Quote from: bytemaster on November 15, 2014, 01:31:07 AM

Quote from: CoinHoarder on November 15, 2014, 01:25:00 AM

Quote from: julian1 on November 15, 2014, 01:18:03 AM
As best I can tell, the entire company / DAC metaphor has been abandoned to avoid provoking securities' regulators.

The 'Bitshares' brand/name is the last legacy of that.

We used to try and claim any and all metaphors that could be made to fit in order to communicate the nature of BTS/X.

Now, we go out of our way to disown them.

The SEC doesn't care what you call it... Securities... Companies... Corporations.. IPOs.. ICOs... Donations...

A spade is a spade in their eyes, and if their criteria for identifying a security was triggered then it doesn't matter what you call it.

Not true.  In fact what you call it is part (but not all) of their criteria.

Seems rather risky to hang our hat on that. I'm sure you've been advised by your legal counsel this is a very important distinction, but then attorneys are members of the B.A.R. and are bound to side with the court / judge first and foremost over any obligations they might have with clients. Sad but true, that's our fucked up legal system. I've seen too many attorneys that simply outright lie to have any confidence in the profession.

If push comes to shove your legal adversary will spin the story based on what BitShares actually IS and how it operates and make their case that way. Since your adversary will be the government (SEC) who provides judges paycheck / benefits, which side of the controversy do you think they'll favor?

Quote from: julian1 on November 15, 2014, 01:18:03 AM
As best I can tell, the entire company / DAC metaphor has been abandoned to avoid provoking securities' regulators.

The 'Bitshares' brand/name is the last legacy of that.

We used to try and claim any and all metaphors that could be made to fit in order to communicate the nature of BTS/X.

Now, we go out of our way to disown them.

Having the company metaphor doesn't have as much sense when you are no longer trying to appeal to people to create their own new DACs.  I am not so sure it has as much to do with securities/regulators as this simple fact.

Quote from: cn-members on November 15, 2014, 03:46:06 AM
hmm.....don't forget ripple's supply still has 3 times room to multiple .

Indeed.

We will hit #2, then they will have to push for adding the final 72 billion ripple to the supply, then we will have to get back to #2 again. ;)

Quote from: Stan on November 15, 2014, 04:06:24 AM

Quote from: julian1 on November 15, 2014, 01:18:03 AM
As best I can tell, the entire company / DAC metaphor has been abandoned to avoid provoking securities' regulators.

The 'Bitshares' brand/name is the last legacy of that.

We used to try and claim any and all metaphors that could be made to fit in order to communicate the nature of BTS/X.

Now, we go out of our way to disown them.

Hmmm.   I seem to remember doubling-down on using whatever metaphor makes the "ah-ha" light come on fastest.
Just two weeks ago...

http://bitshares.org/bitshares-reloaded/

Flip the metaphors around too quickly and you risk losing rapport with your audience.

Can't wait to see the new website!

Quote from: julian1 on November 15, 2014, 01:18:03 AM
As best I can tell, the entire company / DAC metaphor has been abandoned to avoid provoking securities' regulators.

The 'Bitshares' brand/name is the last legacy of that.

We used to try and claim any and all metaphors that could be made to fit in order to communicate the nature of BTS/X.

Now, we go out of our way to disown them.

Hmmm.   I seem to remember doubling-down on using whatever metaphor makes the "ah-ha" light come on fastest.
Just two weeks ago...

I think comparing ourselves, our market cap, to Bitcoin does us a disservice. Just because we use a blockchain, and are listed on coinmarketcap.com, doesn't mean we need to follow their lead and fit in their slot (whoever they are).

The crypto world is such a small community compared to what we're going after it's nearly meaningless. We'll pass BTC incidentally.

I have been struggling to think of an apt metaphor and failing. I'm hoping my "BTS is not an alt coin" thread will assist in this.

We should be looking at Wells Fargo, Chase, NatWest, Barclays, Bitshire Berkshire Hathaway.

Strap some extra fuel tanks to that main engine. We've got a long way to go...

Quote from: Stan on November 15, 2014, 03:32:28 AM

Quote from: Ander on November 15, 2014, 02:10:15 AM

Quote from: Stan on November 15, 2014, 01:38:21 AM
We won't stay long at Number 2.  :)

I think we will be at #2 for quite a while myself. :)
But its good that Stan feels confident.

