I'm gonna guess Xeroc. 

One problem I see with the UIA-based crowdfuning is that if you sell your UIA for BTS your will only have to sell your BTS eventually to cover your costs .. that downward pressure aswell ..
otherwise, if you sell your UIA for USD people need to bootstrap the USD markets which will hinder your crowdsale .. but improve liquidity (slowly) and make the crowdsale easier from legal POV .. or am I missing something?

The value of the UIA would be based on the expectation of future revenue. If you sell your UIA for BTS someone had to buy that BTS to purchase the UIA. IMHO that's a wash in terms of market pressures. The issue with the USD market we are betting is short term teething and will eventually be liquid enough to absorb a UIA sale.

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.

This is great news and certainly a step in the right direction both from an ideological and business perspective.

One thing to keep in mind about "people using what we paid for": How much have we paid for the c++ compilers, the BOOST licenses, the SSL libraries, etc. etc. etc. that is the core of BTS?

The space needs more building blocks.

What if they took 80% of the fees until they'd recouped, for example, $60k worth of BTS - currently about 18 - 20 million shares. That's a 33% ROI - more if the price of BTS goes up during the payback phase.

Feature funding for profit makes sense. Lifetime royalties not so much.

A bold move by this individual and a very long term bet. What would happen if before they recovered their $45k in fees a new worker proposal is submitted and approved to build a better stealth transfer mechanism?

The 25% royalty on the stealth transfer fees for life leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Perhaps it's the precedent it would set for future proposals.

Epic. Great work!