Author Topic: PTS - the insane gift that keeps on giving!  (Read 26633 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
..
* The reason that 11/05 was going to be the last "official" (non-3rd party) snapshot is because there will be no future "official" snapshots. Neither Dan or Stan ever
..

To be precise, and to avoid further miscommunication,

"The reason that 11/05 was suggested/proposed/drafted going to be .. snapshot ...".  I3 (or ex-I3) eventually decided to go with Dec-14  snapshot for Devshare.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 07:39:54 am by cube »
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Unbelievable amount of misinformation in this thread. Here are the facts:

* Stan explained clearly that PTS/AGS "buyout" was simply a proposal that was discussed and rejected.
* The reason that 11/05 was proposed to be the last "official" (non-3rd party) snapshot is because there will be no future "official" snapshots. Neither Dan or Stan ever argued that the social consensus would be arbitrarily mutated to make the 11/05 snapshot the perpetual sharedrop instrument in place of the live PTS chain. Devshares is not a production coin - it is a worthless testnet. It makes sense to use the live PTS chain in Devshares because the social consensus is and always was based on a liquid PTS. The fact remains that the last "official" snapshot will remain the one that took place on 11/05. Just an amazing twisting of facts to imply that this somehow affects 3rd party DACs or modifies the social consensus (it doesn't).

The even bigger problem here is a fundamental misunderstanding of the business case for "Sharedrop Theory." It is absolutely absurd to think that the bare-bones PTS chain is somehow a "threat" to BTS. It's like saying Lamborghini faces a threat from the Toyota Corolla. They are targeted to completely different functions and demographics. There will be many winners in this race. We, as a community, are better off having a horse in each race. PTS gives us a piece of all DPoS chains, even those who may directly or indirectly compete with BTS. They will exist regardless of whether or not we get a stake in them. And by the way, I have no problem with people who choose not to invest in PTS or do not see value in PTS. My problem is with those who are twisting Stan's words to create the illusion that I3 decided to kill PTS or to alter the social consensus. That is not a disagreement on value, it is a categorical lie.

Edit: correction per cube
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 07:47:41 am by alphaBar »

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
We arent mad about this because of the value ofthe sharedrop.

We are mad because of the PRECEDENT it demonstrates, in regards to future sharedrops, which WILL have value.


This sharedrop should be 100% BTS, no fucking shares at all to PTS or AGS because we bought them out.

Any other allocation and I am upset.

Actually IIRC the purpose of the merger was to buy *BM* out, not AGS/PTS. Also, it seems like PLAY, RPC, etc are all deciding to honor AGS/PTS anyway despite what BM said.

What you're saying is that I3 *failed to kill the old social consensus*. How is that their fault?

The bold is what has pissed me off more than anything and nobody mentions this:

BM basically held BTSX hostage. Apparently the shit load of money he/they raised through AGS and the money they have subsequently earned through BTSX wasn't enough to keep BM on board and see the project through. Satoshi gave 2 years before walking and he never took a fucking cent. So I suppose it was quite acceptable to believe we, the shareholders, would get a similar effort and output for the money they "donated".

I suspect that BM is friends with the VOTE guys from before BitShares was ever branded.  Either that or he was duped by another salesman a la Brian Page.  In the beginning VOTE was just another DAC that would develop on its own using what BM already developed, the BitShares Toolkit. VOTE chose their share allocation and were quite greedy in the amounts they would keep for themselves versus what PTS/AGS would get. No one really cared because VOTE really never had or has any real potential to be a monster DAC. Over beers one night BM was sold on all the shit FMV is doing and that they have their reach so far into California that the sky is the limit. With AGS funds gone, BM bought into their hype and decided he should be working for FMV's VOTE because they will pay him more in the future, and it's a guarantee that FMV can deliver California. BM struggling over whether or not he should pull a FreeTrade and jump ship and get a bigger future payday, or to continue working for the people who's funds he took and which have been all sucked dry, he came up with the hype that merging the two and diluting is the best scenario for all. No one seemed to question why it would be ok for him to abandon "His" (don't give me some DACsun bullshit either) project to make a better competitor?  That would be like Google hiring you to develop a program that could risk asses housing insurance through google maps and satellite and public databases then half way through the project you decide to take everything you were paid by Google to do, over to Microsoft and finish building. Now obviously in the real world their are non-compete and non-disclosure agreements, but we don't have that.  Remember: this is all speculation and I have no clue if it is true. I only suspect because we still have no real picture of what the killer monster DAC that only could be achieved through VOTE is or will be. We have also discovered that FMV doesn't answer questions and that FMV is a small fish that just leapt into a Pacific Ocean they thought was a backyard kiddie pool. FMV is a warm fuzzy good idea with no real world way to pierce through to the people and to the levels it needs to reach. The lack of feedback from their recent trip and the nonchalant attitude towards VoteCal (wasn't what was going on in CA part of the big hype for VOTE?) confirms this in my mind.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
We arent mad about this because of the value ofthe sharedrop.

