Author Topic: Power of the community: Price recovery action 1  (Read 22244 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fran2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: fran2k
elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

elmato   He is part of the Argentina-marketing.matt608 team. Another Marketing team.

Nope , elmato is the developer of a cellphone app version of wallet , who happens to be one of the people helping out the marketing in Argentina .

elmato, is effectively the dev, along with dargonar, of the first iOS and Android bitAsset wallets, called BitWallet, next version will be renamed to LimeWallet. Main thread: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,11902.0.html

elmato has also participated in several BitShares talks we had done in the Bitcoin Center Buenos Aires. This was in coordination with the argentina.marketing.matt608 delegate team, from which he is part.

Our past meetups:
[2015-03-20] Buenos Aires - Paperwallets Giveaway and Install Workshop
[2015-02-19] Buenos Aires - Bitcoin 2.0: Bitshares, Sidechains y Ethereum
[2015-01-22] Buenos Aires - bitShares & bitUSD, DACs, Blockchain Based Apps &+
[2014-12-11] Buenos Aires - bitShares & bitUSD Meetup

With that said maybe we can put a website together that highlights the delegates & responsibilities and have another section where we can expect weekly progress reports and have some accountability (we can keep this open or private to members).  Eventually I think we need to put a delegate team page with pictures for the bitShares DAC delegates.  I know some may be uncomfortable so it shouldn't be required, but whenever you look at a company you want to know who is behind it.  It brings the human element to the project.  Just like the Peer-to-Peer tour, Stan, Bytemaster etc bring a human element to bitShares.  You gain trust much faster from others that way.  That's an advantage Bitshares will always have over the anonymous guys from NXT, Darkcoin etc.  It would be good to recruit more females and global talent because money is universal and we want everyone involved.   It's great we have a strong Chinese contingent. 

Anyways you can link up a delegate website to the Bitshareblocks.com's delegate page, but keep it running seperately.  It can have real-time financials totally transparent for everyone to see.  When you think about the level of transparency you can have with the DAC compared to regular corporations & governments, this system is definitely revolutionary.  I can grab the domain: btsdac.org if people like that domain?  I can even set up a simple Wordpress site, but we have to have someone build a data feed of delegate info to it.  The website page can read:  BitShares DAC, 'The World's First Decentralized Autonomous Company'...  anyways what do you all think?

This will be very useful. Delegates should use more their walls to burn comments and updates.


dev0.nikolai   As far as I can tell, he no longer is a Dev with BTS but with PLAY/NOTE

marketing.methodx   Marketing group. MethodX gave up the reigns to others and they are putting out a newsletter.

argentina-marketing.matt608    Marketing delegate who has left and supposedly handed the reigns over to a different group that include elmato, another 100% delegate.

delegate-dev2.btsnow           Redundant delegate

dev-trial.misc.nikolai   This one is funny and I think is an inside joke with Toast. The guy this was intended for is gone, the fees paid off and was supposed be taken offline. But here it is still there banking money.

dacx.baozou   Crowd funded and VC funded, why do they need a delegate. (One of the elusive Chinese whales perhaps?)

provisional.bitscape   Redundant delegate

I think we should start spring cleaning, above are a selected group of delegates that we can use as a starting point. Some of these may be worth keeping, but lets hear the justification of why that should be. Without legitimate justification for their continuance, let us move to promote removal of these delegates.

What research have YOU done on this (or are you waiting for others to do it for you?)

http://bitsharesblog.com

I would be interested in seeing  your analysis of the value of the "selected group of delegates" above being placed on http://bitsharesblog.com

I keep up to date with delegates and take my vote away from those I consider to not be adding potential to BitShares.

That involves a lot of work on my part. I was on Marketing conference calls with some of the delegates for many hours this past Easter weekend.

What we need to do is encourage dialogue to evaluate the delegates. I picked out a handful from Newmine's list and would love to hear your opinions on them as well as everyone else's. This is something we should be doing, it is more constructive than simply bemoaning the price.

What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

Another way your could choose to look at it is that, as we grow, delegates are destined to become small businesses funding perhaps several people to accomplish their tasks.  Under that model, people might come and go while the business remains in good graces.  If that is not philosophically objectionable to you, then having delegates find someone to "take over" for them on the mission they were hired to do (as a proto-business) seems like it could be perfectly natural.

