Long live the social consensus, long live PTS! (Stay tuned)

[fuzzy]

Good question

[Fox]

A note regarding our work on the transition of PTS to a standalone DPOS chain:

PTS is alive and well and so is the social consensus. PTS will be the preferred sharedrop instrument of future 3rd party DACs. We have yet to decide whether to use the Nov. 5th snapshot (since a future snapshot may not be possible if mining stops completely), but rest assured that we have a functional testnet, new website and marketing in the works, and an active group of dedicated developers and marketers.

Stay tuned for more information...

@alphBar
How does the "Invictus Innovations to Return PTS Donations" announcement [1] , thereby diluting the existing PTS chain, play into your consideration for use of the 5 November snapshot?  How is the social consensus for PTS^(DPOS) impacted by their announcement?

Regards,
Fox

[1] https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=11289.75

[Riverhead]

I know you mentioned snapshotting (is that going to become a verb like Googling?) MUSIC in jest but I think it's a core piece of the ecosystem that's evolving. As DACs get more and more specialized it will increasingly make more sense for other DACs that live in the same space (Music, Finance, Gaming, Insurance, Voting, etc.) to snapshot to a much more focused community.

[donkeypong]

ToonCoin.

[fuzzy]

I propose that we use the MUSIC snapshot for all future PTS snapshot sharedrops.
Because I bought a bunch of it prior to the music runup, and sold afterwards.

If I campaign really hard for this and create <Insert name of libertarian leaning politician here> coin, using this snapshot, do you think I can make it work? 

If you are working on developing a coin and feel that snapshotting on bitshares music holders will get you the most preferable user base for your project, then yes.  And I will not judge you for it because it is your work and risk...and thus your decision. I personally would be interested in having on record the reasoning that went into your decision and would like to organize the sharedropped community to ask you questions about your reasons...or just to hear them say thanks for the consideration.  That is why you are a third party developer...and that is why snapshotting to build your userbase is powerful.

I would actually imagine that your project would substantially benefit from having an army of musicians writing tunes about your project.

[fuzzy]

...
Those of you who sold your PTS because you felt it had been bought out in the merger and was now worthless, and are accusing the new PTS project of being a scam: Who did you think you were selling your PTS to and why? You knowingly sold something you feel you'd already been paid for and also felt was worthless. They should have been burned rather than knowingly unloaded on the next sucker. You effectively sold them twice. So, you know, be careful throwing stones in glass houses.
...

I'm glad you made this point.

Exactly.

[hadrian]

...
Those of you who sold your PTS because you felt it had been bought out in the merger and was now worthless, and are accusing the new PTS project of being a scam: Who did you think you were selling your PTS to and why? You knowingly sold something you feel you'd already been paid for and also felt was worthless. They should have been burned rather than knowingly unloaded on the next sucker. You effectively sold them twice. So, you know, be careful throwing stones in glass houses.
...

I'm glad you made this point.

[Riverhead]

Note: This was split out from my earlier post about music. Since that post also read like an accusation towards Ander I split it into a new post.

On another note (no pun intended...ok, maybe a bit )

Those of you who sold your PTS because you felt it had been bought out in the merger and was now worthless, and are accusing the new PTS project of being a scam: Who did you think you were selling your PTS to and why? You knowingly sold something you feel you'd already been paid for and also felt was worthless. They should have been burned rather than knowingly unloaded on the next sucker. You effectively sold them twice. So, you know, be careful throwing stones in glass houses.

For the record I haven't bought or sold PTS since mid October and PTS accounts for less than 2% of my crypto portfolio and BTS about 96%

[Riverhead]

I just think that it would be nice if developers thought about what was the best allocation for their project, and sharedrop based on that.  That might be PTS/AGS, it might be BTS, or it might be both.

I agree. Sorry, my quote about your music suggestion got rolled into my ongoing rant about PTS. I didn't mean the connection; should have been two posts.

[Ander]

I didnt sell any PTS post-merger (didnt have any, sold earlier).

I dont think the new PTS coin is a scam either. 



I just think that it would be nice if developers thought about what was the best allocation for their project, and sharedrop based on that.  That might be PTS/AGS, it might be BTS, or it might be both.

[Riverhead]

I propose that we use the MUSIC snapshot for all future PTS snapshot sharedrops.

Actually share dropping to MUSIC DAC would make a lot of sense for a developer of a 3rd party DAC project that was looking to serve the music community/industry. Especially if they waited for the dust to settle a bit so that MUSIC had largely stabilized and the short term speculators had moved on to other things. What you'd be left with is a core of people that truly supported the music on a blockchain ethos.

[Ander]

I propose that we use the MUSIC snapshot for all future PTS snapshot sharedrops.
Because I bought a bunch of it prior to the music runup, and sold afterwards.