Passing bitcoin wont be easy.  And in fact, we dont even need to pass bitcoin to make us all rich.  Just reach a significantly higher percent of bitcoin's market cap than we are at now, while also having bitcoin increase during its next bubble.

(Of course, eventually passing it is an even bigger deal).

As soon as we're Number 2 with the checking/savings metaphor people will start using both - just to get yield.

"Both" is good.

Once someone uses both, they quickly conclude they want to use BTS as much as possible except when they absolutely must convert to to BTC to use some off ramps.
Over a short time, that moves 99% of BTC into BTS the same way 99% of bank deposits are in savings not checking.

"Both" is the tipping point.

hmm.....don't forget ripple's supply still has 3 times room to multiple .

Quote from: Ander on November 15, 2014, 02:10:15 AM

Quote from: Stan on November 15, 2014, 01:38:21 AM
We won't stay long at Number 2.  :)

I think we will be at #2 for quite a while myself. :)
But its good that Stan feels confident.

Passing bitcoin wont be easy.  And in fact, we dont even need to pass bitcoin to make us all rich.  Just reach a significantly higher percent of bitcoin's market cap than we are at now, while also having bitcoin increase during its next bubble.

(Of course, eventually passing it is an even bigger deal).

As soon as we're Number 2 with the checking/savings metaphor people will start using both - just to get yield.


Once someone uses both, they quickly conclude they want to use BTS as much as possible except when they absolutely must convert to to BTC to use some off ramps.
Over a short time, that moves 99% of BTC into BTS the same way 99% of bank deposits are in savings not checking.

bitshares has the best name and best chance to succeed... I showed my peer at work, an ex msft developer, the wiki pedia for bitshares and he liked it alot.. starting with the name...

Quote from: bytemaster on November 15, 2014, 01:31:07 AM

Quote from: CoinHoarder on November 15, 2014, 01:25:00 AM

Quote from: julian1 on November 15, 2014, 01:18:03 AM
As best I can tell, the entire company / DAC metaphor has been abandoned to avoid provoking securities' regulators.

The 'Bitshares' brand/name is the last legacy of that.

We used to try and claim any and all metaphors that could be made to fit in order to communicate the nature of BTS/X.

Now, we go out of our way to disown them.

The SEC doesn't care what you call it... Securities... Companies... Corporations.. IPOs.. ICOs... Donations...

A spade is a spade in their eyes, and if their criteria for identifying a security was triggered then it doesn't matter what you call it.

Not true.  In fact what you call it is part (but not all) of their criteria.

What I meant was what's done is done. If it is ruled as a security offering subject to registration with the SEC, nothing that we say now will change that.

Most markets are comprised of a couple of dominate incumbents. Bitshares is nicely distinguished in features from Bitcoin (profitable pos, pegged assets, fast) to make it a great alternative for end-users. Getting to number 2 would be an awesome achievement!

Quote from: Stan on November 15, 2014, 01:38:21 AM
We won't stay long at Number 2.  :)

I think we will be at #2 for quite a while myself. :)
But its good that Stan feels confident.

Passing bitcoin wont be easy.  And in fact, we dont even need to pass bitcoin to make us all rich.  Just reach a significantly higher percent of bitcoin's market cap than we are at now, while also having bitcoin increase during its next bubble.

(Of course, eventually passing it is an even bigger deal).

Mostly doesn't matter. 

We get to Number 2 without even mentioning the technology or BitShares theory or anything we love to discuss here.

We are just the world's best crypto savings and checking account.

Once at Number 2, people will be interested because we are Number 2.

We won't stay long at Number 2.  :)

Urg...why does this shit frustrate me so much?  Maybe because the people who pushed us to crypto with their extreme levels of corruption/treason are now plannin to regulate us...and we are all seemingly cool with letting them.

Quote from: CoinHoarder on November 15, 2014, 01:25:00 AM

Quote from: julian1 on November 15, 2014, 01:18:03 AM
As best I can tell, the entire company / DAC metaphor has been abandoned to avoid provoking securities' regulators.

The 'Bitshares' brand/name is the last legacy of that.

We used to try and claim any and all metaphors that could be made to fit in order to communicate the nature of BTS/X.

Now, we go out of our way to disown them.

The SEC doesn't care what you call it... Securities... Companies... Corporations.. IPOs.. ICOs... Donations...

A spade is a spade in their eyes, and if their criteria for identifying a security was triggered then it doesn't matter what you call it.

Not true.  In fact what you call it is part (but not all) of their criteria.