Author Topic: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.  (Read 15981 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bigt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #32 on: December 27, 2014, 11:02:05 am »
I usually only check these threads to keep abreast of major Bitshares announcements however I've felt compelled to post on the recent PTS developments.


First off, I'm really happy that PTS has been upgraded to DPOS. The old wallet was a pain to use! I look forward to an OSX release of the new wallet to get my teeth into.


Secondly, I have a message for Third Party Developers:
  • Sharedropping onto PTS is the perfect launchpad for a third party DAC.
  • People like me hold PTS for the sole purpose of getting a stake in new, exciting, innovative DACs.
  • If you wish to target investors and early adopters that will champion the best new DACs, look to PTS.
  • People like me will look to invest in your DAC and stick around for the long haul
  • If your DAC has wider crypto appeal, you will see this will be reflected in the trade price of PTS around the time of your snapshot. Some see this as a negative. However it is the free market responding to the perceived utility of your DAC. The price spike and related interest will only serve to promote your offering to a wider audience.
To my mind there are 3 demographics you may wish to consider Sharedropping to:
  • BTS - holders will be primarily using the BTSX/ VOTE/ DNS offering. They may have an interest in your DAC. But for the majority this interest will be incidental to the main purpose of them holding BTS.
  • AGS - Founder investors, who again may have an interest in your DAC.
  • PTS - 'Liquid' investors. By this I mean, the majority of PTS holders will have an active interest in investing in Third Party DACs, right here and now. At the time of your snapshot, a large portion of PTS will have a very active interest in your DAC.
The beauty of PTS is that should I fall in love with your new DAC, cash out of PTS and go all-in on your new venture - I will be replaced by fresh blood looking to invest in new Third Party DACs.


This is just my perspective and an insight into why I feel PTS is a tremendous and unique proposition in the Bitshares landscape. I hope it not only sticks around but grows stronger.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #31 on: December 27, 2014, 03:59:16 am »
If the developers plan to keep it deflationary forever, I think I'm going to buy a little because of that property.


As to whether it should be a sharedrop target or not, I don't think it should be. But we'll see what the social consensus turns out to be.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #30 on: December 27, 2014, 03:54:57 am »
alphaBar is saying there was no change. Stan is saying they expected it to die but it pulled a jesus with a third party dev.

So most people think the social consensus should stay with the new PTS dac?

Personally, I think I would like to simplify it, use the toolkit, sharedrop on BTS. get everybody behind the same currency.

But if people think its good to roll with the new DAC in place of the old, I'll start buying some more PTS.

I'm saying (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=12664.msg167111#msg167111) that we need to stop thinking about dictating what consensus we are going to bless and start working as stakeholders to be a preferred target of a share drop.  The chain that gets picked most by developers becomes the de facto consensus.  There is no one else who can declare what it is by fiat.

Ask yourself what it takes to be the most preferred sharedrop target and start inventing ways to incentivize developers to court you.

It's not so much worrying about what consensus we are going to bless than how I'm going to allocate the money I have available to invest. What the social consensus is or isn't seems pertinent to that decision to me.

Nothing wrong with a little price speculation, right?

I could drop the subject if you would like me to though.

No, you are asking exactly the right questions. 

If you want to be dropped on, you need to invest in a chain that represents a demographic that is able to attract developer drops.
So chains that make the best case for attracting developers will also attract investors like you.

But the day of just decreeing that a chain should be chosen is now gone.  Its gotten competitive.  We need to rise to the challenge.

That means AGSers and PTSers need to come out of the woodwork and make their case for why they should continue to be considered - or be forgotten.

And that means BTSers need to make their case too.

I'm a member of all three demographics. 
I've listed elsewhere why I think all three have a good case. 
But what I think no longer matters.
What matters is what other developers find attractive.
Be attractive.
 
« Last Edit: December 27, 2014, 04:01:00 am by Stan »
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.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #29 on: December 27, 2014, 03:33:00 am »
alphaBar is saying there was no change. Stan is saying they expected it to die but it pulled a jesus with a third party dev.

So most people think the social consensus should stay with the new PTS dac?

Personally, I think I would like to simplify it, use the toolkit, sharedrop on BTS. get everybody behind the same currency.

But if people think its good to roll with the new DAC in place of the old, I'll start buying some more PTS.

