Author Topic: Will 3rd Party DACs honor PTS/AGS in the future?  (Read 6414 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wallace

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 215
    • View Profile
As a PTS&AGS holder, I respect what 3I doing for the BTSX and totally agree with this proposal of this merger.

but I have a big concern about the future 3rd Party DAC, we need to keep the social consensus - at least 10% to AGSer and 10% PTSer. currently I didn't see any official response about this.
give me money, I will do...

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Don't forget the beginner's mind

https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Social Consensus Software License - Version 1.0 - August 10, 2013
Copyright (c) 2013 Invictus Innovations, Inc. All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in the source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following condititons are met:
1.Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2.Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3.Neither the name of Invictus Innovations, Inc nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
4.The genesis block of any blockchain must allocate 10% of the total lifetime shares ever allocated by the blockchain to the holders of BitShares PTS proportional to the percentage of total BitShares PTS held. Additionally 10% of the total lifetime shares ever allcoated by the blockchain to the holders of BitShares AGS must be allocated in the genesis block.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS OR ANYONE DISTRIBUTING THE SOFTWARE BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

That is the real deal! It is breached by III!

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
Don't forget the beginner's mind

https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Social Consensus Software License - Version 1.0 - August 10, 2013
Copyright (c) 2013 Invictus Innovations, Inc. All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in the source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following condititons are met:
1.Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2.Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3.Neither the name of Invictus Innovations, Inc nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
4.The genesis block of any blockchain must allocate 10% of the total lifetime shares ever allocated by the blockchain to the holders of BitShares PTS proportional to the percentage of total BitShares PTS held. Additionally 10% of the total lifetime shares ever allcoated by the blockchain to the holders of BitShares AGS must be allocated in the genesis block.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS OR ANYONE DISTRIBUTING THE SOFTWARE BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 


The proposed allocation does not meet the social consensus. Factoring in DNS and VOTE, PTS and AGS would each get

7% + (30%*3%) + (40%*3%) = 9.1%

which is less than 10%, unless I'm missing something. Stan, the allocation really should be made right if Bitshares wants to be able to claim that the social consensus would be met.

Yes.. you are missing that 10% of *future*... they are also getting 9.1% of *PAST*... and most would argue that *PAST* >> *FUTURE* and that BTSX is far more profitable and had greater potential than the other DACs.

@Bytemaster the 9.1% of past&future is OK. What is wrong with that is the promise to AGS/PTS. They were promised that developers of the DACs will have 80%. Developers will use this for developing and promoting. This will make dilution of the original 10% unlikely. Now these 80% are given to other shareholders. AND the dilution is inevitable. And THIS is the breach in promise.

Offline bennyliaa

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Anybody could explain whether it break the social consensus or not after Merge ?  :)

how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 

sorry  what i mean is 3rd Party DACs in the future.

according  BM's reply, for example  3rd DACs  honor new BTSX 20%  instead of  AGS&PTS
then  AGS before feb.28 get 20%*49.4%=9.88%
 AGS after feb.28 get 20%*9.4%=1.88%  much less than 10%


Code: [Select]
new BTSX     btsx 80% ags7% pts7% dns3% vote3%
so AGS before feb.28 get =80%*50%(btsx)+7%*100%(ags)+3%*50%(dns)+3%*30%(vote)=49.4%

AGS after feb.28 get =7%*100%(ags)+3%*50%(dns)+3%*30%(vote)=9.4%




Think as a 3rd party developer....

You would want to honor BTS... or nothing.... *unless* you think we have done something unfair to the extent that you can out compete us.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 02:12:34 pm by bennyliaa »
My Personal BTS Account: stephen

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10344.0

Everyone who is whining read this, and stop. It's embarrassing.

BM built DPOS, BTSX, the concept of DACs, market pegged assets. He's a genius and you're lucky enough to be an early adopter of his product. STOP COMPLAINING.

Offline bytemaster

how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 


The proposed allocation does not meet the social consensus. Factoring in DNS and VOTE, PTS and AGS would each get

7% + (30%*3%) + (40%*3%) = 9.1%

which is less than 10%, unless I'm missing something. Stan, the allocation really should be made right if Bitshares wants to be able to claim that the social consensus would be met.

Yes.. you are missing that 10% of *future*... they are also getting 9.1% of *PAST*... and most would argue that *PAST* >> *FUTURE* and that BTSX is far more profitable and had greater potential than the other DACs.