We are mad because of the PRECEDENT it demonstrates, in regards to future sharedrops, which WILL have value.


This sharedrop should be 100% BTS, no fucking shares at all to PTS or AGS because we bought them out.

Any other allocation and I am upset.

Agreed. PTS and AGS were gone. It is a questionable precedent. After this one, let's all get together and hammer out a new social consensus. 

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
We arent mad about this because of the value ofthe sharedrop.

We are mad because of the PRECEDENT it demonstrates, in regards to future sharedrops, which WILL have value.


This sharedrop should be 100% BTS, no fucking shares at all to PTS or AGS because we bought them out.

Any other allocation and I am upset.

Actually IIRC the purpose of the merger was to buy *BM* out, not AGS/PTS. Also, it seems like PLAY, RPC, etc are all deciding to honor AGS/PTS anyway despite what BM said.

What you're saying is that I3 *failed to kill the old social consensus*. How is that their fault?
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
We arent mad about this because of the value ofthe sharedrop.

We are mad because of the PRECEDENT it demonstrates, in regards to future sharedrops, which WILL have value.


This sharedrop should be 100% BTS, no fucking shares at all to PTS or AGS because we bought them out.

Any other allocation and I am upset.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline jshow5555

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
properly, properly
Totally, worth it forgetting the promise to care about BTS interests only and the fact that you will no longer honor PTS.
properly, properly

Please post links to the promises you seem to remember and we'll analyze them together. 

I know of no promise not to honor PTS when it is useful to do so.  We could just as easily decide one day to honor ethereum or doge if that helped achieve some strategic objective. 

With the BTS sharedrop, BM wanted to make sure that all holders of AGS and PTS were treated fairly if he focused his energies on building that product.  That does not preclude reaching out to form strategic alliances with other groups.  It does not preclude doing things that continue to build up the ecosystem in which BTS lives.  We have always taken a very broad and generous view of letting a thousand roses bloom in the BitShares ecosystem.   We have indicated an intention to aggressively engage in friendly competition but that does not imply we will not cooperate with other developers as well.  Cooperation is actually preferable, when possible.

With the DevShares sharedrop, BM wants a widely used test network that will attract others to experiment and infuse technologies into BTS.  Therefore a wide distribution of free samples to draw in new developers is consistent with his interest in growing the value of BTS, which benefits from having DevShares widely used.  Cross promotions with other chains is also consistent with that focus.



https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10608.0

PTS will continue to circulate and trade; however, without I3 planning any future snapshots its value will be based upon the speculative value of 3rd party DACs such as Music, Play, and others. 


A new blockchain "DevShares" will be used for testing the upgrade of BTS and future hard forks as well as experimental features and economic experiments.   This blockchain will be a 40/40/20 snapshot AGS/PTS/X taken on November 5th



And as I said already on the priceless PTS holders as of 12/14 that have no BTS??? Nice demographic, a true home run, IMHO! Totally worth it braking the above promise.


Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
properly, properly
Totally, worth it forgetting the promise to care about BTS interests only and the fact that you will no longer honor PTS.
properly, properly

Please post links to the promises you seem to remember and we'll analyze them together. 

I know of no promise not to honor PTS when it is useful to do so.  We could just as easily decide one day to honor ethereum or doge if that helped achieve some strategic objective. 

With the BTS sharedrop, BM wanted to make sure that all holders of AGS and PTS were treated fairly if he focused his energies on building that product.  That does not preclude reaching out to form strategic alliances with other groups.  It does not preclude doing things that continue to build up the ecosystem in which BTS lives.  We have always taken a very broad and generous view of letting a thousand roses bloom in the BitShares ecosystem.   We have indicated an intention to aggressively engage in friendly competition but that does not imply we will not cooperate with other developers as well.  Cooperation is actually preferable, when possible.

With the DevShares sharedrop, BM wants a widely used test network that will attract others to experiment and infuse technologies into BTS.  Therefore a wide distribution of free samples to draw in new developers is consistent with his interest in growing the value of BTS, which benefits from having DevShares widely used.  Cross promotions with other chains is also consistent with that focus.

Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline muse-umum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 717
  • BitShares everything
    • View Profile
Stan .......

I hate to break this to you .

But in this case , there was no misunderstanding .

