Would you like to see Beyond Bitcoin (BTS) Marketing Hangouts?

[fuzzy]

I would like to see what the community thinks about having open Marketing Voice Hangouts.  The marketing teams and delegates might not be able to always answer every question, but it might be a way to ensure the community gets a chance to play a closer role in the marketing process.

In the past, marketing efforts have been more difficult to get a pulse on...so I am going to make one final push to see what the community thinks on the issue before I decide to lay it to rest.  Please vote in the poll above.

[davidpbrown]

Marketing can become unproductive, if it doesn't have purpose and momentum. If we're paying 100% delegates then it is important that real progress is made. Anything that support creating focus and helps evidence that marketing delegates are delivering real RoI, will be useful.

It's most important that marketing delegates meet, to ensure they do not conflict; so that they are on target; and that they have focus and real momentum.

I wonder that it is too easy to fall into a rut of talking to ourselves - I suspect that is why the market cap on most crypto's are relatively stable.. because it's the same people. Anyone can opt for a simple incestuous rebroadcasting of the same information; a youtube channel for example, is all very well but if no-one knows it's there, it goes nowhere. Even BM blog I wonder doesn't get promoted widely enough.. posts in /r/BitShares etc, are all very well but what of those not already signed up to that? I'd like to see marketing delegates evidence how they are engaging the real world outside of what already exists. Marketing to those who already know BitShares exists, I wonder will be of little value - the product will sell itself; it's making people aware of it in the first place that matters.

Our marketeers perhaps need to be considered like soldiers,. going out and fighting the cause, not just creating media to entertain us.

So, Marketing Hangouts - or the recording of those, might be useful in order that delegates can evidence that they are expanding the audience for the BitShares product and not just restating that it exists to those who are subscribed.

[CryptoPrometheus]

I think that delegate hangouts are an awesome idea, but I don't think you necessarily have to label them "marketing" or whatever else. Just let people sign up if they want to spend a few minutes talking to their "constituents".

Delegate positions will soon be much more competitive, so if you give them a free opportunity to advertise/campaign/answer questions, I think you will have them lining up around the block - no pun intended!

[fuzzy]

I think that delegate hangouts are an awesome idea, but I don't think you necessarily have to label them "marketing" or whatever else. Just let people sign up if they want to spend a few minutes talking to their "constituents".

Delegate positions will soon be much more competitive, so if you give them a free opportunity to advertise/campaign/answer questions, I think you will have them lining up around the block - no pun intended!

To be honest Crypto-Prometheus I do not see these positions becoming extremely competitive until we reach a valuation of about 3-5x what it currently is.  In that time, a group of 5-10 marketing delegates can earn a lot of BTS without really showing anything for it.  And unless I go out and individually contact each marketing delegate and give a status update to the community whether they choose to do hangouts or refuse to, it will be very hard to incentivize them to come on for hangouts.  I can do this, but eventually marketing delegates will be some of the people with the largest stake in the network and I have to recognize that angering too many delegates can kick me and my crew out of a delegate position.  This is really a quandary for me because although I recognize just how important it is to give the community access to the inner-workings of everything, I also have to try to find a way to keep in the green so-to-speak (and that isn't even talking about wanting to reach my goal of 1 million BTS for my personal stash). 

So I'm not sure how to move forward with respect to this.  All I do know is that I failed he community with Brian by not openly pushing for him to be more open with us.  If I had, we would likely be further ahead...

So now I feel like I'm in a position where I have to have learned something from this experience, but the dynamic is also slightly different. 


Btw....thank you for putting together the marketing newsletter.  That is at least a start!  Are you being paid for your services?

[davidpbrown]

To be honest Crypto-Prometheus I do not see these positions becoming extremely competitive until we reach a valuation of about 3-5x what it currently is.  In that time, a group of 5-10 marketing delegates can earn a lot of BTS without really showing anything for it.  And unless I go out and individually contact each marketing delegate and give a status update to the community whether they choose to do hangouts or refuse to, it will be very hard to incentivize them to come on for hangouts.  I can do this, but eventually marketing delegates will be some of the people with the largest stake in the network and I have to recognize that angering too many delegates can kick me and my crew out of a delegate position.  This is really a quandary for me because although I recognize just how important it is to give the community access to the inner-workings of everything, I also have to try to find a way to keep in the green so-to-speak (and that isn't even talking about wanting to reach my goal of 1 million BTS for my personal stash). 