I'm saying (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=12664.msg167111#msg167111) that we need to stop thinking about dictating what consensus we are going to bless and start working as stakeholders to be a preferred target of a share drop.  The chain that gets picked most by developers becomes the de facto consensus.  There is no one else who can declare what it is by fiat.

Ask yourself what it takes to be the most preferred sharedrop target and start inventing ways to incentivize developers to court you.

It's not so much worrying about what consensus we are going to bless than how I'm going to allocate the money I have available to invest. What the social consensus is or isn't seems pertinent to that decision to me.

Nothing wrong with a little price speculation, right?

I could drop the subject if you would like me to though.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2014, 03:35:32 am by merockstar »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #28 on: December 27, 2014, 02:55:43 am »
alphaBar is saying there was no change. Stan is saying they expected it to die but it pulled a jesus with a third party dev.

So most people think the social consensus should stay with the new PTS dac?

Personally, I think I would like to simplify it, use the toolkit, sharedrop on BTS. get everybody behind the same currency.

But if people think its good to roll with the new DAC in place of the old, I'll start buying some more PTS.

I'm saying (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=12664.msg167111#msg167111) that we need to stop thinking about dictating what consensus we are going to bless and start working as stakeholders to be a preferred target of a share drop.  The chain that gets picked most by developers becomes the de facto consensus.  There is no one else who can declare what it is by fiat.

Ask yourself what it takes to be the most preferred sharedrop target and start inventing ways to incentivize developers to court you.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2014, 02:59:33 am by Stan »
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.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #27 on: December 27, 2014, 02:46:09 am »
alphaBar is saying there was no change. Stan is saying they expected it to die but it pulled a jesus with a third party dev.

So most people think the social consensus should stay with the new PTS dac?

Personally, I think I would like to simplify it, use the toolkit, sharedrop on BTS. get everybody behind the same currency.

But if people think its good to roll with the new DAC in place of the old, I'll start buying some more PTS.

Offline jwiz168

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #26 on: December 26, 2014, 05:44:46 pm »
As I have stated , its well and good that still PTS does its role in the development of future DACs. But this is up to the third party's decision to honor.

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #25 on: December 26, 2014, 04:48:01 pm »
To summarize: there was no change to the social consensus and there was no "buyout" of PTS (confirmed, yet again, in today's Mumble session). PTS and the social consensus live on.

Offline kingslanding

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #24 on: December 26, 2014, 03:19:06 pm »
Now that the gray area regarding what the social consensus has become, and how PTS relates to that has been clarified I would like to point this thread back to the original topic again.

Do you guys think future developers are likely to honor PTS? Why or why not?

If future developers wish to tap into investors, whose primary interest is investing in new and innovative Bitshares DACs, then they should honour PTS.

To my mind, there is a clear demarcation between BTS (the Invictus 'SuperDAC') and PTS (a mechanism by which people can invest in future 'third party' Bitshares DACs).

My investment in BTS is proportionate to my belief in the success of the BTS DAC.

My investment in PTS is proportionate to my belief that (a) there are/ will be developers out there creating future Bitshares DACs and (b) these developers will target PTS holders with a sharedrop in accordance with the social consensus. They will also target this demographic in the knowledge that PTS holders have a track record of evaluating the value propositions of a variety of Bitshares DACs (e.g. BTS, Music, Play, Sparkle etc.) and taking informed decisions on whether to invest further in their enterprise.

Obviously, developers are (and always have been) free to Sharedrop as they wish. However from what I've read and understood from the posts over the last few months, there is nothing to suggest a change the social consensus. From what I can tell, PTS is not only alive and well but has been upgraded, with most (including the exchanges) accepting the upgrade to DPOS-PTS.

 +5%  My thoughts exactly.

Again, BTS did not buy out PTS; it simply honored its share of the consensus.
BTS username/address:   kingslanding9999

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #23 on: December 26, 2014, 02:49:13 pm »
AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.


Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Upon further reflection, without I3 there is no social consensus anymore, is there? The support of the community while the social consensus existed basically meant backing from I3, but without I3 support the community will naturally support whatever DACs they feel aren't screwing them, I am understanding this correctly, Stan? I read both the newsletter but didn't see the idea of social consensus directly addressed.

I3 took the initiative to help the community evolve its social consensus during the early phases but ultimately it is the community's job to maintain or evolve the consensus over time.  I3 alumni will still be here as free lance contributors, and we will have gradually diverging opinions, but the consensus will be whatever the community can cause developers to perceive is in their best interest to honor.

