Author Topic: Proposed Allocation for Merger  (Read 45840 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GaltReport

Quote
2 year vesting period... ie: you can withdraw early for a fraction of your cut.. if you want to sell after 6 months you get 25%... if you wait for a year you get 50%... etc. 

Is the vesting period for btsx, dns, Vote, AGS and PTS?
I thought it was only for AGS and PTS.

If so, there would be an serious incentive to keep BTSX on centralized exchanges.
Because I guess they would simply drop the x, and continue trading.
And so the vesting period would be avoided.
please clarify this.  I ASSUME this doesn't apply to current BTSX holders.  You wouldn't lock their FREE (as in freedom) shares would you?  That's not acceptable.  Couple have asked so BM please clarify it's only for those that are being merged (PTS/AGS ?).

That aside, go for it!
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 08:32:28 pm by GaltReport »

Offline bytemaster

Once sentence on why VOTE would eclipse BTSX...

VOTE was shaping up to have all of the features of BTSX + DNS + Bazzar + VOTE's market strategy + all of the developers.  Why was it going to get all of the developers, because Adam had a 30% stake with which to hire us all and Agent 86 was making a compelling case of the need for dilution and developers with a major stake. 

Why... because BTSX was DAC Sun's chain, had a development budget that was capped, and had no ability to raise capital. 

Because people were starting to freak out that VOTE with that feature set and team would be a threat to BTSX and starting to dump BTSX on the mere rumor.

 
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 graffenwalder

Quote
2 year vesting period... ie: you can withdraw early for a fraction of your cut.. if you want to sell after 6 months you get 25%... if you wait for a year you get 50%... etc. 

Is the vesting period for btsx, dns, Vote, AGS and PTS?
I thought it was only for AGS and PTS.

If so, there would be an serious incentive to keep BTSX on centralized exchanges.
Because I guess they would simply drop the x, and continue trading.
And so the vesting period would be avoided.

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile
+5% support for the proposal


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Offline onceuponatime

+5% Support.....how do I officially vote in support of BM's proposal?

It's not official, but there is a poll here:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10247.0

TurkeyLeg

  • Guest
 +5% Support.....how do I officially vote in support of BM's proposal?

Offline gamey

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

Adam earnest gets 1%? For real?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

.9%.  Or rather "Follow My Vote" does.  I am not sure what that entity is.

Follow my Vote was at the right place to work with Toast and his keygraph id likely leveraging the real id stuff of VOTE.  The thing is, all this intellectual property was I3s from anything I can see.  So I won't speak to what was or what wasn't done by VOTE, but it sounds pretty sweet to me.  And I don't think anything has to be done to be paid. :)  Proven marketer indeed.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 08:11:23 pm by gamey »
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline thisisausername

I'm 100% against this proposal. EDIT: I support the merge but not with these numbers
What AGS/PTS get is ridiculously low.
It is against the initial promise.
I fully agree with this. Agree with the merger but the allocation is so low for PTS/AGS after Feb28! Those were the ppl that donated most of the AGS dev fund...

disclaimer: I donated more to AGS after Feb28 than before.
+5% the incredibly low percentage along with the incredibly long vesting period soaks PTS/AGS holders far too much.
Pjo39s6hfpWexsZ6gEBC9iwH9HTAgiEXTG

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Professor of Computer Science
    • View Profile
    • My Academic Website
  • BitShares: biophil
One sentence on how VOTE will eclipse and Kill BTSX.  Just one sentence, no secrets, no slippery slope, no pie in the sky. One sentence with a fact or even a plausible theory.

Are you blindly following?

Here's a news flash, VOTE WILL NEVER ECLIPSE BTSX? VOTE has zero monetary potential. If Bytemaster wants to leave BTSX and devote all time to VOTE, so be it. Remember he and the I3 others have the largest stake to lose. Has I3 ever canvassed for a new Dev to help out? I certainly never saw a call. I am afraid something is going on behind science we are not privy to.

NewMine, we can always count on you for a good dose of bluster.

Nobody here knows what VOTE is all about. Nobody has anything other than vague hypotheses.

This is what happened, as far as I can guess: BM got really excited about VOTE the other day, and wouldn't tell us why. Then, behind the scenes, he started working on it, and his friends said "hey! stop it! BTSX isn't done yet!" And BM replied and said "But BTSX is boring! How about we figure out a way to roll the VOTE features into BTSX so that I don't have to split my time between what's boring and what's exciting?"

I bet dollars to donuts that's essentially what happened. Stan was exaggerating when he said VOTE would kill BTSX, but the idea was sound: if BM is going to work on both, everything would work better if he could work on them simultaneously.

Disclaimer: I have no idea what happened behind the scenes. I made all that up, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Support our research efforts to improve BitAsset price-pegging! Vote for worker 1.14.204 "201907-uccs-research-project."

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Professor of Computer Science
    • View Profile
    • My Academic Website
  • BitShares: biophil
I'm 100% against this proposal. EDIT: I support the merge but not with these numbers
What AGS/PTS get is ridiculously low.
It is against the initial promise.
I fully agree with this. Agree with the merger but the allocation is so low for PTS/AGS after Feb28! Those were the ppl that donated most of the AGS dev fund...

disclaimer: I donated more to AGS after Feb28 than before.