That's an important statement of the reality at the moment but what it suggests is what I've been wondering.. are marketing delegates really worth 100%? At the moment can a marketing delegate really generate value equivalent to what that 100% BTS return will be? Perhaps marketing should be 40%-50% or some other agreed amount.. 100% represents developer level skill set.. and being blunt, none of the marketing delegates I've seen to date match that contribution.

In the event that the status quo continues for a large fraction of this year - which is what I expect, then do we really want to have gifted large influence to those who have not contributed - equal to those who have.

There's a problem of engagement here.. the voting is not compelling and the evidence is not compelling, so those on 100% at the moment are getting a free ride and then paid handsomely for it.

All very provocative I know but perhaps the challenge should be made more strongly, so that we do get a sense of who deserve what. Devs certainly should get the largest fraction but in time will they deserve 100% even?.. perhaps by then we will have resolved to have more delegates??

[fuzzy]

To be honest Crypto-Prometheus I do not see these positions becoming extremely competitive until we reach a valuation of about 3-5x what it currently is.  In that time, a group of 5-10 marketing delegates can earn a lot of BTS without really showing anything for it.  And unless I go out and individually contact each marketing delegate and give a status update to the community whether they choose to do hangouts or refuse to, it will be very hard to incentivize them to come on for hangouts.  I can do this, but eventually marketing delegates will be some of the people with the largest stake in the network and I have to recognize that angering too many delegates can kick me and my crew out of a delegate position.  This is really a quandary for me because although I recognize just how important it is to give the community access to the inner-workings of everything, I also have to try to find a way to keep in the green so-to-speak (and that isn't even talking about wanting to reach my goal of 1 million BTS for my personal stash). 

That's an important statement of the reality at the moment but what it suggests is what I've been wondering.. are marketing delegates really worth 100%? At the moment can a marketing delegate really generate value equivalent to what that 100% BTS return will be? Perhaps marketing should be 40%-50% or some other agreed amount.. 100% represents developer level skill set.. and being blunt, none of the marketing delegates I've seen to date match that contribution.

In the event that the status quo continues for a large fraction of this year - which is what I expect, then do we really want to have gifted large influence to those who have not contributed - equal to those who have.

There's a problem of engagement here.. the voting is not compelling and the evidence is not compelling, so those on 100% at the moment are getting a free ride and then paid handsomely for it.

All very provocative I know but perhaps the challenge should be made more strongly, so that we do get a sense of who deserve what. Devs certainly should get the largest fraction but in time will they deserve 100% even?.. perhaps by then we will have resolved to have more delegates??

I believe if the delegates were working on a couple things in a group, together by amassing their funds and utilizing them for "viral" types of marketing, or even better---forming an affiliate network (thanks RGCrypto) that not only benefitted them but also every community member who joined it, would be very valuable.  I think we would see a lot.

As far as comparing marketing to devs...that is a hard one.  The reason I personally built a team of 6 people total for my delegate was because I wanted to set it up so other people had a stake in building the value of our project.  That is worth the sacrifice of extra funds going into my pocket because I believe we have to think long-term and incentivize each other to grow. 

We are a network.  We grow in strength as a network everytime an individual in the network grows in strength.  This means we have to look at incentives that align in such a way to help each other grow.  Just like I looked at incentives when designing the hangouts the way they are currently designed, we have to make them align to become effective.  And the best way to align incentives is to consider what everyone needs and try to design situations where everyone benefits from taking part.  Admittedly, I have not perfected this (and could honestly use a coder myself for a user issued asset I'm eyeing) but I am doing my best. 

I think the marketing delegates are doing their best as well (though one in particular recently told me they planned to take a "very passive role" in the community and gave me no further information upon my request for it).  If you go to the NullStreet forums (which anyone can sign up to take part in if you ask Method-X to let you), you will see many people working hard on many things.  Many of these people are volunteering for the cause without getting paid by delegate fees (Empirical1.2 and his video comes to mind) and some are even willing to use their own funds (Onceuponatime) to help see certain initiatives through.  Still others are delegates being paid to do what they do, and it in marketing...persistence matters.  Most results are not seen overnight. 