We have proposed no changes to that consensus and have continued to honor it.  From before the very first Feb 28th snapshot we have supported the concept of honoring the PTS/AGS proto-DAC grandparents through honoring a parent that had honored those grandparents.  So a new developer would be on solid footing doing it either way -- unless the community makes it clear that their consensus has somehow changed.

Meanwhile, we have tried to encourage developers to honor proto-DACs simply because it is in their own self interest. 

Let me ephasize that.
The consensus will be strongest if developers honor it in their own self-interest.

That's what BitShares Sharedrop Theory is all about.  By recognizing that all the coins of the world represent unique demographics they can choose to precision-target their free samples to groups other than the technically gifted.   You can target Mars colonists and permaculture enthusiasts and dog lovers and entire populations of small arctic nations.

But, if you are a smart developer, you will target people who understand and appreciate your coin and are likely to hold them rather than dump them.  Traditional miners are a notoriously bad demographic precisely because they are in business primarily to mine and dump.

BitShares Sharedrop Theory thus revolutionized the whole concept of how to get a safe and fair distribution while eliminating the last remaining (specious) argument for why you still needed mining.

So, regardless of what we many individually prefer, PTS, AGS, and BTS represent fantastic sharedrop targets each for their own demographic reasons.  AGS are proven donors.  BTS are active users.  PTS are HODL die-hards.

It is up to each developer to put together the coalition of demographics they think will make their product succeed.

Stan,
The only problem with PTS is it should be dead! We paid millions to PTS holders to buy them out and now you and others are saying that they are still eligible for sharedrops.

An example of the broken morality of this:
Coca Cola buys out my stock and buys out the company fron me. Now I have received the payment and I no longer control the company as it has been merged into Coca Cola. Now if I came out and started my stock ticker back up and started selling shares it would be considered securities fraud and a breach of contract with Coca Cola.

I find the PTS situation a very unethical turn of events.

You keep saying that.  I understand the source of your opinion.   Its a perfectly good opinion.  But please don't map it onto me as some sort of morality play.  I have consistently stated my equally valid opinion.  Read all of my posts.  They say the same thing.  I'm most concerned with developing a consistent theory of share drops that can be used to analyze the validity of future sharedrops.  I am also concerned with protecting our rights to float strawman concepts for discussion without them becoming promises.  That is what has happened here.

The newsletter is clear.  PTS was not deemed dead by us.  (It may be deduced from our tone we didn't really expect it to live.) Somebody brought PTS back to life independent of us. We didn't object.  The reborn PTS is a completely different demographic representing people who still support that model.  People who don't  support it dumped it. Its been through a huge demographic sifter.   It is just as much a demographic to consider as doge or marscoin - except it represents people who appreciate DACs and want there to be more of them.  Bingo.   

Sharedrop theory and the social consensus have always been that as long as PTS/AGS (or BTS as a PTS/AGS honoring heir) get their 10% the remaining 80% can be used in an unlimited number of ways to achieve the developer's business objectives.

So if the new BTS consensus is that new DACs should honor BTS with 10 or 20%, that's fine.  It appears that there is solid momentum for that.  But that still leaves at least 80% to be deployed for other strategic purposes.

So, the DevShares sharedrop meets every version of social consensus that has ever existed.

There can be disagreements on what is the best strategy, but please, no heavy rhetorical morality play here.


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 islandking

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • The king of the island
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #22 on: December 26, 2014, 02:05:45 pm »
AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.


Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Upon further reflection, without I3 there is no social consensus anymore, is there? The support of the community while the social consensus existed basically meant backing from I3, but without I3 support the community will naturally support whatever DACs they feel aren't screwing them, I am understanding this correctly, Stan? I read both the newsletter but didn't see the idea of social consensus directly addressed.

I3 took the initiative to help the community evolve its social consensus during the early phases but ultimately it is the community's job to maintain or evolve the consensus over time.  I3 alumni will still be here as free lance contributors, and we will have gradually diverging opinions, but the consensus will be whatever the community can cause developers to perceive is in their best interest to honor.

We have proposed no changes to that consensus and have continued to honor it.  From before the very first Feb 28th snapshot we have supported the concept of honoring the PTS/AGS proto-DAC grandparents through honoring a parent that had honored those grandparents.  So a new developer would be on solid footing doing it either way -- unless the community makes it clear that their consensus has somehow changed.

