I've heard multiple people say it was better to eliminate mining and add angelshares because that "makes the deal better for PTS holders"  but really that's a bunch of garbage.

Before if you wanted to get Bitshares you could do it one of two ways - Acquire Protoshares or Mine Bitshares when it came out.   That meant anyone not wanting to mine or risk buying at post-launch market prices had to buy Protoshares, it was the only way.

Of course, Invictus didn't make any money off of that and so here comes Angelshares and the new deal where now instead of 10% of BTS going to PTS holders and 90% being mined over a number of years, it would be 50% with the other 50% going towards Angelshares holders.    This makes sense for Invictus because now they have money pouring in, but for PTS holders?  It means that your exclusivity is not only gone but so is any advantage you had.  Since 100% of the money supply is out day one you'll have immediately depressed prices as people sell to recapitalize some of their gains in Bitcoin or move out entirely as they see the financial opportunity having passed. 

Again, this is fine for Invictus, they got the funds and aren't much impacted except being able to buy more of the cheap BTS themselves.  It does however make one wonder why it was even worth buying or acquiring PTS since a) BTS will be available cheaply due to over supply and b) PTS is the WORST way to vest yourselves with Bitshares because of the math at work.   On February 28th Protoshares holders will get 1-1.5 Bitshares per PTS.  On February 28th Angelshares holders will get 3-4 Bitshares per AGS.   They both "cost" the same, but the more people who go into angelshares per day the worse the deal is for all of them.  Protoshares holders have the option of getting the worst return on investment available or giving their money to invictus and competing with everybody else for the remaining AGS before none of this matters any more.

When the deal gets better for someone, it gets worse for someone else.   I continue to be disappointed by the inability to acknowledge that.

Personally, I saw the price drop as an opportunity to buy more.  This is precisely what I did, and at a discount...especially if BitShares takes off and they can use most of the code for new DACs.

I am not so sure how PTS is garbage.  Has Invictus come out and said they plan to no longer develop DACs that honor PTS?

I've read Adam Levine's comments and I'm a bit confused as to why PTS-investors are getting such a raw deal. If I understand correctly the funding boost via AGS has increased the chance of succes and value plus roi of pts-holders immensely, without the pts-holders having to do or risk anything. (It even sounds like the ags-campaign has averted a trainwreck, because of the lack of funding)

Then again, I have not heard the LTB-show and only got wind of bitshares and Invictus after the ags-option was added. So from my perspective if only LTB-listerners were supposed to reap the maximum benefits of the Bitshares deal, that would be unfair and a raw deal for me and the people I've alerted to this.

So seeing how I only happened on this project by chance (because I was actively searching for projects like this, instead of alt-coins) I agree completely that Invictus could use some major PR and marketing work. Planning and investing more in clear information and getting the word out, could definitely increase attention and investments for Invictus. Each day you delay this is costing you(and us) dearly. Even worse I've heard loads of people taking credit for what I've only recently heard were Larimers/Invictus ideas to begin with. Ethereum and other  so called 2.0 (I know horrible term since were not even close to crypto 1.0 yet) are reaping the hype benefit for concepts that should have brought attention and support for Invictus.

agreed...and then you get into the fact that one of the main people hyping Ethereum actually left Invictus to do so...and there are questions as to why that I have resigned to admitting will likely never be answered.  I won't get into it again on here, but one should definitely research this on their own--and see my angry rant (somewhere on this forum).

To the Raw Deal PTS represents, as it stood before AGS, my BitShares PTS were only going to give me a 10% allocation of the total number of BitShares X when they came out.  Afterward it gave me 50%, which is a 40% increase if I just HELD my PTS.  This means everyone who thought investing in PTS before AGS came out is now getting 5x as many BitShares X. If they believed in Invictus enough to invest in BitShares AGS (AngelShares), they would be getting (using Feb 28th snapshot) approximately 12x the original deal. 

As for miners...what is keeping miners from mining PTS to this day?  Nothing...If they wanted to get a coin to mine, pump and then dump then sure they will be pissed, because BitShares PTS explicitly incentivizes people to hold them (much like Bitcoin).  I fail to see how any of this can be labeled garbage...that is unless the VC from China is someone with ties to HSBC or some other banking cartel (*cough cough*). 

