Author Topic: You guys don't understand devshares.  (Read 19047 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
Bytemaster, I think the biggest problem here is that you did not communicate with the shareholders about this decision. It took a community uproar for you to start this conversation.

Offline bytemaster

My current conclusion

Our dev team plus Stan, even collectively lack the ability  to discern within a market acceptable degree of accuracy the likely response of the market to their actions.

Why? Developers seem to be very literal. They appear to be genuinely confused & frustrated even as a collective,  why the market would respond negatively to some of their decisions.

The title of Toast's thread and even BM's last post in the same thread highlight it best. (They actually think it has something to do with DVS.) They also think it is shareholders fault for reacting that way, not an entirely predictable response of a market.

It's also possible Stan doesn't intend to be so condescending, patronising and evasive in most of his posts either.

Everyone thinks you are all rock stars we want you to be appreciated and respected as such. We want you to change the world for the better, be rich and famous and make us wealthy in the process.  I doubt most want to overly influence what you work on or what you do. What you have though is a dev brick wall atm. Even when you think you've taken input, it gets filtered through the literal wall and we end up with decisions the create completely unessecary PR problems for the umpteenth time. The result is frustration and confusion from the markst because we can't understand how a group of exceptionally intelligent people can make such unnecessary  unpopular, divisive and BTS value damaging decisions.

It's perfectly obvious that the DVS thing of going post 11/05 would be interpreted badly especially by the Chinese market after the merger & is not worth the blowback.

But I will try to understand that I'm dealing with a group of people that don't intend to make such negative PR decisions that look antagonistic towards their own shareholders. They are genuinely even as a collective just very literal people who are unable to pre-emptively discern how their actions will be received and the wider implications of them on the market

I certainly recognize that I did blame others for their response and that in general I have no one to blame but myself.   I appreciate that you recognize our INTENT is do do well by all and that we cannot possibly know others expect. 

One thing I have learned is that changing anything is bad and I am loath to do it even if the original decision was a mistake.   

I would much rather not be the one to make decisions because it is easy to critique but difficult to decide.   I also don't want to let the squeaky wheel rule the day just because they complain the loudest.   So it is a real challenge to determine where the AGGREGATE PUBLIC OPINION falls. 

If changing to a 100% BTS allocation would make everyone happy it would be a no brainer.  I am not in this to pick favorites. 

So is there any objection to a 100% BTS allocation, if so please speak up now.

I am actually thinking about allocating 10% to nullstreet leaders and 10% to Chinese community leaders and 10% to core developers and 10% AGS 10% PTS and 50% to BTS.   This way the key players all have something to work with.

My only fear in changing anything is that it will just result in a DIFFERENT PR mess.    Can you all prove to me that the PR would be better by changing it now than by letting it ride?

My prediction is that if we were to exclude AGS / PTS all together that many people will create just as much negative PR.   


For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
My current conclusion

Our dev team plus Stan, even collectively lack the ability  to discern within a market acceptable degree of accuracy the likely response of the market to their actions.

Why? Developers seem to be very literal. They appear to be genuinely confused & frustrated even as a collective,  why the market would respond negatively to some of their decisions.

The title of Toast's thread and even BM's last post in the same thread highlight it best. (They actually think it has something to do with DVS.) They also think it is shareholders fault for reacting that way, not an entirely predictable response of a market.

It's also possible Stan doesn't intend to be so condescending, patronising and evasive in most of his posts either.

Everyone thinks you are all rock stars we want you to be appreciated and respected as such. We want you to change the world for the better, be rich and famous and make us wealthy in the process.  I doubt most want to overly influence what you work on or what you do. What you have though is a dev brick wall atm. Even when you think you've taken input, it gets filtered through the literal wall and we end up with decisions the create completely unessecary PR problems for the umpteenth time. The result is frustration and confusion from the markst because we can't understand how a group of exceptionally intelligent people can make such unnecessary  unpopular, divisive and BTS value damaging decisions.

It's perfectly obvious that the DVS thing of going post 11/05 would be interpreted badly especially by the Chinese market after the merger & is not worth the blowback.

But I will try to understand that I'm dealing with a group of people that don't intend to make such negative PR decisions that look antagonistic towards their own shareholders. They are genuinely even as a collective just very literal people who are unable to pre-emptively discern how their actions will be received and the wider implications of them on the market
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 05:23:14 pm by Empirical1.1 »

Offline bytemaster

It really comes down to perspective. When we decided to rebrand and merge multiple projects into one we did our best to balance stake of all parties with minimum dilution to bts.

