are you going to be loyal to the blockchain or are you going to be loyal to the principles? Will you keep supporting Bitshares even if it's not a good tool for freedom, or will you abandon it and jump to the better ecosystem that can actually create a real change in the world?

Just remember that Bitshares is a DAC. Dan can not do anything to it without the shareholder vote.

I know that very well. That's why I want to encourage everybody to think deeply how to vote in the near future. Do you want to keep on going the unsuccessful road or choose another one that might be better?

10
General Discussion / Re: Dan's Next Project - EOS Rears its Head
« on: May 16, 2017, 02:45:12 pm »
It's like moving our store from inside our own house to the shopping mall of someone else to operate under their new rules and not ours.
Today BitShares shareholders do have 100% control over the application, the blockchain itself and its settings. That's power we would probably lose running on EOS.
It's like moving a centralized exchange to BitShares ^^
Not saying it does not come with benefits but also not without risks.
I've known this to be true for years but right now is the first time I truly appreciate 100% shareholder control.
Is BTS 2.0 the first company in history to be able to say that with 100% confidence?

But think a little while how well Bitshares has worked so far... From technical standpoint there shouldn't be anything that prevents it being a TOP5 blockchain. But the community hasn't been able to use the technology to grow the ecosystem.

Would it be really a bad thing if a community like that would lose some of the control? What's the point of having control if it's used ineffectively?

11
General Discussion / Re: How to design efficient and resilient DAO
« on: August 22, 2016, 07:21:25 am »
Maybe I've failed to understand the voting process of bitshares; but why is low voting turnout in DPOS a bad thing? For instance I don't vote, so don't my shares simply go from an active to passive state as you talk about in the article which doesn't affect active voters?

It's a problem because the decisions become too random. If only a minority is actively taking part in discussions, they don't have enough power to make everything happen that they want. Uninformed voters might come any day and vote against consensus because they don't understand why certain decisions are made and are too lazy to find out. This makes the decision making process too chaotic to be efficient.

The main argument you made was that limiting the amount of decision makers produces a more efficient DAO, and that could certainly be the case. So along with annual delegate voting, would you want to decrease the number of delegates which a DPOS system uses from 51 down to 10 for example?

I don't propose annual voting (it was just an example how companies currently limit the decision making power of their shareholders).

In my model there is no role that is exactly a delegate. Of course block producers are delegates in a way that the power to produce blocks is delegated to them. But there are no delegates like Bitshares 0.x had.

The executive team has power to decide how many block producers there will be and how much they are paid. If there is too few, resiliency will suffer because the existence of DAO is not guaranteed anymore. DAO could also incentivize node maintaining by paying for them.

My understanding is that the benefit of a smaller number of delegates would mean more money from block rewards to fund development for each delegate rather than having to share those rewards with a higher number of delegates and possibly less disagreement between delegates about how to best move the DAO forward. But I'm sure bitshares made the number 51 to prevent help prevent collusion as lower numbers could more easily allow 51% attacks. How do you defend against that if there's only annual voting and possibly with less delegates?

My model uses a reserve pool which is also used in Bitshares 2.0. "Delegates" won't earn money from block rewards, instead there are workers who are paid from the reserve pool.

Read more here: Stakeholder-Approved Project Funding


12
General Discussion / How to design efficient and resilient DAO
« on: August 21, 2016, 07:12:30 pm »
You might be interested in my post about DAO design: How to design efficient and resilient DAO.

I describe a model for an efficient DAO that's based on Bitshares 2.0. It could be used to make new and better version of Bitshares because it removes the problems that Bitshares currently has.

13
My latest post on Steem: Banx was definitely a scam

14
I was just thinking that there is probably very little demand for gridcoin-MPA. It's a financial derivative that is useful only for traders. And if the real coin can be traded easily somewhere else, or even in Bitshares via gateway, MPA is not very interesting to anybody.

IMHO MPAs are useful only for highly traded currencies and assets, like fiat-currencies, precious metals, etc.

15
What is the usecase for Gridcoin MPA? If nobody is trading the real thing, why would they want to trade MPA?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 32