Author Topic: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once  (Read 69113 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
I understand and agree with the statement that "we need to recognize those who have helped fund development after Feb 28th so they don't compete with us."

However, I don't see why or how anybody who participated in AGS or for that matter PTS after the snapshot would have any expectation of getting a stake in BTSX.


Yes, but they have other expectations that need to be met.   How do you resolve the above 2 points and not have Bytemaster continue on to do what was uhm suggested by I3.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline teenagecheese

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
It seems we're at a fork between expectations and reality. Hopefully we can merge without conflict :)

I agree with the 7 problem points in the OP. They need to be resolved. I think this proposal is a step in the right direction.

Yes, I think good things will come from this thread, whatever the decision is. This is a huge positive in my opinion. I am now more excited than ever about bitshares!

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile

So is KeyID/DNS DAC  going to be killed off ?  Or is that going to continue since it should be self-funding ?

This is just a discussion... no decisions have been made and I am not speaking for the entire team.  I am just trying to find a solution that aligns peoples loyalties.   

Right now Toast is 100% responsible for KeyID / DNS and it will be up to him and the DNS community.

1) This idea has not been run by Toast, Follow my Vote, or Agent 86
2) This is just a proposal that I want feedback on

I deleted this post once I realized my mistake.  Sigh.  It is a lot more reasonable to me now that I think about it and understand.  I can't exactly +5% it though.  I'd want to mull it over for days.  I realize I have some attachment to the concept of PTS/AGS etc.  So I am not necessarily rational as I should be in that area.  As long as the core DACs are fired off and autonomous the idea seems palatable.

This basically just means rolling PTS/AGS into "Bitshares" and not going with the VOTE DAC. 

God have mercy on us.

;)
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline Method-X

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
  • VIRAL
    • View Profile
    • Learn to code
  • BitShares: methodx
I really like the idea of a snapshotable token (PTS) that allows any third party developer to create a DAC and leverage the BitShares community. That idea is solid and doesn't need to be done away with. It only needs to be simplified: either combine AGS/PTS into one liquid asset on the BitShares exchange or use BTSX (BTS?) as the snapshotable token itself. Want to use the BitShares toolkit and get gain the support and network effect the entire community offers? Snapshot BTS.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Just to stimulate your metaphorical thinking for what they are worth...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mergers_and_acquisitions
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline roadscape

It seems we're at a fork between expectations and reality. Hopefully we can merge without conflict :)

I agree with the 7 problem points in the OP. They need to be resolved. I think this proposal is a step in the right direction.
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline bytemaster

I understand and agree with the statement that "we need to recognize those who have helped fund development after Feb 28th so they don't compete with us."

However, I don't see why or how anybody who participated in AGS or for that matter PTS after the snapshot would have any expectation of getting a stake in BTSX.

The proposal to have a lock-in period of 6 months is at best a hack and at worst arbitrary.

They didn't expect to get a stake in BTSX... but they did in domains, voting, and every other idea we came up with.  If we add those to BTSX you better believe they would expect a cut to be fair.  I picked 6 months because that is how long I think it would be reasonable to expect some of those features in BTS.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline teenagecheese

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Bytemaster, I am glad you posted this. While I'm not sure if you've read my comments, I am sure you are aware of my, and others', concerns and looking for a way to resolve them. Awesome!

I think consolidating is a great idea. The way I see it should be is this:

1. Have one DAC (bitshares) with one token (bitshare) you can invest in if you want to be a part of it.
2. Have multiple products from this DAC, i.e., bithshares exchange (x), bitshares vote, bitshares dns, bitshares ID
3. Have these products be tied together with one fungible currency (bitUSD), as well as coordinated ID system and email system and everything (hmmm this is sounding like a succesful model we are all familiar with....GOOGLE!
4. I think you would still need btsx to make bitshares x work, I'm not sure about that or not. Could use some discussion I think.
5. I am totally for resolving and simplyfing AGS and PTS in some way, must be fair of course
6. Dilution is fine if everyone votes on it, because as you say, bitshares are not currency, they ARE a share in a company

What does everyone think? Will totally linking everything together cause problems, with voting for instance. I don't know, but I think not.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
I understand and agree with the statement that "we need to recognize those who have helped fund development after Feb 28th so they don't compete with us."

However, I don't see why or how anybody who participated in AGS or for that matter PTS after the snapshot would have any expectation of getting a stake in BTSX.

The proposal to have a lock-in period of 6 months is at best a hack and at worst arbitrary.

I'm sure the hack can be refined.

But if we are doing a merger of BTSX with various future DACS to form *BTS* then they definitely do have a valid interest.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
I am pretty sure the prices of BTSX, PTS, etc are now about to freak out once everyone sees this..but I have no idea in which direction. :)
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

pollux

  • Guest
I understand and agree with the statement that "we need to recognize those who have helped fund development after Feb 28th so they don't compete with us."

However, I don't see why or how anybody who participated in AGS or for that matter PTS after the snapshot would have any expectation of getting a stake in BTSX.

The proposal to have a lock-in period of 6 months is at best a hack and at worst arbitrary.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
@Gamey:  I thought your motto was, "What, Me Worry?"

:)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline bytemaster


So is KeyID/DNS DAC  going to be killed off ?  Or is that going to continue since it should be self-funding ?

This is just a discussion... no decisions have been made and I am not speaking for the entire team.  I am just trying to find a solution that aligns peoples loyalties.   

Right now Toast is 100% responsible for KeyID / DNS and it will be up to him and the DNS community.

1) This idea has not been run by Toast, Follow my Vote, or Agent 86
2) This is just a proposal that I want feedback on
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
I'm utterly speechless.

Just remember those that scream the loudest....

Well they scream the loudest.

I will definitely be divesting.  Where previously there was limited diversification now there will be near 0. 

I think you'd kill the social contract, although DAC developers could continue to use it I suppose.  Those who care get their stakes, those who don't keep their wallet oh well.

BTS X could continue with its current set of rules and fund its current status.    What would you divest into?   Because if we knew what you would divest into then that will help us know where we are week and what needs to be done to solidify it.

Honestly, I read all your rules then skipped the tail end of your post.  I thought you said drop *all* DACs.  So I interpreted it like that.  I was so perturbed I didn't read your whole post for clarifcation.  So that is where I was coming from. 
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline bytemaster

I'm utterly speechless.

Just remember those that scream the loudest....

Well they scream the loudest.

I will definitely be divesting.  Where previously there was limited diversification now there will be near 0. 

I think you'd kill the social contract, although DAC developers could continue to use it I suppose.  Those who care get their stakes, those who don't keep their wallet oh well.

BTS X could continue with its current set of rules and fund its current status.    What would you divest into?   Because if we knew what you would divest into then that will help us know where we are week and what needs to be done to solidify it.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.