Final allocation offer - slightly changed proposal!

[Shentist]

1.
I am a supporter of the merger, because I see a need to only trade bitUSD on a single blockchain. Much easier for the user
2.
If you followed my posts it is not suprising, that I don’t support the proposed allocation of Bytemaster. But reality is, it would be impossible to change Bytemasters view, so I suppose it will be :
80% BTSX 7 % AGS 7% PTS 3% DNS 3% VOTE

Instead of complaining all the day I dicided to make a better proposal to fix some issues I see. My proposal will not change the BTS allocation, but will include some new entity.

Why is the allocation wrong?

If you take a calm look, it is clear that the merger is in favor of the Feb. 28 Snapshot and didn’t consider the risk the AGS and PTS donors took who donored of bought PTS after this snapshot. They are diluted the most.

So what can we do, to fix this unfairness?

I propose to create on BTS the first Asset on the exchange – GENESIS (GNS).

Genesis will hold the promises given AGS and PTS for the use of bitshares toolkit from 3rd parties with 20 % in the sharedrops.

The tweak with Genesis is, we will reverse the allocation done for the BTS creation:

20% BTSX : 40% AGS : 40% PTS or 1:2:2 = = 5 Million GNS

To give Genesis more value I propose as well to use them for the creation of new assets on the exchange instead of BTSX.

With this approach we could smooth some unfair allocations in favor on the Feb. 28 Snapshot.

I hope you like my idea!

More details:

Genesis – 5 Million  GNS – 1 BTSX : 2 AGS : 2 PTS allocation

What are GNS good for?

• If a new DAC with the toolkit is created, GNS holders will get at least a sharedrop after the max. Sharecount of 20%
• To issue assets on the BTS exchange you need to pay the fees in Genesis shares!

To make it much simpler for the enduser I would like to price all the fees in bitUSD and we could buy the needed GNS in the backround without confusing the user.

Creation of new assets:

a) BitAssets

BitAssets should be created by vote and every holder of Genesis will be deducted with the needed GNS for creating a new bitAsset. Everyone has to pay, because it benefits the whole community.
   Or
If someone is willing to pay the fees, he can also create a bitAsset

Assume a Altcoin want to be traded as bitAsset, the Altcoin community can create this new bitAsset and can fund it by crowdsale.



b) user issued Assets

Bitshares ME: (no restrictions)
       x bitUSD has to be paid, but in the backround the blockchain will buy the needed Genesis shares on the market and will increase the value with buying pressure of GNS
suppose to create a bitAsset without restriction you have to pay 100 bitUSD and the system will buy the needed GNS

 Bitshares X (for companies like Overstock; legal problems solved etc.)
suppose we charge 0,5% bitUSD for the issued valued shares
example: you create a new asset with 1.000.000 Overstock shares and the nominal value is 1 bitUSD. So the fees will be 5.000 bitUSD to be paid

this is just a quick idea, but i am looking for a solution everyone can agree. with GNS in place the late AGS and PTS donors can compensate overtime the cutted allocation in new DACs and the BTSX holder will also get a fair share.