The ONLY thing that I would fear, as an investor, is Devs coming in and copying all of Invictus hard work and then not honoring the social consensus in any meaningful way.  This is still possible, but Invictus used their brains to hedge against that as well...the AGS funds help to protect their intellectual capital by allowing them to HIRE Developers of promise and keep one step ahead at best and, at worst, have the ability to compete against those who would attempt to use their hard-earned capital (in time, experience AND money) to construct something similar.  AGS helps them retain the first movers advantage.

Really at a loss how any of this is bad, and trust me I was originally PISSED that they changed plans after I invested.  But Invictus listened to our concerns and went above and beyond to ensure the community was well compensated for their trust and the extra perceived risk they were taking by keeping their PTS after the change of strategy.  Those who left...well they don't have BitShares PTS or BitShares X, but they can still buy PTS/AGS for the next round. 

Disclosure:  I learned of PTS from Adam's show and invested in them 4 days after launch.  This has been a so-far wonderful experience for me...though I do reserve the right to change my mind in the future (but probably will not unless they as people change)

For those who think Bytemaster doesn't pay attention to your ideas...
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=835.0

It seems sometimes he takes the community's ideas and substantially improves them...

<asskissing> Wonderful job so far </asskissing>

Post your ideas to the Alternative DACs Section here:  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?board=9.0

Quote from: CLains on March 13, 2014, 03:56:40 pm

Good concept!

The most immediate requirement is a proper voice over, and of course an index of questions, clickable, that immediately load that part of the video.

agreed, the voice is hard to follow, but a bit sticky. After a couple days of editing its grown on me (not a good thing for a Cuban ). We should be able to find better SAPI voice module or a real voice actor volunteer.

I like your index feature, I can parse out clips by question and present them somehow/somewhere

Maybe Team Viral would be willing to all read the script...then allow people to vote on who sounds best.  It would also help to identify the best option from a pool of individuals who would likely be more than willing to contribute at no cost. 

Quote from: fuznuts on March 13, 2014, 10:34:43 pm

Acting like Lizard Men (from some other dimension?) are the dictatorial hand pushing these agendas is purely naive.  I assure you cartels and "secret" societies are a distinctly natural phenomenon.

The government as a whole is a cartel conspiracy

 

now lets get back to productive conversations about counterparty?

Quote from: Mrrr on February 06, 2014, 11:39:43 pm

XCP guys seem to be rather hardcore. They're finally hiring someone for PR and decide to just pay it out of their own pocket rather than explicitly asking for community funding.

Asking for community funding and giving the community opportunity are two sides of the same coin.  Suppose I created bitshares entirely from my own funds and then kept one hundred percent of the money supply for myself Or sold it After it was on the market.  I could just imagine the accusations I would get then. 

This business of demonizing people who fund raise And at the same time demonizing people to do 100% premine is ludicrous.  You can't have it both ways everyone wants something for nothing.   

Even if you could fund it by yourself giving others an opportunity to get involved is a great way to build a community.   

Ripple didn't do any community fundraising and look where got them. 

Double standards and unreasonable expectations abound.

Everyone wants the creator to take 100% of the risk and get none of the profit. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That isn't exactly a fair characterization.  I know of a group of people right now in the marketing section under a post called "Team Viral" where people are actually donating their time and efforts to helping our community...to my knowledge none of them are on payroll and all could sit back and hope others act. 

I can tell you for 100% certain that I am not part of it because of monetary gain (though it would be a nice ancillary benefit).  Instead, I am here because you guys thus far have earned my trust (probably the same with many others)...watch what happens if it is lost--though pretty confident it won't  

Let me know where you guy are coordinating. Not huge on the tech side but figure I can give some valuable inputs on the marketing end.