I believe that the Devs should be able to have more than one delegate, and I also believe that marketing delegates should work in teams and should pick out people who volunteer for them anyway, signing them on for a cut in the pay.  But this is just me and my opinion only matters as far as it matters to those who listen to it and, of course, myself (I usually tend to like my own ideas, though so don't trust my biased opinions on those merits alone). 

DPoS is going to be political.  We need to understand that.  THIS IS GOOD.  It is far better than lying to ourselves and everyone around us thinking some algorithm is better at ruling our lives than we are.  However, this doesn't mean we shouldn't be working to find better ways to incentivize participation on a deeper level from those who have the philosophies necessary to see this project through.  Which brings me to my last point. 

I think that unless someone can come here and show us an extensive list of all the things they have done, they should have a preliminary period of time when they must prove themselves to the community.  I say this because the people who are willing to do this are here for more than just the BTS in their pockets.  This is VITAL.  Why?  Because just like any network, we will experience some very hard times on the way to the top...and that means that the people who are here for more than money will likely stay here through the hard times (when we need them most).  This also means that when they have proven that, that we should have no qualms with paying them well--because we will know they are using those funds not only to enrich themselves, but to enrich all of us. 

Please consider voting if you guys haven't already. 

[triox]

  I can do this, but eventually marketing delegates will be some of the people with the largest stake in the network and I have to recognize that angering too many delegates can kick me and my crew out of a delegate position.

This is a real problem in this community. Everyone wants to be a delegate so we end up sucking each others dicks instead of pushing ourselves to higher standards.
Every diluting delegate should be publishing weekly reports about what they did with their operating funds, how many work hours they put in and at what rate. This includes devs.

[Empirical1.2]

With Brian we had 1 guy costing circa $10k a month who probably spent an average of $10k a month (badly) so he was overpaid and under-performing.

At the current CAP I would prefer 1 main guy getting $3000 in personal salary with a budget of $12 000.
Then we'd have budget for a new animated video every 2 weeks, always have an advert on a top crypto-currency site (Coindesk/CMC) with our latest feature as well as extra money leftover for other initiatives. We'd only have to monitor 1 main guy and $3000 at least incentivises a bit of  competition. You'd also have $4500  left over for 3 smaller marketing delegate positions.

At the current CAP our system of 9 marketing delegates with $1500 each is hard to keep track of and if they want any personal salary for their efforts their budget becomes miniscule and takes ages to accrue.

However given that's what we have the more initiatives that add accountability and helps them communicate the better.

[matt608]

At the current CAP our system of 9 marketing delegates with $1500 each is hard to keep track of and if they want any personal salary for their efforts their budget becomes miniscule and takes ages to accrue.

9?  I count 5, myself, methodx, rgcrypto and bitscape's first one (second one isn't in yet) and the Chinese group.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

With Brian we had 1 guy costing circa $10k a month who probably spent an average of $10k a month (badly) so he was overpaid and under-performing.

At the current CAP I would prefer 1 main guy getting $3000 in personal salary with a budget of $12 000.
Then we'd have budget for a new animated video every 2 weeks, always have an advert on a top crypto-currency site (Coindesk/CMC) with our latest feature as well as extra money leftover for other initiatives. We'd only have to monitor 1 main guy and $3000 at least incentivises a bit of  competition. You'd also have $4500  left over for 3 smaller marketing delegate positions.

At the current CAP our system of 9 marketing delegates with $1500 each is hard to keep track of and if they want any personal salary for their efforts their budget becomes miniscule and takes ages to accrue.

However given that's what we have the more initiatives that add accountability and helps them communicate the better.

You are only going to attract bad talent at that low pay rate. You can get bad even at $10k, it's just less likely at higher rates. Finding someone who can work well in the crypto space unless they are inspired by it is a challenge though, which is why I think the model to hire someone for the task is inefficient.

Delegates are inspired entrepreneurs that have the 'can-do' spirit to make things happen.

We are magical beings that can turn nothing into something.

A guy seeking a job in marketing willing to accept that kind of rate of pay is more than likely going to be really ineffective.

I see the delegates work tend to be complimentary and not overlapping. Some are not even really considered marketing, but their activities accomplish it. They are largely operating on the hope, belief, and prayer that BTS market cap goes up and their delegate stake increases in value. That is enough to motivate anybody to want to see BTS better perform. The motivational dynamic in my estimation is perfect.

