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 - Ben Mason

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 72
16
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why so silent?
« on: June 15, 2016, 07:28:57 am »
Hi Cob, thanks for posting.  I just have one question.  Why are you and your team focusing on the b2b approach when it certainly looked like you were almost ready with an MVP for Peertracks months ago?

Let me go into more detail.

The PeerTracks web app is pretty much ready. The royalty splitter needs something to split.
One big issue is the stability of the bitUSD (collateralized by MUSE). MUSE is too volatile to support a MUSE-USD.
Our users are not traders. The music industry is quick to sue for minor royalty discrepancies.
PeerTracks faced a chicken/egg problem.

The second problem was the double pitch (pitched the token concept along with the automatic payment splitter/distributed metadata ledger)

I solved two birds with one stone by focusing on Troopeers. It's a single pitch. "Whoever you are, if you have or want an engaged fanbase, sign the hell up!"
The onramping is easy with a centralized DB as a back end. We will then snapshot all token balances to MUSE once the blockchain is to a point we are happy with.

This means that Troopeers can do its thing, irrespectively of MUSE. MUSE can be upgraded to something much more viable. Only then will the music branch launch (PeerTracks.com)

We simply can't afford a giant team though, so progress is slow. Troopeers' success should allow us a much much bigger budget.

ATM ressources are focused on Troopeers. Shortly switching gears to MUSE. Then we hook up Troopeers to MUSE, followed by PeerTracks.
I'm sorry cob, it's to little, too late for me. I also disagree with your approach, priorities and assessment on the Graphene built blockchain.  If you had launched peertracks and focused on the original mvp based on the original vision of enabling the viral distribution and marketing of music by fans incentivised by new connections to the artists they discover, perhaps muse would have had a value that could then be supporting further development, wether by yourself or the community. That is one pitch right there. Instead, investors have been misled about the status and direction of the project and now it's come down to negotiating with entrenched business interests for whom royalty extraction is a dying business model and are unlikely to accelerate that death by joining troopeers. Or maybe they will, but I don't care because that should have been a side show to providing a platform that eliminates the middle men between music and fans. Don't you understand that time is not on your side? If you had any sense at all, you would focus on releasing peertracks for musicians and fans asap. If you are concerned with the muse dollar peg, then use something more stable like bitusd. My position has not changed I'm afraid, I've had to move on. I wish you and whoever is working with you the best of luck.

17
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why so silent?
« on: June 11, 2016, 07:48:28 pm »
Whoever is making the decisions for peertracks/muse have, for me, irreparably compromised the integrity of this project. You've had my btc and then moved steadily beyond any accountability or what I would consider a rational approach to the project and community. Wether peertracks or troopeers or whatever launches or not, I've lost my passion for your project and will be looking elsewhere for a solution to unlocking music creativity and distribution. I still don't believe cob is a scammer, but I do believe some of the responsibility for the apparent failure of this project and the alienation of the muse community is his. So for anyone with muse or thinking to get any.....think very carefully beforehand and beware of the degree of compromise and centralisation that may have occurred . I make this statement before altering any muse position I have currently.  I may try to salvage something but generally that will come at someone else's expense so I guess I'll chalk muse up to a sad and unecessary waste. On the bright side, there's always hope and I can't wait until music is set free!

What is the definition of a scammer?

Cob did take our money by telling lies all the time. Isn't that exactly what a scammer does? He never explained why he spread false information about an alpha that has never been out or hundreds of testers etc.
All the false information and implications have always come out as lies.

I don't see how we cannot call him a scammer.

He burned 500k of investors money and is still here telling us they will come up with some crap, but the main objective isn't on the radar .

No roadmap but a bunch of crap talk.

He is a scammer
I can empathise with some of how you feel marky. But I believe his intentions were honourable at the beginning and he was as enthused and passionate about building something revolutionary for music as the rest of us. Along the way things happened and gradually its all gone wrong. This happens. Whatever the truth, i've lost interest and will focus my engagement with other more promising projects. It's not the first mistake I've made and it won't be the last. I'm not about to waste any more time and effort trying to extract answers that will clearly never be forthcoming. Anyway that's it. I doubt I'll comment further in this part of the forum.

just today, i saw you dump about one million MUSE ??? ??? ???