That said it was a compromise that left ags and pts at a slight disadvantage.   There was a large uproar at the time and I took note that they felt shafted on future drops by only getting 20% of 20%.   

So we have a big issue here because I was trying to do right by ags and pts for everyone that felt they were given the short end of the stick in the "merger." 

DVs was compliant with all social consensus as it allocated over 20% to each demographic.   

I don't buy the argument that DVs has no value.  It has value, just higher risk.   

Anyone who thinks DVs will divide loyalties to bts is assuming it has a chance to grow more than bts.  It does not because it will be an unstable version of what bts will eventually become.   

We did not merge pts, we share dropped on to it to gain our teams loyalty to bts rather than divide among 3 or 4 chains.   

Pts lived on.  It has value.  We returned it to people.   We had to use dec 14 date so that returned pts would be distributed.   Using December 14 was also neutral on old vs new pts.   

From a legal perspective I very much like that pts was first honored by non i3 and is last honored by non i3.   Lets let pts live and be successful on its own.  Far less likely to be considered a i3 security this way.

If you made investment decisions based upon dev share allocation and have been harmed, show me what you thought you were getting and how much you lost. 

As far as the pr issue goes, the blame falls on those quibbling over nothing.   Those who envy a free gift of a low value token meant to be given away to help with testing. 

I have tried to be respect everyone.  I am quite saddened to see pts pushed out as if their success harms bts.    I wish them the best and support their efforts.   I just don't give it my time and r&d dollars.   

We work so hard to get network effect and now some of us want them removed from our forums and thus divide our network effect of this forum.   

Please be respectful to all and grateful for each gift you receive.  This is Christmas after all.   

I really think this issue stems from being jealous at others fortunes.  Who here would complain about a 20% drop on bts and 80% drop o our dev team?    On what grounds?   

We fought to get sparkle to honor us 33% after she rejected bts because of our attitude that everyone else must die.   This looks to be more of the same.   I thought it would be nice to sparkle to have the share drop be the same.  A thank you for honoring bts 33%.   

Bts will never receive a share drop if every future developer sees this kind of bs.   

Anyway I will see you all on mumble. I may be a few min late. 


For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Cube ,  I'll leave this to you and all the other adults here .

I guess as a PR and media specialist , my concern for this matter is obviously moot . Since you're treat this like a debate instead of a PR issue .

You can always win an argument because sooner or later your counter party will lost the interest to argue any further . But you can't win back the public image in a long time no matter how hard you try .

I'm too invested in this so I tried very hard to serve BTS and the community as those companies I've served as a PR consultant before . But clearly there is nothing related to PR for me to do here . So , I guess I'll just have to divide my time to do something that people are actually interested in .

Amazing things will come . Stay tuned .

You are passionate about bts and its ideals, and you have been conveying your beloved subject to your friends and other community members.
It would be a pity and a great disservice to all, if the result of this thread is a loss of a passionate voice.

No. This should not be the outcome.  My attempt to highlight the given facts, in a manner as best I can, is not meant to be an argument for nor against the issues at hand.  The hope is that with these new facts, those affected would begin their internal self-reconciliation, and one day be able to accept them.  It is a pain to see people suffer from misunderstand because of a lack of information, or a misinterpretation of it. Let us do our part to resist misinformation.

You are a PR consultant and you are a great addition to bitshares.  I believe your skill and experiences are very much sought after here, and other crypto spheres.  Do continue giving your passionate and wonderful contributions. 

Cheers! :)

+1  :)
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 btswildpig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1424
    • View Profile
 :o  I'll just offer one suggestion :

any future proposals , suggestions , put it on version control sites like Github .
At least people can see what changed in the process .
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 helloworld

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
I3太随意,我们太当真,This is a joke.
Please to be more professional.
BTS:bts-hero

Offline islandking

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • The king of the island
    • View Profile
Does this really seem to be in question to you guys?
Yes. It matters quite a lot. It's about trust. I will stop all of my investments on BTS once I figure out I can't trust the 'official' guys anymore.

Exactly! It is a trust issue. If they cant keep their word on this, then why should I trust them in the future?
I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. - Satoshi

Offline davidpbrown

Did we have a merger or did we not? What is to stop another merger = dilution of BTS in future, and another cycle of the same with PTS3.0 appearing reborn? It all seems rather ridiculous.

While acknowledging [PTS+AGS] vested within BTS makes a lot of sense, acknowledging the new PTS2.0, does seem odd.