There's nothing about this that makes it the actual end of AGS, right? The AGS donation list is still there, and we could still say the social consensus (in tatters though it may be) demands honoring it 10%. Or we could update the social consensus to say that you can honor PTS/AGS or the new BTS. Or we could say honor BTS and AGS or something like that.

However, it really does seem like post-Feb 28 AGS donators are getting shafted with this proposal.

Disclaimer: I donated almost nothing to AGS because I needed liquidity.
Support our research efforts to improve BitAsset price-pegging! Vote for worker 1.14.204 "201907-uccs-research-project."

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
One sentence on how VOTE will eclipse and Kill BTSX.  Just one sentence, no secrets, no slippery slope, no pie in the sky. One sentence with a fact or even a plausible theory.

Are you blindly following?

Here's a news flash, VOTE WILL NEVER ECLIPSE BTSX? VOTE has zero monetary potential. If Bytemaster wants to leave BTSX and devote all time to VOTE, so be it. Remember he and the I3 others have the largest stake to lose. Has I3 ever canvassed for a new Dev to help out? I certainly never saw a call. I am afraid something is going on behind science we are not privy to.


Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
I'm 100% against this proposal. EDIT: I support the merge but not with these numbers
What AGS/PTS get is ridiculously low.
It is against the initial promise.
I fully agree with this. Agree with the merger but the allocation is so low for PTS/AGS after Feb28! Those were the ppl that donated most of the AGS dev fund...

The vote DAC was described as having the potential to have more value than BTX (plus the DNS DAC...). This allocation proposal does not reflect that.

disclaimer: I donated more to AGS after Feb28 than before.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 07:59:26 pm by delulo »

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Does anyone want to tell me why VOTE changed everything?

I haven't been able to find the amazing revelations related to vote.

Possibly California exploring new voting systems and the VOTE concept fitting what it is California is looking for.

Yea, California is going to want to accept BTS as a voting solution?  Does that seem plausible?  A custom blockchain - yes.  The 2nd swiss-army of blockchains ?  ... ?

Yea it keeps track of your votes !  And does your Name Service !  The ultimate vote solution !  OH yea, we're a bank denominated in all manner of commodities !  Come one ! Come all !

<facepalm>

Am I being too cynical ?

It seems for this reason that the various aspects of the "super DAC" should be branched off into their own wallets or something -- there needs to be a separation between all these different ideas, while still being ultimately backed up by the BTS super token so that investors are happy and developer focus isn't pulled to competing ventures.

Separate Wallets would work, no? Think about what cob and eddy were talking about with peertracks- an interface that sits "on top of" the blockchain. Room for as many other interfaces/wallets/clients as needed. The Bitcoin crowd has had this idea for a long time- use BTC as the ledger and ride everything else on "top". Same idea with Bitshares, but with BTS it could actually work, thanks to DPOS, faster transaction times, touring completeness, etc.

Having a a multilayered complicated transaction system on the blockchain is almost the opposite direction from transparency and the main reason you are selling voting on a blockchain.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 08:17:35 pm by gamey »
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile

I'm not very happy about PTS not being liquid.  The vesting period needs to be a lot shorter.  PTS is getting screwed.  0

I'm not even sure marketing one big DAC is that great of an idea.  Metcalfe's or not.  We're a currency, but also DNS provider, but we do voting too !   Is this easier to market ?   How about using it?  I guess one blockchain with separate front ends ?   No one had to even mention PTS/AGS previously in marketing.  Now we have a million different things under 1 roof. 

I suppose it might be better because I don't particularly disagree with Metcalfe's/network effect but you guys better think real carefully before blindly following a law.  There is a real problem with technical people applying stuff like this and having utter faith in it but failing to see the limitations of men in some regard.

So are there going to be separate front ends ?

So how many steps have we taken backwards from a point of stability ? 

Adam Ernest now gets 1% of BTS because he did what ? 

This is sort of what I was worried about when I first read Dan's initial posting.

Adam earnest gets 1%? For real?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Offline CryptoPrometheus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Does anyone want to tell me why VOTE changed everything?

I haven't been able to find the amazing revelations related to vote.

Possibly California exploring new voting systems and the VOTE concept fitting what it is California is looking for.

Yea, California is going to want to accept BTS as a voting solution?  Does that seem plausible?  A custom blockchain - yes.  The 2nd swiss-army of blockchains ?  ... ?

Yea it keeps track of your votes !  And does your Name Service !  The ultimate vote solution !  OH yea, we're a bank denominated in all manner of commodities !  Come one ! Come all !

<facepalm>

Am I being too cynical ?

It seems for this reason that the various aspects of the "super DAC" should be branched off into their own wallets or something -- there needs to be a separation between all these different ideas, while still being ultimately backed up by the BTS super token so that investors are happy and developer focus isn't pulled to competing ventures.

Separate Wallets would work, no? Think about what cob and eddy were talking about with peertracks- an interface that sits "on top of" the blockchain. Room for as many other interfaces/wallets/clients as needed. The Bitcoin crowd has had this idea for a long time- use BTC as the ledger and ride everything else on "top". Same idea with Bitshares, but with BTS it could actually work, thanks to DPOS, faster transaction times, touring completeness, etc.
"Power and law are not synonymous. In fact, they are often in opposition and irreconcilable."
- Cicero