You act like being an early adopter is a privilege, that you deserve everything you can get your hands on. Let me tell you it is not. It is a gift, maybe the greatest gift anyone has ever received - and it is time that you take on the responsibility that goes along with it.
I think we are seeing "true colors" from a lot of people, out on display for all the community to see. Who can handle the intensity of the reality of what needs to be done? I am most impressed by the ones that haveaccepted this reality, even though it may have meant a temporary personal "loss". My observation is that those who hold most tightly to their "expectations", are the ones who cry the loudest when they find out the world does not revolve around them.
I'm getting sick of Rune's thinly hidden cheerleading. The account is not even a month old and this person is condescending to people who have been around far longer, done far more, and bought into something completely different.
He is telling us same cheerleading we heard before he was even around.
It was not an honor or a privilege to have been early investors. We did this by making the correct decisions. Make those correct decisions required labor and intelligence. We worked for it. You probably came around after seeing BTSX on coinmarketcap. So save your bullshit for others.
As for everything else it seems fairly close to a done deal. I'm not happy, but mainly it is over the cultural shift. It is likely required and likely a good thing. I just don't understand what exactly these "mergers" mean or what exactly they imply and it is a source of my irritation. The value equation is very complicated and depends on a lot of small factors which have been vague and scattered about.
In the end I'd ask people to start being nicer. I'm sure Dan never really wanted it to turn out like this, and it really is as much a proactive move as reactive I believe. Yesterday I had a lot little jabs and snide posts. It is hard not to be that way. For me this pivot makes it harder to be a rah-rah fanboy as my vision isn't as much aligned with this single DAC centric one. I'd imagine it is like being a sports fan (whatever thats like) and seeing your whole team just die on the field. Ok.. not really.. I'm kidding.. Seriously though I will try to be more positive. We'll see where she goes as I can't see any other project as worthy of my time. :|
If you look at the history Rune was in forefront pushing for the merger in the VOTE thread that started all this (I think Rune made the proposal before BM did). Now that he has what he wants he's trying to get everyone to shut up and just go along as quietly as possible. To help facilitate this he just has to shake the pompoms a few times to get the 
crowd going.
On top of that in the confusion he's now also proposing a system where an elite few get access to secret forums for all the inside details from the devs. At what stake threshold to gain access does he propose, close to around the amount of stake he controls...
It's just a bunch of manipulative bullshit, never let a good crisis go to waste and all that.
Like everyone else, at the very least I've not been bored haha.
Okay first of all, we are stakeholders in the same company. Our goal of increasing value should align, and it would make no sense for me to act in a way puts you at a disadvantage, as I'd also be hurting myself. If you think it would be more profitable for us to have several DACs, and that I have hurt you financially then fine you are right to be mad at me, but you have to understand that I did it only with the best intentions of increasing value for everyone (including myself). Ideologically, I would prefer many DACs, but in practice I don't think any other strategy than a superDAC is economically viable. If we did not make the superDAC, someone else would, and their superDAC would outcompete ours. Do you trust that other random community to be as honest as ours? My experience tells me that most other altcoins have pretty horrible pump n dump communities that put profit above everything else compared to this one. Since there is no other way, what I hope to achieve is that our superDAC is created in a way that stays true to the principles of decentralization. I'm of course also very excited to see what it will end up becoming.
Regarding the insider club, you're right that it's a bad thing, but consider that right now the insider club is I3 with no transparency at all. I would prefer to have absolute transparency with nothing being hidden from anyone with no barriers to entry whatsoever, and I hope we can implement that once we have achieved significant network effect. Right now it seems that I3 employees thinks it is vital to keep a lot of information secret to avoid having it stolen by competitors. I trust their judgement in this regard, even if I don't like it, and that is why I proposed the "secret insider club" of large stakeholders to be able to share this sensitive information, so that there at least are people independent from the developers who are able to hear it and report their sentiments to the broader community.
I guess delegates could also be used for this regard, but I suspect that delegates will devolve into politics and we would then be stuck with this secret insider club political elite that I think could go really bad.
The fact that I conveniently decided to put the bar exactly so that I could join the secret insider club was pretty stupid I guess, but in the end it would be up to I3 to decide who to let in on their secrets, and also since I'm the only member of the community that I know for a fact could be trusted to be honest and transparent about relaying what stage these secret projects are at, I just can't help be biased. I know the fact that I trust myself useless for everyone else but I just wanted to voice my thought process. At least I disclosed my share, it would be worse if I conveniently put my proposal at my own share level without disclosing it and then pretended it was for some other reason.
In the end I already own enough shares to become ridiculously wealthy once this blockchain takes off. I could just sit back and do nothing and I'm sure there'd be massive price bubbles regardless, but I feel compelled to argue for as much transparency as possible, and try to push the DAC in the direction that I am convinced is best for everyone. It's quite disheartening to become the target of hostility. That being said I also realize that I'm unfairly lucky to be a purely BTSX investor, and I've been insensitive to the frustrations of those that held other shares, and for that I'm sorry.
Topic: Stop arguing percentages and look at the bigger picture. (Read 21493 times)
