Author Topic: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)  (Read 13876 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline davidpbrown

Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #75 on: October 22, 2014, 12:41:35 pm »
Fu--c-k  +5%

事实证明:BM是一头猪!
That is hell of a contribution to the discussion .. would you take at least the same amount of time it took you to register your account and write something _valuable_!?

//edit: your lucky I am not a mod .. I wouldn't tolerate users like youposts like that

Sorry but trying to resist people's expression of frustration like that, will be futile. It seems obvious that's most likely not directed at BM but the sum total of sudden changes mooted. A change to heavy moderation and any step to centralisation; making PTS illiquid etc, all add up to be exactly at odds with what some will have expected. I wonder the rush to meet 5th Nov hasn't helped.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline 00091lacer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 624
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #76 on: October 22, 2014, 12:45:12 pm »
BTSX60% PTS 15%  AGS 15% DNS 10%
BTSX and AGS said "yes" 
PTS and DNS said "no"
So BTSX and AGS  is win?Right?
Are you kidding me?

Offline ebit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ebit
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #77 on: October 22, 2014, 12:53:08 pm »
telegram:ebit521
https://weibo.com/ebiter

Offline BTS007

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #78 on: October 22, 2014, 01:38:44 pm »
 :D :D :D +5% +5% +5%
BTS ID:bts007

Offline fuzzy

Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #79 on: October 22, 2014, 02:35:06 pm »
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline Brent.Allsop

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
    • Canonizer.com
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #80 on: October 22, 2014, 02:40:35 pm »
Fuzz,

You obviously still do not get what Canonizer.com can do, otherwise you would have attempted to do this survey with a more modern tool like Canonizer.com.

These issues are the biggest problem facing the crypto currency movement, and we can't take over the world till we get them solved in a very amplify the wisdom of everyone way.  The expert opinion is that mining is bad, but the Bitcoin herd is still running towards mining like a bunch of lemmings about to jump off the cliff and become very poor, throwing away millions of $$$.  Why is it that this problem can't be solved, without some set of experts like The bytemaster and team having to invest huge amounts of effort and capital to get over the huge barrier of entry to create a viable competitor that is strong enough to be able to destroy mining and Bitcoin with it?

And, sure, the bytemaster is brilliant, and we are very agile, while we are small, so we may be able to kill mining (and bitcoin with it), but then what?  How do we scale that?  This dilution issue (or some other similar issue in the future) could kill bitshares, just like mining is about to kill Bitcoin by making it vulnerable to Bitshares like competition, or at best fracture the community.

Let me list just a few of the problems with attempting to quantitatively determine and build consensus in this way.

  • Not Quantitative: When The bytemaster makes proposals like he does to the forum in this way, if people spend way too much time, they may be able to determine how much consensus there is for or against the idea.  But how much time and effort, and how likely is someone to make a mistake and get it wrong, or read the crowd incorrectly?
  • Does not scale:   There are only at about 100 people participating in this process.  We need to be able to scale this to millions of people and more, in a way that amplifies everyone's wisdom, and motivates everyone to be very involved in the process.  Even with 100 people participating, nobody knows who is in what camp, how much and what they are willing to give up, what, exactly, would be required to get the various people in each apposing camp to get on board, and so on.
  • Destroys consensus: Doing things this way just destroys consensus, or at least that's the way it always appears.  People get the perception that there are hundreds of different points of view, and more.  If there are already 1000 posts, nobody will want to post another post as nobody can read 1000 posts, let alone one more.  Nobody can agree on even definitions, let alone what each "yes" vs "no" camp means, and so on.  When, in reality, there is always way more consensus than is apparent.  The important things is, we need to be able to measure and build consensus, quantitatively, from the bottom up.
  • People Loose Interests: If you do not have a constantly improving, easy to follow system, people will lose interest.  Each of the yet to be defined camps or positions, must be able to improve in description, and be stated very definitively and consisely, in a way that ensures everyone in the camp definitely agrees.  The camp descriptions must be able to change and improve, by anyone, in a wiki way, while insuring unanimous agreement by everyone in the camp.  I you can't do that in an efficient way, people will not have enough time to do due diligence, and just not participate.
  • Survey Not Dynamic: People must be able to propose more than just yes / no, and what the yes and no camps mean must be able to change, dynamically, as more consensus is built.  Even the top level question, or goal of the question must change, from the bottom up, in a wiki way, that insures everyone agrees with the change.