And? I announced my concerns well in advance. I also stated that I might try to salvage something. I'm bag holding more than that. Finally, Is it possible for me to know every market participant's perception. No. Do I know anything for a fact? No.

18
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why so silent?
« on: June 11, 2016, 07:10:58 pm »
Whoever is making the decisions for peertracks/muse have, for me, irreparably compromised the integrity of this project. You've had my btc and then moved steadily beyond any accountability or what I would consider a rational approach to the project and community. Wether peertracks or troopeers or whatever launches or not, I've lost my passion for your project and will be looking elsewhere for a solution to unlocking music creativity and distribution. I still don't believe cob is a scammer, but I do believe some of the responsibility for the apparent failure of this project and the alienation of the muse community is his. So for anyone with muse or thinking to get any.....think very carefully beforehand and beware of the degree of compromise and centralisation that may have occurred . I make this statement before altering any muse position I have currently.  I may try to salvage something but generally that will come at someone else's expense so I guess I'll chalk muse up to a sad and unecessary waste. On the bright side, there's always hope and I can't wait until music is set free!

What is the definition of a scammer?

Cob did take our money by telling lies all the time. Isn't that exactly what a scammer does? He never explained why he spread false information about an alpha that has never been out or hundreds of testers etc.
All the false information and implications have always come out as lies.

I don't see how we cannot call him a scammer.

He burned 500k of investors money and is still here telling us they will come up with some crap, but the main objective isn't on the radar .

No roadmap but a bunch of crap talk.

He is a scammer
I can empathise with some of how you feel marky. But I believe his intentions were honourable at the beginning and he was as enthused and passionate about building something revolutionary for music as the rest of us. Along the way things happened and gradually its all gone wrong. This happens. Whatever the truth, i've lost interest and will focus my engagement with other more promising projects. It's not the first mistake I've made and it won't be the last. I'm not about to waste any more time and effort trying to extract answers that will clearly never be forthcoming. Anyway that's it. I doubt I'll comment further in this part of the forum.

19
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why so silent?
« on: June 11, 2016, 10:08:40 am »
Whoever is making the decisions for peertracks/muse have, for me, irreparably compromised the integrity of this project. You've had my btc and then moved steadily beyond any accountability or what I would consider a rational approach to the project and community. Wether peertracks or troopeers or whatever launches or not, I've lost my passion for your project and will be looking elsewhere for a solution to unlocking music creativity and distribution. I still don't believe cob is a scammer, but I do believe some of the responsibility for the apparent failure of this project and the alienation of the muse community is his. So for anyone with muse or thinking to get any.....think very carefully beforehand and beware of the degree of compromise and centralisation that may have occurred . I make this statement before altering any muse position I have currently.  I may try to salvage something but generally that will come at someone else's expense so I guess I'll chalk muse up to a sad and unecessary waste. On the bright side, there's always hope and I can't wait until music is set free!

20
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why so silent?
« on: June 09, 2016, 05:45:26 am »
Please cob. It was one pertinent question. The reason I invested in muse was to further the idea for building a decentralised music platform. If I understand it correctly, troopeers is a platform being built to service many areas of the entertainment industry. Now I have other questions.

Why has peertracks not been launched?
Does the peertracks app work.....is there an MVP?
Who is responsible for the business decisions in your team? 
Do you or your team feel any accountability to the people that bought muse for an innovative, decentralized music platform?
If your team has moved beyond any feeling of connection and accountability towards your investors and given that your team seems to have  changed focus from the stated objectives behind the muse project....would you consider making the peertracks code available to us so we can arrange for the application to be completed and released? We could release the application under a different name that would enable you to still launch peertracks with the troopeers platform when it's ready.



21
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why so silent?
« on: June 07, 2016, 07:38:21 pm »
Hi Cob, thanks for posting.  I just have one question.  Why are you and your team focusing on the b2b approach when it certainly looked like you were almost ready with an MVP for Peertracks months ago?  Surely unlocking the talent of the future and fans of the future has more appeal and power than negotiating with entrenched interests.  Those businesses would be coming to you if Peertracks were successful and succeeded in generating a viral interest in the free expression of music combined with a new and improved value proposition for fans.  If you could explain the approach and the status of Peertracks more clearly, that would be very much appreciated.

