BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community

[jwiz168]

Great work BM , so this some sort of delegates for hire scheme?

[bytemaster]

We want to work together and recognize the contributions of each member to helping the community grow and achieve its ultimate mission, world peace.

For the benefit of attracting a wider community, I think it would be helpful to list some of the ways members can do this and be recognised, apart from the limited number of delegate roles. How do community members without developer skills meaningfully contribute?

I am working with Adam to create jobs for everyone to earn money by helping to market without dilution. 

[bytemaster]

Here is what I don't want to happen is for delegates to be considered directors of a company issuing shares to the public as an unlicensed security. 

A self governing community that uses bts to track each persons share of the work contributed is much more generic and does not imply a legal entity.   

I also want the message and metaphor to make people feel as part of something rather than owning part of something separate from them.

[starspirit]

We want to work together and recognize the contributions of each member to helping the community grow and achieve its ultimate mission, world peace.

For the benefit of attracting a wider community, I think it would be helpful to list some of the ways members can do this and be recognised, apart from the limited number of delegate roles. How do community members without developer skills meaningfully contribute?

[bytemaster]

So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...

Thought about this.  But the masses would laugh at such a thing. 

[Thom]

So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...

R U trying to start a war? 

Interesting, but I'd prefer "virtual, borderless community on a blockchain" and get away from statist lingo like country.

[Thom]

Keep in mind that this community will have many faces.  Just like the users of a BitShares debit card or a voting booth or a day-trader's console don't need to know the whole backstory.   

But there will be times when a bigger metaphor is needed to communicate the entire vision and legal theory of operation.

"You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

The Matrix is oine of my all time favorite movies, but it is deep. I thought the new BTS was about simplifying the message. How deep does this marketing hole go Stan? Perhap.s we should stop chasing rabbits and listen to the oldman oldmen

[oldman]

BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community
To this end the funds held by I3 for development will be divided among the core developers who will work together as independent parties to grow the community.  Details of this plan are still under review, but at the end of the day the result will be that no one developer will have "king making authority" for delegates.    People have stated that I have "too much power", but I do not wish to rely of fiat to get things done, but instead on my ability to persuade the community.   I also wish for the development of BTS to continue regardless of what the SEC or government attempts to accuse I3 of.   BTS is bigger than any one of us and has the potential to unite everyone under a fully voluntary society. 

I would ask that this happen only after a MVP BitShares product is in place - ie. stable client, basic feature set, major bugs ironed out.

It would be terrible if BM identified another opportunity like the merger and was not be able to implement because the 'community' does not want to inconvenience share price.

BitShares is not ready for Dad to take the training wheels off just yet. I'd say give it at least six months and then disband I3 and divvy the remaining funds.

Generally I like what you're saying here BUT I find using a company metaphor the best way to describe what BitShares actually is. What is a company? It's a community. It makes more sense to describe BitShares as an "unmanned company". People actually get excited when I describe it like that. This change might be important for legal reasons, but in my opinion will only further lead to confusion. People are having a REALLY hard time wrapping their head around what this is...

EDIT: I think the term "open source company" sums up what we are quite nicely. BitShares is literally an open source project + monetary incentive.

I agree with MeTHoDx on this one.

The term 'DAC' is already out in the wild and folks that invest in BitShares expect to be investing in a company.

Companies produce profit, communities produce people.

I like BM's philosophy and I think BitShares + Meshnet might actually have a shot at changing the world.

But first things first - this community needs to build a profitable, self-sustaining DAC.

Then we can go change the world.

[Method-X]

So why not just declare BitShares a sovereign country on a blockchain...

[Stan]

Keep in mind that this community will have many faces.  Just like the users of a BitShares debit card or a voting booth or a day-trader's console don't need to know the whole backstory.   

But there will be times when a bigger metaphor is needed to communicate the entire vision and legal theory of operation.

"You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

[fluxer555]

'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.

That's a good point, but if that were the intended meaning the name should drop the trailing "s" to become BitShare

Not necessarily, 'shares' can mean 'multiple instances of sharing'. so BitShares would be describing a collection of shares, shared by community members.

[fluxer555]

'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.

What a twist...

[Thom]

'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.

That's a good point, but if that were the intended meaning the name should drop the trailing "s" to become BitShare

[godzirra]

'Shares' can also be understood as a verb. A community motivated to work together by sharing.
That seems just as appropriate.

[Thom]

I am just waiting for Rune to put the positive spin on the OP... I do believe he can!

I like the gist of it, but would like more information about this:

We have long used the company metaphor to describe BitShares X as a bank and exchange and thrown around words like shares, dividends, dilution, merger, interest, etc.   I would like to officially strike all such language from the rebranded BitShares (BTS) to be launched because it does not fit with what we are really doing and those words work against us in every way except understanding the economic consequences of various decisions. 

This concerns me.

Why? I think what he is trying to say is that we need our own economic language and concepts else we will be put into a box with entities which don't or can't do what we do.

Bitshares is a decentralized application which has functions which make it like a cooperative but it's not a company. So when we define ourselves we should do so carefully so that what we are doing is understood but also in a way so that regulators who don't understand cannot use it as an excuse.

If you want Bitshares to be treated as sovereign then it has to use it's own language. Of course these are my opinions and I think the community would benefit long term from this but I'm interested in knowing why it concerns you.

I appreciate your interest luckybit. I'm not the only one:

This change might be important for legal reasons, but in my opinion will only further lead to confusion. People are having a REALLY hard time wrapping their head around what this is...

EDIT: I think the term "open source company" sums up what we are quite nicely. BitShares is literally an open source project + monetary incentive.

1) The financial terminology works for many reasons, so we shouldn't jettison it without much community discussion.
2) We might be distancing what we have accomplished, before we say what we're going to do.
3) A huge amount of information, FAQ, whitepapers, websites, interviews and other media / documentation might need to be scrapped to support such a major shift.
4) We'll have to "un"market our previous message, otherwise the new msg will just confuse people.

I think this could be a real positive thing, but it is rather disappointing such a msg is dropped late in the day, especially since it  conveys such a major shift in how we have previously marketed and defined ourselves in the past.

Although I believe it was certainly thought out and vetted much better than the merger announcement, it still feels like it was "sprung" on us, even if nothing else in the timing (late in the day).

And keep in mind this feedback is coming from a guy that is far from experienced with derivatives, futures and all the financial jargon. But it's not about how easy or difficult such concepts are for me, but rather how well they fit with what we're doing and the markets we're trying to reach.

Face it, our main thrust is focused on the financial sector. I don't see that changing. If the shift is preemptive to avoid legal issues I'm all in for however we need to spin our persona to accomplish the mission while sidestepping the politicians.