Author Topic: Proposal to resolve single (BIG) issue with dillution  (Read 4847 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
A 50%AGS/50%PTS split asset would include post Feb28th AGS.  Personally, I'd make more money with the above proposal (10%AGS,10%PTS,80%BTSX) but I worry that it A) will liquidate value of AGS and B) will not help prevent dumps after snapshots like PTS faces today.

The original proposal for AGS/PTS 6 months freeze can also be implemented. The main thing that differs is non-dillutable GENESIS shares.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
The dilutable/non dilutable share idea will not work with a DAC. I'd like it if it was possible, but the mechanism simply cannot be implemented or applies to our case. If standard BTS tokens are widespread and the "non dilutable" BTS tokens are not, then standard BTS will be valued higher because they have a larger network effect.

Statements like "will not work" and "cannot be implemented" are not helping the discussion at all.
1 It could work
2 My technical experience makes me claim it can be implemented
3 If you have 80% BTS and 20% non-dillutable BTS , assuming they provide identical shares in future DACS then the market will decide which will be more valuable. Anyway the price ratio between them is irrelevant.

Offline yellowecho

I do not think your proposal is doable in practice. Doable in terms of the cost of the solution will be more than any perceived benefit.

The price of this genesis asset is not the issue we are discussing here, imho.

I promise I'm not trying to be difficult but I don't understand what you mean.  What costs are associated with such a solution?  The benefits would be the same as current social contract with added liquidity for AGS, cost savings and stability for PTS, and larger reserves/increased price for BTSX holders.

I like having genesis asset on the BTSX exchange.
And as one of the aims of BM's proposal is reducing complexity - why just BTSX and AGS, let's include BTSX also in this  GENESYS asset.That way we will have just one asset for genesis purposes. To follow the percentages in the OP  we will end with the following %s:

10% AGS
10% PTS
80% BTSX

Biggest advantages of the OP proposal:
-no delusion for BTSX
-simplicity - one  GENESYS for the future
-Tradable AGS (for all practical purposes)

+5%

The only things I have - I do not think as of today the system supports user issued assets' distribution to imported priv. key.; and importing priv keys taken from TITAN account into the new DACs - but the first should not be to hard/time consuming coding job and for the second we will need some kind of tool sooner or later anyway, it seems.

 [edit] for math

One more note: BM wants everybody to have  skin in the game. If post Feb 28th AGS holders do not get share of the current BTSX we have not achieved that.

A 50%AGS/50%PTS split asset would include post Feb28th AGS.  Personally, I'd make more money with the above proposal (10%AGS,10%PTS,80%BTSX) but I worry that it A) will liquidate value of AGS and B) will not help prevent dumps after snapshots like PTS faces today.
696c6f766562726f776e696573

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Once BTSX becomes BTS, it simply makes no sense to have PTS and AGS anymore. They should simple get a one time compensation in BTS, that slowly becomes available over the next year, and then all future I3 efforts should go towards improving BTS.

DACs that want to experiment with the bitshares toolkit can then snapshot BTS directly, or snapshot the PTS "last snapshot" + AGS.

In the end having several competing chains simply makes little sense for the community. Chains will inevitably compete for value, and that means as a developer you either have to pick a side, or you will constantly be attacked for "helping the competitor too much"/"not giving enough to our BTSZ chain".

You can always rename GENESIS to BTS (non-dillutable).

The dilutable/non dilutable share idea will not work with a DAC. I'd like it if it was possible, but the mechanism simply cannot be implemented or applies to our case. If standard BTS tokens are widespread and the "non dilutable" BTS tokens are not, then standard BTS will be valued higher because they have a larger network effect. There is no underlying asset to distribute, as is the case with normal stock dilution.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Once BTSX becomes BTS, it simply makes no sense to have PTS and AGS anymore. They should simple get a one time compensation in BTS, that slowly becomes available over the next year, and then all future I3 efforts should go towards improving BTS.

DACs that want to experiment with the bitshares toolkit can then snapshot BTS directly, or snapshot the PTS "last snapshot" + AGS.

In the end having several competing chains simply makes little sense for the community. Chains will inevitably compete for value, and that means as a developer you either have to pick a side, or you will constantly be attacked for "helping the competitor too much"/"not giving enough to our BTSZ chain".

You can always rename GENESIS to BTS (non-dillutable).

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Once BTSX becomes BTS, it simply makes no sense to have PTS and AGS anymore. They should simple get a one time compensation in BTS, that slowly becomes available over the next year, and then all future I3 efforts should go towards improving BTS.

DACs that want to experiment with the bitshares toolkit can then snapshot BTS directly, or snapshot the PTS "last snapshot" + AGS.

In the end having several competing chains simply makes little sense for the community. Chains will inevitably compete for value, and that means as a developer you either have to pick a side, or you will constantly be attacked for "helping the competitor too much"/"not giving enough to our BTSZ chain".