Modern systems like the one we are developing with Canonizer.com can amplify the wisdom of the crowd and solve all these problems, enabling the herd to change direction very rapidly and efficiently.  Sure, Canonizer.com is just a prototype, hard to use, and people need to get up the huge learning curve about how to communicate and build consensus, concisely and quantitatively, which takes some work.  But it can be done and more effort can be put towards developing such system enabling is to communicate concisely and quantitatively.

And the first Crypto Currency community to learn how to most effectively do this in a way that scales in agile, intelligent ways, will be the first one to rapidly take crypto currency to the next level (the next level being taking over all hierarchies and bureaucracies, and becoming the new rulers of the world)

I do get what cannonizer can do Brent trust me. I am not an expert on its use, however, on how to effectively maximize its utility.  You want to start one?

Oh and as for alphabar...im too busy trying to help unite the community to deal with your angry posts.  I have and continue to sacrifice for this project...along with a great many others on this forum (who do even more). Please dont talk to us like we are greedy a-holes who do not care about the success of this project.  I sincerely hope we can all take a deep breath and recognize the stakes...and im not talking to our pockets...

I'm not speaking to your intentions, just your actions. You may intend to "unite the community", but you are alienating a huge segment of an already small group of Bitshares stakeholders. When somebody brings up a valid and objective argument and you ignore it by saying "good enough" or "it's the best we can do", don't be surprised if there is a backlash. The allocation issue doesn't take effort. Nobody is criticizing you for not trying hard enough. It's about what is equitable and fair, and your proposal isn't even close.

Hi Fuzz,

Sorry, I didn't mean to be angry.  I very much appreciate all the work you do for everyone!!!  I guess I am just trying to say I am able to help with such efforts, by creating and getting canonizer.com survey topics started.  But if others are using other tools and methodologies, I don't want to split from and detract from what they are doing.  I am in the process of getting a Canonizer.com survey topic started, I will return and report once it is ready for other's to participate.  Anyone that would like to help speed up the process is welcome to contact me.

alphaBar is raising a critically important issue.  We want to have the largest tent that includes everyone possible.  So if we use a tool like Canonizaer.com, we will be able to find out, exactly, what alphaBar, and anyone else believes and wants, at least if they participate in helping us communicate what they and everyone else wants, concisely and quantitatively.  Once we can do that, in a way that scales, finding creative ways to get it all for everyone and building the greatest possible and hopefully unanimous consensus is much more likely.

Brent






« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 03:15:46 pm by Brent.Allsop »

Offline seusnow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #81 on: October 22, 2014, 02:40:57 pm »

When this poll is completed, I intend to create and post a thread for people to propose distribution models to current holders of all bitshares tokens (PTS/AGS/BTSX/DNS...etc)

At that point, we will consolidate and have a poll to choose between them. If you are interested in proposing your own model, please begin preparing your statements and reasons. 

Each will need to have its own thread so others in the community can discuss--this current poll is only to gauge community interest in moving to a "super"chain (BTS) on that basis ALONE


Such a foolish idea to change BTSX.
BTSX seems not a decentrated coin, but a more concentrated coin which were determined by 3I
Today we can increase the amount by 20%, next day we can change it to 100%.
Can you think about what will happen if btc increased by 20%.
we should obey the rules of the game, no matter it is good or not.
The stabilization (stable wallet and stable rules) makes the price stable. And people will invest it.
If rules are easy to be changed, who knows what will happen.
Maybe next month BTS will become BTS2 if BM got another idea.
Please concentrate on the stability of the wallet, promote BTS to a real English market (not polo,bittrex, but btc-e, bitstamp etc.)