Devshares should be considered monopoly money and zero real value. We need a reboot of devshares that does acknowledge BTS, in order that those of us who moved to BTS from PTS when the merger was mooted, can contribute to testing on devshares. Currently it seems no drop on BTS occurred.. that's the only real issue. Since devshares has no value, the split is of little real consequence, though might prevent some becoming 100% devshare delegates to test from that point of view.

I've never been in favour of the new 'unofficial' PTS but people are free to do what they want. Obviously, is it also the case that core devs will be judged against their ability to be consistent and to act as one, on important issues.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
Ok, I'll take people's word that DVS will be basically worthless.  At least that mind-change has been accomplished.   :)

PTS+AGS are a sensitive topic because BTS haemorrhaged shares in order to be free of any obligations to them. 

Some including me thought the new PTS was 'unofficial', and would probably not receive much in the way of sharedrops from anyone.  I thought 'maybe its dead, people aren't really going to use it now the social consensus has been all messed up'.  I presumed BTS would be the new main sharedrop target if any occurred.  PTS does compete with BTS as a sharedrop target.  Core devs giving PTS anything, even complete junk, matters (a little) because it being from them legitimises the new PTS as a sharedrop target.  It's extending the PTS salespitch, 'so far we've recieved' etc.  It's plugging PTS back into the system and does feel like it would increase the chances of PTS getting real sharedrops in the future.  Splitting it evenly between the 3 may become standard procedure, or 100% BTS could become the norm, as lead by the lead devs example.  The norm (or social consensus) is being set now, perpetually.  In the future BTS devs should always recommend drops on only BTS with no mention of any others, it's a little harder to do that now having offered an empty hand to PTS to pull them back up from a cliff face.  It may not have cost BTS anything now, but it's worth something to PTS as it endorses future sharedrops on them, which costs BTS in the future.

There's also the issue of BitShares supporting PTS more generally, it's on the forum, it still has the BitShares name, it complicates the BitShares message, it would be better for BTS if it disappeared completely.  So please don't feed it.

PTS could inflate their supply and sharedrop PTS on BTS lol, then we're all included in everything. :p

Offline Musewhale

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2881
  • 丑,实在是太丑了 !
    • View Profile
STAN,还我钱吧,我不玩了 :P :P :P

I want to say, BTS has a good idea, but I3 is changeful, we temporarily turned into a pile of shit.  :'( :'( :'(
MUSE witness:mygoodfriend     vote for me

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
Cube ,  I'll leave this to you and all the other adults here .

I guess as a PR and media specialist , my concern for this matter is obviously moot . Since you're treat this like a debate instead of a PR issue .

You can always win an argument because sooner or later your counter party will lost the interest to argue any further . But you can't win back the public image in a long time no matter how hard you try .

I'm too invested in this so I tried very hard to serve BTS and the community as those companies I've served as a PR consultant before . But clearly there is nothing related to PR for me to do here . So , I guess I'll just have to divide my time to do something that people are actually interested in .

Amazing things will come . Stay tuned .

You are passionate about bts and its ideals, and you have been conveying your beloved subject to your friends and other community members.
It would be a pity and a great disservice to all, if the result of this thread is a loss of a passionate voice.

No. This should not be the outcome.  My attempt to highlight the given facts, in a manner as best I can, is not meant to be an argument for nor against the issues at hand.  The hope is that with these new facts, those affected would begin their internal self-reconciliation, and one day be able to accept them.  It is a pain to see people suffer from misunderstand because of a lack of information, or a misinterpretation of it. Let us do our part to resist misinformation.

You are a PR consultant and you are a great addition to bitshares.  I believe your skill and experiences are very much sought after here, and other crypto spheres.  Do continue giving your passionate and wonderful contributions. 

Cheers! :)
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 10:51:42 am by cube »
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.

Offline btswildpig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1424
    • View Profile
Cube ,  I'll leave this to you and all the other adults here .

I guess as a PR and media specialist , my concern for this matter is obviously moot . Since you're treat this like a debate instead of a PR issue .

You can always win an argument because sooner or later your counter party will lost the interest to argue any further . But you can't win back the public image in a long time no matter how hard you try .

I'm too invested in this so I tried very hard to serve BTS and the community as those companies I've served as a PR consultant before . But clearly there is nothing related to PR for me to do here . So , I guess I'll just have to divide my time to do something that people are actually interested in .

Amazing things will come . Stay tuned .
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 09:42:50 am 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 cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
The reporter needs to report the facts and not his interpretation nor assumptions of the facts given.


1. History : people (including you , Chinese , many other western members) thought 11.05 was the final snapshot for all I3 products .