 

Quote from: MktDirector on March 13, 2014, 07:06:38 pm

I appreciate you all taking the initiative on this and running with it. I've been working day and night on the new websites and videos (coming in one week) as well as on the event this summer so less time than I'd like to do these kind of marketing efforts.  Keep your eyes out for a sneak peek soon on the website and I'll look at what you're doing further once the dust settles over here.  B

Hey Brian, as discussed I added you to the Asana group. I think it would valuable to check in there once and while to make sure we are not duplicating efforts and/or ideas.

 

Very nice idea .. .. but: the altcoins should be chosen carefully ... no maxcoin, and other shitcoins

Well the point would be to let the developers decide if they wanted to create "shares" for their coin.  It would not be you, invictus, I ...or any other community members choosing which coins to do this with.  It would be on a first-come/first-served basis--the first to bootstrap their expansion in such a way would get on the chain.  A big reason (one which I earlier failed to express--sorry!) why I found this consideration worthwhile was due to the fact that many people can just make their own altcoin and let good, yet uninformed, people who are just walking into the cryptomarket fall victim to multiple pump and dump coins.  So this would serve as a proving grounds for DEVELOPERS to show the crypto-community they actually care about building infrastructure / seed-funding development of tools etc rather than just starting yet another clone, putting up a forum, posting an "ANN to Bitcointalk"...then dump their premined or early advantage coins for a premium. 

It is intended to weed out bad actors as much as to reward(and recruit) those who actually care about producing value for the community members who put their TRUST in them.  Many people like to say these are trustless systems, which is of course true on the code side...but who writes the code?  who has central control of multiple variables before and sometimes even after launch?  We should never be so naive as to think dangerous actors exist in this space and any way to reward those with good intentions while creating disincentives for the bad actors helps the community as a whole.

Outreach to the cryptocommunity's Devs should be one of the number 1 methods Invictus' team utilizes to gain traction in the market, and this would do well achieving it while also showing the rest of the community that BitShares truly INTENDS TO CHANGE the MtGOX (honeypot, fraud, scam) paradigm, and that they and our community are only interested in working with honest actors. 

Of course, Barwizi, the creator of Noirbits and Noirshares, would be the first to get on the altcoin BTS chain as he has already created his shares (and even honored the social contract).  The Dev of MMC would have Barwizi AND Invictus' entire team to assist him with the finer points of accomplishing this same thing and as such would effectively have an upper hand on accomplishing this over most other coins (maybe they would charge for this service? or expect the Devs they help to honor the PTS/AGS NoirBit/NIG concensus model(s)).  Then it would be on him/her to decide whether or not he/she wanted to participate. 

Of course coins like Peercoin who are working on implementing their own Peershares are also one-step ahead (and as such they probably deserve to be rewarded by the market for adding more value to their ecosystem anyway). 

P.S.  if you are from another Bitcoin 2.0 site where this model could be utilized please feel free to share it there as well.  Though these ideas are expressed here, it is only out of respect for Invictus that I post here.  I do not honestly have the time to post them to every forum.

 

Quote from: blackbeard on March 13, 2014, 12:20:49 am

When is the website being released?

Precisely when the Sun reaches a point in the constellation of Pisces known as the First Point of Aries -- along the x-axis of our solar system.  At the Vernal Equinox when days and nights are of equal length.  At that instant the sun will appear to cross the celestial equator, the projection of the earth’s equator on the sky, heading northward. 

i.e. the First Day of Spring!

Thank you everyone for taking the initiative on this one and going for it.  I have many different channels I'm trying to market through but this is one that needs help and you all can certainly step in and run with it.  There are always more marketing ideas than people and leadership to tackle, but I agree, this is one area that we can be doing more in.  Thx,  B

Thank you for being thankful

Quote from: CLains on March 12, 2014, 06:24:52 pm

How about Saturday 11pm GMT/7pm EST?

Normally, I'd be available - however this Saturday is St. Patty's-day-celebration-extravaganza (where I'm at), and I highly doubt my ability to coherently contribute.    

Sunday?

Sounds fine with me...but it all depends on what the other crew members are up for.  I think we should try to stick to a few dates/times and those who can show up show up.  It is rarely going to be possible to get all of us together...and the good thing about being able to record meetings is that we can send them to each other to listen to offline.