If you bother to spend 3 minutes like I just did to look for stuff , you'll see I'm right at 100% .  (send me a PM if you can't see that in a day )

I was actually starting to doubt my understanding skills and language skills , then , I found that .

I can live with changes , I can live with hard choices , but this wasn't that hard to begin with , just a neglect  .

You guys simply forgot what you've said on record before making the allocation for devshares . That's OK , just own your mistakes . People will understand . But they can't understand that you turn this into their own problem and accuse them being not seeing the truth .

I appreciate your efforts.
Please post links to what you are talking about.
Lets see if we can get to the source of what is causing this misunderstanding.
:)

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10608.0

The bottom section of the OP , specifically talked about the significance of 11.05 snapshot for devshares  .

of course , since the title is with the word "draft" , and this issue of devshares and I3 related snapshots never brought up in the newsletter later , you can claim that thread is just random mumbling ....
Finally.

Offline btswildpig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1424
    • View Profile
Stan .......

I hate to break this to you .

But in this case , there was no misunderstanding .

If you bother to spend 3 minutes like I just did to look for stuff , you'll see I'm right at 100% .  (send me a PM if you can't see that in a day )

I was actually starting to doubt my understanding skills and language skills , then , I found that .

I can live with changes , I can live with hard choices , but this wasn't that hard to begin with , just a neglect  .

You guys simply forgot what you've said on record before making the allocation for devshares . That's OK , just own your mistakes . People will understand . But they can't understand that you turn this into their own problem and accuse them being not seeing the truth .

I appreciate your efforts.
Please post links to what you are talking about.
Lets see if we can get to the source of what is causing this misunderstanding.
:)

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10608.0

The bottom section of the OP , specifically talked about the significance of 11.05 snapshot for devshares  .

of course , since the title is with the word "draft" , and this issue of devshares and I3 related snapshots never brought up in the newsletter later , you can claim that thread is just random mumbling ....

"
A new blockchain "DevShares" will be used for testing the upgrade of BTS and future hard forks as well as experimental features and economic experiments.   This blockchain will be a 40/40/20 snapshot AGS/PTS/X taken on November 5th. 
"
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 05:36:01 pm by btswildpig »
这个是私人账号,表达的一切言论均不代表任何团队和任何人。This is my personal account , anything I said with this account will be my opinion alone and has nothing to do with any group.

Offline jshow5555

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
Stan .......

I hate to break this to you .

But in this case , there was no misunderstanding .

If you bother to spend 3 minutes like I just did to look for stuff , you'll see I'm right at 100% .  (send me a PM if you can't see that in a day )

I was actually starting to doubt my understanding skills and language skills , then , I found that .

I can live with changes , I can live with hard choices , but this wasn't that hard to begin with , just a neglect  .

You guys simply forgot what you've said on record before making the allocation for devshares . That's OK , just own your mistakes . People will understand . But they can't understand that you turn this into their own problem and accuse them being not seeing the truth .

I appreciate your efforts.
Please post links to what you are talking about.
Lets see if we can get to the source of what is causing this misunderstanding.
:)

It is simple - What is the reason/justification to inflate BTS 7% and drop those new shares on PTS, again? Remind me, I am having a memory problems, apparently.

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
If such a huge proportion are going to be given away, wouldn't it be better to drop on Ethereum, or github users?  That would bring in more new developer interest than PTS/AGS.  Or give DVS away as bounties and prizes for completing tasks for BitShares.  There's lots of great ways 66% of DVS could be given away.  Dropping on chains which are already incentivised by the BTS drop is a waste, and in this case stirs up old problems.  I would favour 100% BTS drop, or majority BTS combined with some creative community-sourced ideas on drop targets.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 04:56:48 pm by matt608 »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Stan .......

I hate to break this to you .

But in this case , there was no misunderstanding .

If you bother to spend 3 minutes like I just did to look for stuff , you'll see I'm right at 100% .  (send me a PM if you can't see that in a day )

I was actually starting to doubt my understanding skills and language skills , then , I found that .

I can live with changes , I can live with hard choices , but this wasn't that hard to begin with , just a neglect  .

You guys simply forgot what you've said on record before making the allocation for devshares . That's OK , just own your mistakes . People will understand . But they can't understand that you turn this into their own problem and accuse them being not seeing the truth .

I appreciate your efforts.
Please post links to what you are talking about.
Lets see if we can get to the source of what is causing this misunderstanding.
:)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline liondani

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3737
  • Inch by inch, play by play
    • View Profile
    • My detailed info
  • BitShares: liondani
  • GitHub: liondani
A divided community will not last.

what will happen if the "divided" community’s will grow further and divide again and again.... and again.... :P