Also the Dev fund from DNS is being removed from DNS so it more than 9.1%
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 bytemaster

how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 


The proposed allocation does not meet the social consensus. Factoring in DNS and VOTE, PTS and AGS would each get

7% + (30%*3%) + (40%*3%) = 9.1%

which is less than 10%, unless I'm missing something. Stan, the allocation really should be made right if Bitshares wants to be able to claim that the social consensus would be met.

Yes.. you are missing that 10% of *future*... they are also getting 9.1% of *PAST*... and most would argue that *PAST* >> *FUTURE* and that BTSX is far more profitable and had greater potential than the other DACs.
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 pendragon3

how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 


The proposed allocation does not meet the social consensus. Factoring in DNS and VOTE, PTS and AGS would each get

7% + (30%*3%) + (40%*3%) = 9.1%

which is less than 10%, unless I'm missing something. Stan, the allocation really should be made right if Bitshares wants to be able to claim that the social consensus would be met.

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 

sorry  what i mean is 3rd Party DACs in the future.

according  BM's reply, for example  3rd DACs  honor new BTSX 20%  instead of  AGS&PTS
then  AGS before feb.28 get 20%*49.4%=9.88%
 AGS after feb.28 get 20%*9.4%=1.88%  much less than 10%

Code: [Select]
new BTSX     btsx 80% ags7% pts7% dns3% vote3%
so AGS before feb.28 get =80%*50%(btsx)+7%*100%(ags)+3%*50%(dns)+3%*30%(vote)=49.4%

AGS after feb.28 get =7%*100%(ags)+3%*50%(dns)+3%*30%(vote)=9.4%




Think as a 3rd party developer....

You would want to honor BTS... or nothing.... *unless* you think we have done something unfair to the extent that you can out compete us.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
But instead of softening people up, you (and by you, I mean BM) created a PR nightmare shitstorm by announcing an allocation that superficially violates the social consensus, and now before most people have a chance to react, the price of DNS is on the floor and everybody's pissed because they were deluded by an inflated market price. Did you honestly believe that was the best way to do it?
I tend to agree here ...

BM proposed to have a 'verbal' hangout session announce before publishing proposals again .. so that questions can be answered until everything is clear .. and then the proposal can be made public .. however... the issue then is ... people are rushing into the hangouts wanting the "latest" insider information to dump/dump the price before everyone else had the chance ...

I honestly prefere having these proposals published right away .. however .. BM should consider consulting toast before! He has a better "feeling" for those proposals ...  IMHO

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Professor of Computer Science
    • View Profile
    • My Academic Website
  • BitShares: biophil
how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 

Look, Stan, I mean this in the best way possible, but your PR is so bad. I mean just unbelievably awful. You're going to shrug my comment off with something weird and vaguely witty like you always do, but when will you guys realize that what is obvious to you isn't immediately obvious to everybody else?

I finally understand why this counts as honoring the social consensus. What I don't understand is why you think people will accept it so easily, especially since when BM proposed the allocation, he didn't even try to explain it until like 10 pages in? In investors' view, they have a stake in the DNS DAC. Now, if you soften them up ahead of time, they would see that the DNS DAC isn't a DAC, it's just a naked featureless DPOS chain derived almost entirely from AGS/PTS. That is, DNS is AGS/PTS. Looked at like that, it's obvious that 240 satoshi was an over-inflated price.

But instead of softening people up, you (and by you, I mean BM) created a PR nightmare shitstorm by announcing an allocation that superficially violates the social consensus, and now before most people have a chance to react, the price of DNS is on the floor and everybody's pissed because they were deluded by an inflated market price. Did you honestly believe that was the best way to do it?
Support our research efforts to improve BitAsset price-pegging! Vote for worker 1.14.204 "201907-uccs-research-project."

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????

When you consider DNS and VOTE as part of the post-Feb 28th package then you do have 10%.
And they get a pre 28th share in BTSX as also.

So this actually exceeds the social consensus in that sense. 
Part of the balancing act needed to bring all parties together.
Not easy.   :)
 
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 sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
Think as a 3rd party developer....

You would want to honor BTS... or nothing.... *unless* you think we have done something unfair to the extent that you can out compete us.


Third party should still honor the final snapshot for PTS&AGS at least 10% each
just like  Licensing fees  for  bitshares toolkit

if  honor  bts,AGS before 2.28 Benefit more more more more than  anything else

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
how dare  to  broke the  social consensus for PTS/AGS 10% each???????????????????????