There is enough of us to keep an eye on things.. look what happened just last week. One wasn't cutting it and they got the boot. If there are others it will show, and the remaining cream will rise to the top.

My 2.9 cents anyways.

Jonathan

[fuzzy]

  I can do this, but eventually marketing delegates will be some of the people with the largest stake in the network and I have to recognize that angering too many delegates can kick me and my crew out of a delegate position.

This is a real problem in this community. Everyone wants to be a delegate so we end up sucking each others dicks instead of pushing ourselves to higher standards.
Every diluting delegate should be publishing weekly reports about what they did with their operating funds, how many work hours they put in and at what rate. This includes devs.

The nature of human behavior is what it is.  Politics occur in every system where people must compete for the acceptance of the majority.  I am not "sucking a dick" instead of pushing myself to higher standards...and I'm sorry that this has gotten you so heated.  In fact, it kind of sucks that my openness and honesty is returned with this kind of response--it actually serves as an incentive to not be as honest!

But to think it is wrong that people who work their butts off and sacrifice for the ecosystem, then put up 60,000 BTS just to register a 100% delegate (hoping they get voted in) to have a concern for losing their position when they find themselves lucky enough to get voted in, is severely missing the point. 
I did not construct the incentives of the system and honestly I do not see them getting much better other than a few potential tweaks--and the inclusion of some other tools.  But with that said, it creates a system where people in delegate positions are forced to consider the realities of weighing their honest opinion against what it can do to their position. 

The fact is that if you piss off power players you get the boot.  I am obviously not afraid to potentially piss them off in the name of the community (though this is not my intent), but I also have to recognize the reality that most people have not even voted for my delegate.  So I see the quandary that most politicians see (and wow is it a crazy learning experience)...most people do not actively vote and the power players are the only ones in society who see it as worth their time.  So who are we forced to go to when we begin depending on funding?  The apathetic?...or power players...?

Just posting this thread could have severe risks for me (if the marketing people choose to think of it as an attack) and I am uncomfortable doing it.  However, after the whole ordeal with BP I promised myself that I would approach the community when my spidey sense was going off--which is what I'm now doing.  I sincerely hope you will take a deep breath triox and understand the position I am in and that I am not meaning to demean the efforts of anyone here...simply trying to act as a community representative who may or may not be missed if his services are shut down for failing in his role of bringing the Empathetic community together around the power players to ask the legitimate questions and represent "the rest of us".

At the current CAP our system of 9 marketing delegates with $1500 each is hard to keep track of and if they want any personal salary for their efforts their budget becomes miniscule and takes ages to accrue.

9?  I count 5, myself, methodx, rgcrypto and bitscape's first one (second one isn't in yet) and the Chinese group.

Yeh, which is why I like Sumantso's idea about having colorized names to show what role(s) people are performing in the ecosystem.

With Brian we had 1 guy costing circa $10k a month who probably spent an average of $10k a month (badly) so he was overpaid and under-performing.

At the current CAP I would prefer 1 main guy getting $3000 in personal salary with a budget of $12 000.
Then we'd have budget for a new animated video every 2 weeks, always have an advert on a top crypto-currency site (Coindesk/CMC) with our latest feature as well as extra money leftover for other initiatives. We'd only have to monitor 1 main guy and $3000 at least incentivises a bit of  competition. You'd also have $4500  left over for 3 smaller marketing delegate positions.

At the current CAP our system of 9 marketing delegates with $1500 each is hard to keep track of and if they want any personal salary for their efforts their budget becomes miniscule and takes ages to accrue.

However given that's what we have the more initiatives that add accountability and helps them communicate the better.

I want to see all the marketing delegates soar to new levels of success.  I want to see all of us uplifted and to hopefully find a career working for blockchains if that is what we love and believe in.  I also agree that communication is as big a priority as any (obviously). 

[davidpbrown]

What you've suggested is a fair test of the reality and something would be badly off, if you were punished for any of the good sense expressed.

There should be a worry about who holds the power. Such issues are already central to the way that those critical of BitShares talk; so, everyone needs to work hard to ensure that such talk as 'greedy devs' does not stand up to scrutiny; that again is a reason that delegates should be evidencing their work.. but if they do not need to worry because they hold all the votes, then we might start to have a problem. What perhaps needs to occur, is that the delegates become more critical of other delegates and more careful who they support.