22
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Community sentiment - cob screwed us?
« on: June 07, 2016, 06:05:01 pm »
There is no way in hell that Cob scammed anyone.  If he could talk about whatever the issue is, he would. 

I wonder who is in fact controlling the project at the moment.

23
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Community sentiment - cob screwed us?
« on: June 06, 2016, 10:50:19 pm »
The only thing that makes sense to me is that cob has been caught between a rock and a hard place. I think he is a genuine person, but clearly has been through quite a set of challenges. I don't understand the lack of clear updates, especially when launching in May was the stated target. It is very frustrating. What can we do though?  I imagine there are many holders who are becoming demoralised. Unfortunately, the fun and enthusiasm is being drained from what was a very promising project and despite the failure rate of startups, the lack of solid information leaves a bad taste. As I've stated before though, I don't believe cob is the root cause. I'll admit though that irrespective of cob's intentions and efforts, I'm about ready to cut my loses. I just hope that whoever's behind the extremely poor information is not intending for holders to sell off in order to acquire more muse, given the funding challenges they've had.

24
The real leaders of bitshares are the ones just getting on with working, networking, writing and raising development funds. No-one needs to be elected. That's just a waste of time.

The definitive statements often being made about people and their status or intentions with respect to BitShares is an embarrassment. 'I know what's going on and it this!' These types of remarks are so often wrong and there is hardly ever a retraction or apology. Yet the definitive statements keep coming. It's sad.

Things have not panned out the way many expected over the last couple of years, sorry.  The only solution is to keep working hard and to adapt.  There are so many opportunities for everyone willing to give a little more. 

25
I don't think we need to rebrand BitShares as such, partly because I don't like rebranding in general (wastes precious time, sends a conflicting message, and usually leads me to suspect it's being done because of mistakes made in the past) and partly because I don't think it is a bad name.

But I do think it would be beneficial to promote the use of the term DEX as "ours" in our marketing literature (web site, social media, and even the web wallet). I use this term all the time in telegram/slack, as do many others, to describe our trading network. So I suggest we keep BitShares to describe the coin and the chain and use "the DEX" to describe the actual market that runs on the chain.
This the approach I would support.

26

- the new ship was not for free, the investors gave up their promise to get 10% of everything, because the headbuilder argued he build the second ship on his own


if you think outside the box you will realize that you still can get at least 10% of everything... You have an "inside" information about the opportunity to create some posts on steemit and get rewarded on 4 July... 10% of STEEMS marketcap will "gifted" to all participants in about a Month (in Current valuation it is about $2M and it can certainly increase more) And nobody ask's you to invest any penny... You can just open free of charge a steemit account, make some posts (like you did here for free) and wait for some STEEM dollars... I ensure you it is worth your time.... There are already really strong indications about that...   
I bet many of future steemit user's would love to be on our position and have so early the information's we "luckily" have right NOW... And don't expect the Larimer's to make an official post somewhere to promise you they will upvote many of your  post's because they ow you their existence in crypto world!!! That would be bad PR for steemit ... Don't forget that for the first time Graphene get recognition from many community’s outside BTS...
We must think outside the box... We must see it like a great OPPORTUNITY  ... like a "half" full glass of water !!!  If you are thirsty you should drink it ... and not complaining it is half empty  :)



i will not use this platform, because it is against my ethical believings, but thanks for the advice, i will not give more time to STEEM as needed.
Requires effort.....so not good enough?

27
 +5%

I have approx 13000 Steem power in account benjojo.  I haven't done anything of note for beyond Bitcoin but I am happy simply to up vote the outstanding content you've produced.



28
Fantastic ideas and I couldn't agree more with the responsibility upon us to get it right. I also agree that the backbone, including critical infrastructure must be tackled in order to achieve the full systemic benefits of blockchain. The ultimate benefit from which all other benefits are derived is the assured integrity of information over time.

Any idea tackling the transition to blockchain from the point of view of integrity is BitShares friendly! Once fiat confidence collapses, a degree of sound money will have to be reintroduced, whether blockchain money is used or not. There are more important, more intrinsic systems that require decentralisation.

29
General Discussion / Re: Move Bitsharestalk to Steemit?
« on: May 11, 2016, 04:03:16 pm »
Steem's unlimited range of topics appeals to an infinitely wider audience than BitSharesTalk and thus has the benefit of bringing new eyeballs to anything about BitShares posted there.