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
I like having genesis asset on the BTSX exchange.
And as one of the aims of BM's proposal is reducing complexity - why just BTSX and AGS, let's include BTSX also in this  GENESYS asset.That way we will have just one asset for genesis purposes. To follow the percentages in the OP  we will end with the following %s:

10% AGS
10% PTS
80% BTSX

Biggest advantages of the OP proposal:
-no delusion for BTSX
-simplicity - one  GENESYS for the future
-Tradable AGS (for all practical purposes)

+5%

The only things I have - I do not think as of today the system supports user issued assets' distribution to imported priv. key.; and importing priv keys taken from TITAN account into the new DACs - but the first should not be to hard/time consuming coding job and for the second we will need some kind of tool sooner or later anyway, it seems.

 [edit] for math

One more note: BM wants everybody to have  skin in the game. If post Feb 28th AGS holders do not get share of the current BTSX we have not achieved that.
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline yellowecho

I do not think your proposal is doable in practice.

Could you elaborate?
who is gonna pay this10% interest?
is it really worth it?
will this 10% interest achieve what you want?

Like the previously proposed bitUSD5PERCENT, the new asset would be funded via transaction fees and could be viewed as reserves on the BTSX balance sheet and give long term stability to bitUSD.  In fact, since PTS already costs an estimated $1million per year to mine the initial 10% interest could be paid on that alone since $1M is 10% of $10M representing the market caps of both AGS and PTS as an investment vehicle.
Rather than new DAC fundraising coming from BTC, the community could encourage developers to raise money using bitUSD donations which would increase transaction volume in bitUSD (incoming revenue) and new development funds could be protected by bitUSD price stability.  Long term investors (PTS & AGS) would be awarded 10% interest just like the current social contract.  Regarding whether or not it's 'worth it' depends on the community's feeling on the matter.  From my point of view, there are no downsides but I'm very open to others' criticisms!
696c6f766562726f776e696573

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
I do not think your proposal is doable in practice.

Could you elaborate?
who is gonna pay this10% interest?
is it really worth it?
will this 10% interest achieve what you want?
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline yellowecho

I do not think your proposal is doable in practice.

Could you elaborate?
696c6f766562726f776e696573

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Creating an asset without interest doesn't fix the pump and dump volatility problem of PTS and doesn't really guarantee any sort of return.  In fact, doing so would actually be negative for AGS because it means AGS positions could be liquidated.  Why not treat the new asset like a bond earning 10% and forget all the snapshots?  New DACs would use bitUSD which would be extra bullish for bond holders.

I do not think your proposal is doable in practice. Doable in terms of the cost of the solution will be more than any perceived benefit.

The price of this genesis asset is not the issue we are discussing here, imho.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2014, 06:08:37 pm by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline yellowecho

Creating an asset without interest doesn't fix the pump and dump volatility problem of PTS and doesn't really guarantee any sort of return.  In fact, doing so would actually be negative for AGS because it means AGS positions could be liquidated.  Why not treat the new asset like a bond earning 10% and forget all the snapshots?  New DACs would use bitUSD which would be extra bullish for bond holders.
696c6f766562726f776e696573

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
I like having genesis asset on the BTSX exchange.
And as one of the aims of BM's proposal is reducing complexity - why just BTSX and AGS, let's include BTSX also in this  GENESYS asset.That way we will have just one asset for genesis purposes. To follow the percentages in the OP  we will end with the following %s:

10% AGS
10% PTS
80% BTSX

Biggest advantages of the OP proposal:
-no delusion for BTSX
-simplicity - one  GENESYS for the future
-Tradable AGS (for all practical purposes)

+5%

The only things I have - I do not think as of today the system supports user issued assets' distribution to imported priv. key.; and importing priv keys taken from TITAN account into the new DACs - but the first should not be to hard/time consuming coding job and for the second we will need some kind of tool sooner or later anyway, it seems.

 [edit] for math
« Last Edit: October 19, 2014, 07:55:09 pm by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline yellowecho

I agree with your idea of combining AGS/PTS into a 'genesis'; however, I think it'd be more beneficial for all if this 'genesis' was an asset on the exchange earning 10% interest as defined by the social contract.  All that would be asked of new DACs would be for them to use bitUSD as a currency... doing so would generate the 10% interest for the genesis bond holders just as it would for them to receive a 10% stake.

To think of it differently, 'genesis' would be a long-term investment vehicle as it is today (bond/security) earning 10% interest.  BTS would be an equity for BitShares.  And bitUSD would be a currency.  New DACs would honor shareholders by using bitUSD which would essentially add to BTS reserves which is actually better for 'genesis' shareholders as it has the benefits of AGS/PTS with reduced costs (no PoW), increased liquidity (for AGS), and increased stability for PTS (no flash crashes after snapshots).  The system would grow more organically and everyone wins.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2014, 05:13:39 pm by yellowecho »
696c6f766562726f776e696573

Offline Pheonike

By including it in btsx we get the tx fees.