If I campaign really hard for this and create <Insert name of libertarian leaning politician here> coin, using this snapshot, do you think I can make it work? 

[zerosum]

PTS is dead. It makes no sense to sharedrop on an outdated prototype system that people still have large hoards of. PTS holders have been given a sharedrop and a snapshot on the 5th for BTS distribution.

If I was a 3rd party developer I would want my application to be used by as many people as possible so I would distribute it on BTS as it has a larger userbase and my shares would not be held by just a few individuals who have hoards of PTS.

There once was a time when everyone who was involved in bitshares had PTS and/or AGS, and to sharedrop to them was to sharedrop to the whole bitshares community.


Now, much of the community still has PTS/AGS, but there are many newcomers as well who are mostly in BTS. 

In the future as bitshares grow, this later category will grow, and more and more will just have BTS.



It is up to developers to chosoe their target group correctly.  Do they want to try to get buyin of the whole bitshares community, by sharedropping BTS?  Or do they want to specifically target early adopters, by sharedropping PTS/AGS? 

This is a decision they must make, and depending on the project, I think either one could be the correct decision.  If you are looking to get the widespread community to start using your product, you might sharedrop BTS.  If you are just looking for a small group to start building your technology, you could go with PTS and try to get more core supporters. 

(Or you could also sharedrop both!)

In the end, it is new project developers that will decide what to do with their projects.  I hope that these developers will make intelligent decisions based on the goals they want to achieve with the sharedrop.

Partly true, however we can make it even more precise!
-What you said about BTS - i.e. if they want the whole bitshares community.
-If they want early adopters only - they drop on AGS and PTS holders as of 5th of November.
-If they want to drop to some but not all early adopters and primarely on alphabar and company - i.e. people who bought PTS for  extra cheap from early adopters after 5th.  of November, they drop on his Alpha-ProtoShares.

[Ander]

If PTS still perfectly represent the early donations and the social contract, then PTS holders shouldn't have received any diluted BTS during the merger...

I agree with this.

I am a bit frustrated that PTSers want to have their cake and eat it too.  That is, they want to both get shares in BTS AND they want to still be the target of future sharedrops by 3rd party developers.

It should have been one way or the other.  Either PTS is merged into BTS, and now BTS is what you sharedrop to.  OR, PTS doesnt change at all, but doesnt get extra BTS.  (After all, PTSers back in February already got BTSX which turned into BTS).


That said, it seems the PTSers have won, mostly thanks to alphaBar's campaigning.  They managed to get BTS and they are managing to survive and convince people that they should get sharedrops in the future, not BTS.   Grats to PTSers, you won the merger and managed to get a slightly bigger share of the pie than everyone else!


But is all of this a big deal?  Probably not, unless you are a developer of 3rd party DACs.  Honestly, I think that the vast majority of the value of the bitshares ecosystem is in BTS, and it always will be. 


If in the future, a 3rd party develoepr sharedrops to PTS, I personally will ignore their project.  PTSers will be interested.  If they decide to sharedop to BTS, I will support the project.


I do think it makes a lot of sense for developers to pick who to sharedrop too based on the needs of their project.  For some, BTS might be better, for others, PTS.  I think it dependso n what you need: do you need lots of users (sharedrop BTS).  Or do you need a small core of developers (sharedrop PTS).

[Riverhead]

There once was a time when everyone who was involved in bitshares had PTS and/or AGS, and to sharedrop to them was to sharedrop to the whole bitshares community.

Now, much of the community still has PTS/AGS, but there are many newcomers as well who are mostly in BTS. 

In the future as bitshares grow, this later category will grow, and more and more will just have BTS.

It is up to developers to chosoe their target group correctly.  Do they want to try to get buyin of the whole bitshares community, by sharedropping BTS?  Or do they want to specifically target early adopters, by sharedropping PTS/AGS? 

This is a decision they must make, and depending on the project, I think either one could be the correct decision.  If you are looking to get the widespread community to start using your product, you might sharedrop BTS.  If you are just looking for a small group to start building your technology, you could go with PTS and try to get more core supporters. 

In the end, it is new project developers that will decide what to do with their projects.  I hope that these developers will make intelligent decisions based on the goals they want to achieve with the sharedrop.

I'd say this is one of the better responses I've read so far and I tend to agree with it.

It's very possible that PTS will not survive this. The idea behind PTS was that when you give an allocation to PTS hodlers you get a strong community supporting you right out of the gate. That was true then, and could have been true now, but the community just jumped ship at the first shinny bobble to snapshot PTS a couple of times.

Perhaps I'll come around eventually but right now I'm just floored by how quickly this community turned on a dime.  From supporting PTS and all that it represented to pushing for it to be shut down for the betterment of one DAC. It's like I woke up in the Twilight Zone.