BitShares to become Decentralized Autonomous Community

[thazel72]

How is a stakeholder looked at in the eyes of the law? I would say that we are all more or less stakeholders in a Distributed Autonomous Community. I think this would also offer the easiest branding switch to make without confusing the hell out of people even more than Bitshares already does. Having a stake in this new community is more important to me than a share in some distributed autonomous corporation.

[yellowecho]

Decentralized Autonomous Network... DAN

It was SO meant to be!

Technological Organization Autonomously Securing Trust

[Method-X]

Decentralized Autonomous Network... DAN

It was SO meant to be!

[robust8]

Just one experiment……

[yellowecho]

Why can't we all just agree that DAC stands for Decentralized Autonomous Consensus? 

Consensus comes in many forms.. whether its in the form of a community, a company, a corporation, a co-operative, or a country.. BitShares provides consensus and that's what matters.

[zerosum]

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.

I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.

Yes!
There was a message. Pretty powerful one, indeed!

Message, Vision, Idea!

In which all of us believe(d), more or less; some sooner, some later; some totally, some only in the core principals;

Now all of a sudden comes this - lets build Bla-bla Bla-bla Community - not only totally uninspiring, but already accomplished!
We do have a community. No need to build one with some adjectives in front of it.

And no, I do not believe we have achieved our goal if we force a half-a** constitution on the king,

If we want a republic there should be no king!

If we want better business model(s) for our kids, we should not hide behind false pretenses that this is not a business!

[lovejoy]

I think this is a brilliant direction
strategically as well as ideologically

It certainly raises some questions
as to how these things are communicated
as wider adoption occurs

but this is such a paradigm shift
dressing it up in the old language and concepts
probably is a burden to the vision

after all...

We're not trying to beat anyone at their own game
We're changing the game

A system of agreements
Among a voluntary society of friends
Decentralized Autonomous Community

The torch is advancing
Enlightened self organization is not only possible, but inevitable
And this is one aware and advanced community
it's an honor and a privilege

further thoughts
leadership is a useful thing
I don't believe decentralization can function well without leadership
the spectrum of leadership is simply more granular
leadership is necessarily provisional, and reputation based
decentralization also, it has been mentioned, is a tactic rather than a strategy

if you're on a ship in perilous waters, best to trust in the captain to make fast course corrections
attempting to reach consensus in such times can leave you dashed upon the rocks
delegated authority
something this community knows well.

This just keeps getting better and better
I think we have a great community here
And we are more than equal to the challenges

One last thought on those who aren't sure how to contribute for lack of technical wizardry

IMHO there is ample room for creativity in language, image, organization of information, and coordination between this amazing pool of talent to more than justify a healthy dose of non-technical delegates with the capacity to carry and evolve this vision, and see projects through to completion.  There is an amazing diversity of talent here, and it makes us strong.

[yellowecho]

Community, Cooperative, Country, Corporation. I would think in different countries to different people it could be marketed in a different way with a different metaphor. In the United States corporations aren't a good metaphor and country is science fiction to most people.

BitShares loves DACs; all nouns starting with a C are fair game 

[kisa]

The only thing that remains constant is change. We've got to get used to that in order to be successful in this game

[luckybit]

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.

I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.

This is the same sort of debate about whether Bitcoin is a coin, a currency or a commodity. Bitcoin is more than a coin, currency or commodity. Currency is an app. Coin is a description to make it easier to understand (like company for Bitshares).

[JWF]

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.

This is one of the answers I have been looking for, a meaningful way for us little guys with not much ability to actually contribute. I look forward to your/Adam's creation.

[Method-X]

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.

I do understand where you're going with this and why you're thinking this way. Is there any way to push the community aspect for now on your end but let the community at large describe BitShares as a "company on a blockchain"? That metaphor when properly employed works SO beautifully... It's the entire reason I was sold on the BitShares concept. It made total sense. I'm not sure I would be here right now if it was pitched as a decentralized autonomous community. Doesn't have the same oomph.

[BTSdac]

every body or team can join this community by buying BTS, developing code , marketing. supporting bitusd. create assets.  ..................   

[luckybit]

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

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

They would right now. Five or ten years from now it could be entirely different.

So right now we are building a community which can over time take on all the necessary functions so that if in the future it becomes possible then the metaphor can change.

Community, Cooperative, Country, Corporation. I would think in different countries to different people it could be marketed in a different way with a different metaphor. In the United States corporations aren't a good metaphor and country is science fiction to most people.

[luckybit]

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

You start by declaring yourself a community, then you build in as much utility as you can so that community can be self sufficient. It's not a blockchain country but it could become one if we want it to.

Even thinking of Bitshares as a cooperative is more accurate than a corporation but community is the most accurate for what we are today. It's not a country as you'd need so many DACs to not just exist but be connected to each other. You would also need the Internet of Things to be in place.

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.

An interesting fact is the term Decentralized Autonomous Community has existed prior to Decentralized Autonomous Corporation. So switching to a Decentralized Autonomous Community will make what Bitshares is a bit more clear to certain people while people who are speculators might get confused.

I think if you understand the philosophical and political reasons behind Bitshares then it always was a Decentralized Autonomous Community. The community is what gives meaning to a DAC. If the community is important then it must survive whether or not Bytemaster is in the position to lead it.