Meanwhile, we have tried to encourage developers to honor proto-DACs simply because it is in their own self interest. 

Let me ephasize that.
The consensus will be strongest if developers honor it in their own self-interest.

That's what BitShares Sharedrop Theory is all about.  By recognizing that all the coins of the world represent unique demographics they can choose to precision-target their free samples to groups other than the technically gifted.   You can target Mars colonists and permaculture enthusiasts and dog lovers and entire populations of small arctic nations.

But, if you are a smart developer, you will target people who understand and appreciate your coin and are likely to hold them rather than dump them.  Traditional miners are a notoriously bad demographic precisely because they are in business primarily to mine and dump.

BitShares Sharedrop Theory thus revolutionized the whole concept of how to get a safe and fair distribution while eliminating the last remaining (specious) argument for why you still needed mining.

So, regardless of what we many individually prefer, PTS, AGS, and BTS represent fantastic sharedrop targets each for their own demographic reasons.  AGS are proven donors.  BTS are active users.  PTS are HODL die-hards.

It is up to each developer to put together the coalition of demographics they think will make their product succeed.

Stan,
The only problem with PTS is it should be dead! We paid millions to PTS holders to buy them out and now you and others are saying that they are still eligible for sharedrops.

An example of the broken morality of this:
Coca Cola buys out my stock and buys out the company fron me. Now I have received the payment and I no longer control the company as it has been merged into Coca Cola. Now if I came out and started my stock ticker back up and started selling shares it would be considered securities fraud and a breach of contract with Coca Cola.

I find the PTS situation a very unethical turn of events.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 02:26:07 pm by islandking »
I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. - Satoshi

Offline bigt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #21 on: December 26, 2014, 11:46:35 am »
Now that the gray area regarding what the social consensus has become, and how PTS relates to that has been clarified I would like to point this thread back to the original topic again.

Do you guys think future developers are likely to honor PTS? Why or why not?

If future developers wish to tap into investors, whose primary interest is investing in new and innovative Bitshares DACs, then they should honour PTS.

To my mind, there is a clear demarcation between BTS (the Invictus 'SuperDAC') and PTS (a mechanism by which people can invest in future 'third party' Bitshares DACs).

My investment in BTS is proportionate to my belief in the success of the BTS DAC.

My investment in PTS is proportionate to my belief that (a) there are/ will be developers out there creating future Bitshares DACs and (b) these developers will target PTS holders with a sharedrop in accordance with the social consensus. They will also target this demographic in the knowledge that PTS holders have a track record of evaluating the value propositions of a variety of Bitshares DACs (e.g. BTS, Music, Play, Sparkle etc.) and taking informed decisions on whether to invest further in their enterprise.

Obviously, developers are (and always have been) free to Sharedrop as they wish. However from what I've read and understood from the posts over the last few months, there is nothing to suggest a change the social consensus. From what I can tell, PTS is not only alive and well but has been upgraded, with most (including the exchanges) accepting the upgrade to DPOS-PTS.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 01:19:04 pm by bigt »

Offline jwiz168

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #20 on: December 25, 2014, 01:01:01 am »
Being  a DPOS, pts becomes a DAC IMHO. Any developer may use it as asset for their project or it continues to be an altcoin in an exchange. The fact is it had built the framework for currency and DAC model. To me, I would hold my PTS but NEVER reinvest simply because I think I have enough. There are still numerous DACs will exist. Now my focus is on BTS because this is the current direction for further development of advanced DAC.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #19 on: December 25, 2014, 12:26:58 am »
Now that the gray area regarding what the social consensus has become, and how PTS relates to that has been clarified I would like to point this thread back to the original topic again.

Do you guys think future developers are likely to honor PTS? Why or why not?

Offline kingslanding

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.
« Reply #18 on: December 24, 2014, 11:18:12 pm »
I never saw the BTS snapshot as AGS/PTS being bought out.  AGS/PTS holders were given BTS because of the social contract for DNS and VOTE.  BTS is a dac, just like MUSIC and PLAY, although a big one.  So it should be perfectly fine & "fair" for future dacs to still honor the 10% to AGS/PTS holders.  As Stan said, it's up to the new dacs to decide on how to best distribute.  If people think only BTS holders should be honored, then I argue MUSIC and PLAY holders would have to be considered as well.  They are all dacs.
BTS username/address:   kingslanding9999