Offline davidpbrown

Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #82 on: October 22, 2014, 02:50:18 pm »
Such a foolish idea to change BTSX.

Perhaps it is foolish of us to anticipate those clever enough to have created BTSX it in the first place.. there might be a bigger idea at the root of this. Though, I get where you are coming from and I do not like the way this has been presented to date. If there is a big idea, then core devs thought on that should rule, before ever worrying the wider community like this.. they should just ask us to trust their judgement.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #83 on: October 22, 2014, 02:54:45 pm »

When this poll is completed, I intend to create and post a thread for people to propose distribution models to current holders of all bitshares tokens (PTS/AGS/BTSX/DNS...etc)

At that point, we will consolidate and have a poll to choose between them. If you are interested in proposing your own model, please begin preparing your statements and reasons. 

Each will need to have its own thread so others in the community can discuss--this current poll is only to gauge community interest in moving to a "super"chain (BTS) on that basis ALONE


Such a foolish idea to change BTSX.
BTSX seems not a decentrated coin, but a more concentrated coin which were determined by 3I
Today we can increase the amount by 20%, next day we can change it to 100%.
Can you think about what will happen if btc increased by 20%.
we should obey the rules of the game, no matter it is good or not.
The stabilization (stable wallet and stable rules) makes the price stable. And people will invest it.
If rules are easy to be changed, who knows what will happen.
Maybe next month BTS will become BTS2 if BM got another idea.
Please concentrate on the stability of the wallet, promote BTS to a real English market (not polo,bittrex, but btc-e, bitstamp etc.)

All those decisions will be in the hands of the shareholders and it would take a really good case to convince them to vote for something that radical.  Let's see, suppose the Chinese government offered to make BTS the official financial and e-trade system of China but they wanted 90% of the stake.  Otherwise, China would clone BTS and take 100% of its stake.  What would stakeholders do? 

Hint:  Take 10% of the China deal and invest in the next European BTS clone that pops up.  :)

Meanwhile, if you look at BTS as a DAC-OS, a platform or "mall" for unmanned businesses, then none of your worries apply.
You can choose to love it or hate it by simply changing your metaphor.


The people who will become rich from this were able to see the correct metaphor:  MS-DOS in 1981.
The people who will gain nothing from this will be those who kept insisting on using the wrong metaphor.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 02:56:43 pm by Stan »
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 davidpbrown

Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #84 on: October 22, 2014, 03:05:42 pm »
The people who will become rich from this were able to see the correct metaphor:  MS-DOS in 1981.
The people who will gain nothing from this will be those who kept insisting on using the wrong metaphor.

I'd rather see metaphor of Linux in 1992.. 0% d'oh!
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline dlh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #85 on: October 22, 2014, 03:10:08 pm »
BTS bear said is right, such as 3I, many believe you 3I people are you hurt, they were from the beginning of the trust, support you 3I. At least 1/3 people who support you disappointed to you, the people scattered

Offline questionsquestions

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #86 on: October 22, 2014, 04:59:53 pm »
It's super important this merger goes ahead sooner rather than later otherwise there will be no way to build any consumer confidence. Any perceived inaction will be seen as a weakness of BitShares(X) and is likely to seriously undermine attempts to market its most valuable brand; BitUSD.

Besides; multiple DAC's and asset types make no sense when you haven't even successfully launched BitSharesX to the mainstream yet.


Offline yoshiwatusi

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #87 on: October 22, 2014, 06:05:16 pm »
this is off topic but no one is replying the bitshares thread.. been trying to withdraw pts from my wallet to bter, its been over an hour and not a single confirmation.. is PTS dead?

Offline onceuponatime

Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #88 on: October 22, 2014, 06:21:43 pm »
this is off topic but no one is replying the bitshares thread.. been trying to withdraw pts from my wallet to bter, its been over an hour and not a single confirmation.. is PTS dead?

It's notdead, but blocks are very slow.

Offline pyython

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« Reply #89 on: October 22, 2014, 07:15:28 pm »
The biggest things keeping me from going full bull on the Bitshares ecosystem were the complexity of the investment options and the "X" branding.   +5% +5%