There are _some_ people (Chinese and non-chinese) _assumed_ that 11.05 was the final snapshot.  There is absolutely no hard fact about a 'final' snapshot.  The assumption could come from a drafted proposal but it was cleared up in the official newsletter.

2. devshares drop on 12.14 , people automatically thought that means PTS sharedrop on "11.05" , BTS drop on 12.14 .

Again, _some_ people automatically _assumed_ (wrongly) sharedrop on 11/05.  I3 (or ex-I3) decided on 12 Dec snapshot for devshares.

3. Some western members finally figured out devshares was actually sharedrop on 12.14 instead of 11.05 though interaction with bytemaster.

Some 'misinformed' members _assumed_ 11.05 and discovered it is Dec 14 from BM.

4. A western member started to post sarcastic post about how PTS get all the juice after it was suppose to be dead after 11.05 .

No mentioning of western nor which origin of this member. The member mentioned about 'properly properly' which is a typical phase in the Chinese community.

5. People started to argue the value of devshares , was is worth all that ?

There are people who have questions and opinions about the value of devshares. They voiced their opinions.

6. People started to ask questions about the meaning of 11.05 snapshot , which was denied by Stan and he pointed out 11.05 is a communication error that made by translators and readers , not them .

Some people insisted they were informed 11.05 and I3 (or ex-I3) 'changed their mind'.  Stan realised there was a misunderstanding and asked for the source of the misunderstanding.

7. Western members starting to show how they read the exact same thing .

Some members started to expressed their own opinions after reading Stan's clarification article.

8. Toast jump in and start this thread and asked why you guys are so crazy about a worthless thing...

Toast cautioned people who place any expectation of value on devchain.  It is dangerous and they should not.

9. Stan added that 11.05 as "final" was not any official statement , the only official statement was the newsletter , anything other than that was just discussions .

Upon seeing the source of misunderstanding, Stan explained at length the source was a 'draft' and 'not a promise'.  He said the 'official document is the newsletter'.

10. People started to wonder , if 11.05 can be void , then what about the future ? will there be some product that can be understand as a I3 product which happens to have significant value and then tear the community apart again ? I think this is the real issue they're talking about here .

Some people after reading Stan's clarification was still not satisfied.  They insisted their views and opinions.  Some interpreted and insisted Stan's clarification as Stan's 'denial'.

11. I don't really have an opinion of my own , I'm just a reporter in this mess . I just merely pointed out all the facts involved , and the potential damage they could cause .

I think you are more than a reporter.  A large part given out is interpreted information.  Now, where does the damage lie?

Edit: More facts from Stan's clarification article (not that Stan is poor in communication, I am breaking it down just in case there are further 'wrong facts' reported.)

* In the SAME draft post quoted as source of misunderstanding, BM stated "News letter has replaced this".

* BTS got 20% in the first proposal (ie the same draft post quoted), not 100% like some have been trying to claim. I3 (ex-I3) tweaked the percentages to "just make them all the same".  So BTS received MORE THAN what was originally drafted or proposed.

* I3 (ex-I3) reserves the right to do what we think is best for the product we are releasing.
I believe (ie after MY OWN INTERPRETATION) that this applies to all future releases from I3 (ex-I3)

* float one or more proposals, listen to discussions, refine our position and formally post it.

This is the OFFICIAL procedure of how I3 (ex-I3) handles information release - ie OFFICIAL release is AFTER all discussions AND their own internally REFINED position.


« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 08:35:20 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
ok , I guess all the people that view 11.05 as the final snapshot have issues with denial .
Rest assured , I can accept that I was the only one misunderstood the whole thing .

But what about others ? Can you help clear that , first with all the western members here with denial issues , then I can learn from you and see how that goes .

Because , simply "you were wrong" is not a answer . There are too many people out there won't accept that .

Look, I don't want to contribute to antagonism and division among our community. In some small way we are all united here. The most fundamental point I will make is that PTS can never be a competitor to BTS. It is absolutely illogical to assume that this could be the case. If we agree on this then there will be no issue with the continued presence and support of a strong PTS/AGS. PTS does not have the developers nor the features of BTS. On what basis could PTS possibly compete with banking, exchange, DNS, and all of the other features of the BTS chain? None.

That being said, the crypto wars will not result in a single consolidated token used by every person and for every application. Multiple tokens, multiple applications. If one consensus algorithm proves to provide superior security and efficiency then it will be shared by a large number of these tokens. I think we all believe that the best consensus protocol available today is DPoS. If we believe this, and we know that other chains (both complementary and competitive) will exist, then why in the world would we not support the social consensus??? A rising tide lifts all boats, but that will not help us if we can't launch our boats in the first place.