This includes new DEX users who have picked up a head of Steem and now want to know what other cool things you can do with it.

Kind of like Plutonium.

It's fortunate that those with intractably bitter attitudes want to stay here on BitSharesTalk where no one will see their posts and only positive, optimistic people want to move their constructive, forward thinking opinions into the bright, puffy cloud of Steem where snide comments quickly sink into oblivion.  So it's a really beautiful, self-reinforcing Darwinian selection process. 

No need to formally make such a group decision.  It will sort itself out.

:)

It is very much true that shady people who have one consistent trait of not following through with what they say they're going to do would prefer a site where they and their cohorts can bury any messages pointing this out.

Edit - It shows a lack of integrity to not speak of one's truth beliefs.

All he's done is work tirelessly, tirelessly for BitShares. He has tried to remain a source of optimism, enthuse and inspire the community consistently for years. He is not responsible for project failures and changes of necessity along the way. You would be hard pressed to find anyone with more integrity than Stan. It saddens me that more people who should know better do not realise that.

If you don't like Steem, don't go there but please realise.....for your sake.....that Steemit is BitShares. It took me a while to figure out too ;)) Steemit is one of the many ways we can increase the chance of BitShares decentralised market features reaching  a wider audience and continue its development. Supporting Steemit is supporting BitShares. Consider that this may be a significant step to moving beyond an aggressive, often misrepresentative crypto only crowd. Blockchain tech desperately needs new minds.

I do have to ask, how do you think Steemit advances blockchain tech ?  Give us a rundown on this?

IMO basically one could rewrite STEEMIT using a centralized database, but there would be no suckers to buy the tokens because they're not "crypto".  THATS IT.

Am I missing something ?

This "all he is done" is bullshit. I had your attitude ~ 2 years ago and argued with a guy named Adam B Levine. He had quite a bit of history before me.  While I do think he was carried away with hyperbole, (Suggesting Larimers owned 40%+ of BTS etc)  I do think he had legitimate reasons for most everything he said. When these situations repeat themselves, perhaps you should step away and wonder what is really going on and learn from history.

Thats all I will say on this matter, out of respect to collateral damage to various hard working honest supporters. I feel like a dick both ways. Be honest and hurt people, say nothing and let people learn their lesson. "Voluntary shunning" is not that great if you let the next guy get screwed.
Steemit has the potential to enhance the conversation, to bring new ideas, new capital in. All of which increase the chance of further development.

You say my attitude is 'bullshit.' You are of course entitled to you're opinion. I believe in honesty, even if it hurts.  But I don't believe in casual references to complex history, fraught with competing ideas, agendas and a multitude of challenges that then lead to an over-simplistic judgement against a man's integrity. Especially one that has deeply enhanced the community with his intellect, humour and optimism. With friends like these......!

I have no doubt that from your perspective, you feel Stan has over promised and under delivered. Fair enough, but that is certainly not a question of integrity from my perspective.

I never said your attitude was bullshit. (????)    I said "Just stop the anti-dilution bullshit ... "  This was a reference in what needs to happen to get BTS going forward without any active devs.  Or just hope they do what they say. I get it. You're a nice guy. No doubt Bytemaster has put in a lot of hard work. There is no doubt BitShares wouldn't exist if not for him. I used to stand up for him too. These roles were reversed ~2 years ago when I was you fighting off what I felt was FUD.

It would have been real easy to continue with the social consensus.  Do you remember that? It is what pulled in a lot of us, including myself.  But no, it is another weird premine from Dan. Now they'd like the few active posters to go over to steemit. Well duh, but should we? You may want to go and I wish you the best experience possible on their site. Just not my thing and I don't want to see users poached for a project that shows no benefit to BTS outside of our wishful thinking.
Ok sorry, I misunderstood the bullshit comment. I didn't take it to heart anyway. I don't believe any of the objections to Steem or the motives of the Graphene devs or the status of the BitShares/Steem community or the configuration of native units in Steem are fud. I genuinely welcome the analysis (such as it is.....mine is certainly not very scientific) and the discourse around such topics. I simply believe I have an understanding of flow of events that have led to the launch of Steem. I chose to trust....because I think they've earned it....the core devs primarily and partners within the BitShares/Graphene economy. The reason I am part of the discussion is because I hope for a unity of purpose from within all our connected communities so that we can all be a part of all of the success that will come if we get it right.