I don't understand [Number of votes] on http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegates being a % but I understand that there are some there with substantial % support.. perhaps too much of that is lazy by default support for everyone. Perhaps someone big vote should push those who have not evidenced their contribution, to encourage that they do.

More power to fuzzy! 

[lovejoy]

Delegates are inspired entrepreneurs that have the 'can-do' spirit to make things happen.

We are magical beings that can turn nothing into something.

A guy seeking a job in marketing willing to accept that kind of rate of pay is more than likely going to be really ineffective.

I see the delegates work tend to be complimentary and not overlapping. Some are not even really considered marketing, but their activities accomplish it. They are largely operating on the hope, belief, and prayer that BTS market cap goes up and their delegate stake increases in value. That is enough to motivate anybody to want to see BTS better perform. The motivational dynamic in my estimation is perfect.

There is enough of us to keep an eye on things.. look what happened just last week. One wasn't cutting it and they got the boot. If there are others it will show, and the remaining cream will rise to the top.

My 2.9 cents anyways.

^ This is the best thing I've read all day.

I support marketing or just plain old developer hangouts, for sure.
In fact we still have yet to schedule ours Fuzz... it was a crazy month, but we're happy to get something on the calendar.

Personally I'm really impressed with the way the marketing crew is self organizing.  I see natural roles developing, and I think we're all mature enough to call bullshit when we see it.  There's a lot happening at nullstreet, and things are heating up in a really good way.

Speaking from personal experience the whole process of running for a delegate spot has been a massive undertaking, and absolutely no personal gain of any kind to show for it yet. Quite the opposite.

Our team has about 360 hours and $1200+ dollars invested, on top of delegate registration fees of around 120,000 bts, just now about 75% recovered from our first delegate's accumulated pay.  Not to mention we haven't been able to really seek professional legal council (yet another reason to support Fuzz) and we haven't taken care of a good many business expenses associated with doing this right.

How many other '100% paid' delegates are in a similar position thus far?

I am all for transparency, i love it, but If I had one BitSilver for every frustrated rant calling for delegate accountability of system in which even 100% paid delegates are still working for free... with lion hearted effing magic abilities of literally turning 'nothing into something'.... i would put them all in a fund to counteract the cynical by reminding them to be grateful for all the gifts they have received in life, just to be here, having this conversation.

Let's turn this around.  There is critical thinking, which is awesome... and there is toxic, neurotic, infectious scarcity complex... which is self defeating.

Did you ever have a swear jar at home?  Where you had to put a quarter in the jar if you dropped the f-bomb?
We should institute the 'gripe jar'... i have no idea how that would work, but damn i'd love to see it.

How about this.  Every time someone gripes about how awful things are, delegate or not, will ask them what they have been doing to help this project succeed?  How many people did they turn on to BitShares in the past month?  How much liquidity did they provide?  How many creative ideas have they shared?  How many solutions have they offered?  How many times did they say 'good job', or, I really appreciate all you have done to advance the cause.  If they can't say anything useful, then they can tip the gripe jar 1 BitSilver to be used for something constructive.

“Cecil Graham: What is a cynic?
Lord Darlington: A man who knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing.
Cecil Graham: And a sentimentalist, my dear Darlington, is a man who sees an absurd value in everything and doesn’t know the market price of any single thing.”

Can we land somewhere in the middle?  Can we recognize the great strides which have been made instead of sulking in the shadows of 'what might have been?', and chasing the phantoms of 'what are we losing?'

Oh, one more thing... you can leave your 'dick metaphors' at the door.
We don't need to read that crap... get creative at least for satoshi's sake.

I had to get that out of my system before it turned into resentment.  Some comments in this thread were just the straw that broke the narwhal's back, and that's hard to do!  Little mopey gripey sulk all over this forum.

Praise to those who contribute by other means!

peace, b

[ticklebiscuit]

Maybe its overkill.  You do a good job on your other stuff. Maybe just read that news letter from them and put it out as a recording. 

Im voting no because that brian dude was just an epic fail.  Is it statistically possible to have another so close in succession?

[ebit]

good idea