Social consensus has failed in many respects which is presumably why it was abandoned in favour of other means to gather support and generate adequate incentives. I was a huge fan of the social consensus but I can accept it was flawed and have come around to the idea of trying new methods.

Don't forget that one of the purposes for the distribution (or apparent initial lack thereof) was to avoid any imperial entanglements. This may be of critical importance in the future.

The way I see it, there is no need for any division between BitShares and Steem from the perspective of the people involved....there is absolutely no them and us. I've been wrong about many things and will be again but that's the way I see it.  I think Steem as a platform will be good for people in general, good for communities (not currently in crypto but need it) and good for BitShares. I know that you've been a staunch defender of everything we are talking about, heck, you've made greater efforts than I have to communicate, challenge and discuss. I also think I understand how you feel. All I can say is thank you gamey.


30
General Discussion / Re: Move Bitsharestalk to Steemit?
« on: May 11, 2016, 08:24:38 am »
Steem's unlimited range of topics appeals to an infinitely wider audience than BitSharesTalk and thus has the benefit of bringing new eyeballs to anything about BitShares posted there.

This includes new DEX users who have picked up a head of Steem and now want to know what other cool things you can do with it.

Kind of like Plutonium.

It's fortunate that those with intractably bitter attitudes want to stay here on BitSharesTalk where no one will see their posts and only positive, optimistic people want to move their constructive, forward thinking opinions into the bright, puffy cloud of Steem where snide comments quickly sink into oblivion.  So it's a really beautiful, self-reinforcing Darwinian selection process. 

No need to formally make such a group decision.  It will sort itself out.

:)

It is very much true that shady people who have one consistent trait of not following through with what they say they're going to do would prefer a site where they and their cohorts can bury any messages pointing this out.

Edit - It shows a lack of integrity to not speak of one's truth beliefs.

All he's done is work tirelessly, tirelessly for BitShares. He has tried to remain a source of optimism, enthuse and inspire the community consistently for years. He is not responsible for project failures and changes of necessity along the way. You would be hard pressed to find anyone with more integrity than Stan. It saddens me that more people who should know better do not realise that.

If you don't like Steem, don't go there but please realise.....for your sake.....that Steemit is BitShares. It took me a while to figure out too ;)) Steemit is one of the many ways we can increase the chance of BitShares decentralised market features reaching  a wider audience and continue its development. Supporting Steemit is supporting BitShares. Consider that this may be a significant step to moving beyond an aggressive, often misrepresentative crypto only crowd. Blockchain tech desperately needs new minds.

I do have to ask, how do you think Steemit advances blockchain tech ?  Give us a rundown on this?

IMO basically one could rewrite STEEMIT using a centralized database, but there would be no suckers to buy the tokens because they're not "crypto".  THATS IT.

Am I missing something ?

This "all he is done" is bullshit. I had your attitude ~ 2 years ago and argued with a guy named Adam B Levine. He had quite a bit of history before me.  While I do think he was carried away with hyperbole, (Suggesting Larimers owned 40%+ of BTS etc)  I do think he had legitimate reasons for most everything he said. When these situations repeat themselves, perhaps you should step away and wonder what is really going on and learn from history.

Thats all I will say on this matter, out of respect to collateral damage to various hard working honest supporters. I feel like a dick both ways. Be honest and hurt people, say nothing and let people learn their lesson. "Voluntary shunning" is not that great if you let the next guy get screwed.
Steemit has the potential to enhance the conversation, to bring new ideas, new capital in. All of which increase the chance of further development.

You say my attitude is 'bullshit.' You are of course entitled to you're opinion. I believe in honesty, even if it hurts.  But I don't believe in casual references to complex history, fraught with competing ideas, agendas and a multitude of challenges that then lead to an over-simplistic judgement against a man's integrity. Especially one that has deeply enhanced the community with his intellect, humour and optimism. With friends like these......!

I have no doubt that from your perspective, you feel Stan has over promised and under delivered. Fair enough, but that is certainly not a question of integrity from my perspective.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 72