Thanks Stan, that resumes whats actually happening with the argentina.marketing.matt608 delegate, which will be 'argentina.team' delegate. We are in a transition period, and we are planing to switch to this new delegate during the next three months. Here is the post where matt608 clarifies the situation: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,11847.msg198849.html#msg198849

We will be posting some more info about this in the coming days.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2015, 07:52:23 am by fran2k »
Witness: rmglab /// Buenos Aires BTS Meetup http://www.meetup.com/es-ES/BitSharesBA/ /// [old BTS 1.0 chain] Delegate bitshares-argentina (ex argentina-marketing-matt608) Thread https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15781.0.html

Offline fuzzy

Opportunity, kids.  I'm buying at least one K @ half a cent, and 5 more if it reaches a third. I doubt I'm the only one with this plan.  I've been hoping for half a cent prices for some time now.

Oh I am going to buy some if I can get my hands on some spare cash.  Public fountain time baby... :P
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline mint chocolate chip

What I do not like so much is delegates leaving and 'handing' off their position to someone else. Do we not have a way for a 100% delegate to reduce his or her pay? If you are hired, and you decide to move on, it would be nice if you reduced your pay to 3% and continue signing blocks, inform everyone and ask to be voted out.

Another way your could choose to look at it is that, as we grow, delegates are destined to become small businesses funding perhaps several people to accomplish their tasks.  Under that model, people might come and go while the business remains in good graces.  If that is not philosophically objectionable to you, then having delegates find someone to "take over" for them on the mission they were hired to do (as a proto-business) seems like it could be perfectly natural.
That makes sense.

Offline xh3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
    • Bit-Cents
Opportunity, kids.  I'm buying at least one K @ half a cent, and 5 more if it reaches a third. I doubt I'm the only one with this plan.  I've been hoping for half a cent prices for some time now.

Offline betax

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 808
    • View Profile
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange

Wrong. Who is going to verify identity? Dont forget you have more than just the US identities to deal with. Oh, and dont forget, whoever controls the identity verification system is corruptable and centralized. VOTE will never work beyond a simple polling place no different than the value ngeof the polls here on this form.

I was referring to ALM, at the moment you need to provide a form of identification to register in exchanges (at least in Europe). Bitshares could introduce a similar way of identity verification (Keyhotee) that could provide the same functionality. Now with that in place, you could also implement voting. At thel beginning yes, this will be just a poll, but once is demonstrated the reliability and trust, will be easy to sell.

Lets wait and see the roadmap.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc

Offline testz

Do you know the meaning of the word "secret"?
VOTE will never work because NewMine says "It will never work."?

True, but we also shouldn't believe it will magically work just because Bytemaster says it will.

True.
My personal opinion about VOTE based at some information from forum, https://followmyvote.com and mumble sessions - I think it's will work, at least much better and will be more transparent when current voting process.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
Do you know the meaning of the word "secret"?
VOTE will never work because NewMine says "It will never work."?

True, but we also shouldn't believe it will magically work just because Bytemaster says it will.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline testz


I also was demanding one sentence why VOTE was all of a sudden some became a "secret sauce" and I never got a response to the question. Only some BS about how voting is corrupt and BM has to try and change it blah blah blah.....VOTE merger was a scam and will alway be a scam. It will never work. DNS had a chain and Toast was the lead developer. BM didn't have to split time with DNS. So this was all about getting VOTE, the DAC least potential to become the reason we needed to give i3 more shares and Adam a huge stake.

Do you know the meaning of the word "secret"?
VOTE will never work because NewMine says "It will never work."? What if other shareholders think different?

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile


What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange

Wrong. Who is going to verify identity? Dont forget you have more than just the US identities to deal with. Oh, and dont forget, whoever controls the identity verification system is corruptable and centralized. VOTE will never work beyond a simple polling place no different than the value of the polls here on this form.

For vote to work there would need to be multiple centralized identity services competing against one another, cross verifying identities, and calling out bad performance.

Also, I loosely understand that politicians would eventually need to pay voters directly to incentive voting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange

Wrong. Who is going to verify identity? Dont forget you have more than just the US identities to deal with. Oh, and dont forget, whoever controls the identity verification system is corruptable and centralized. VOTE will never work beyond a simple polling place no different than the value of the polls here on this form.

Offline betax

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 808
    • View Profile
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:



You are totally right, this is the real value for adoption and decentralisation, if IBM is going to create their own currency linked to FIAT, here we have something already built and with its own multiFiat exchange
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 01:43:20 pm by betax »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline nomoreheroes7

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • King of all the land
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nomoreheroes7
What Bitshares needs are optional user accounts linked to government id and verified by a DAC.

This would make KYC/AML trivial and open the fiat floodgates. I think the dev team already has this in their sights and the tech forms part of the VOTE platform.

What Bitshares also needs is completely anonymous, secure and untraceable accounts.

This would change the world:

Step 1: Fiat value migrates to BTS via kyc/aml compliant gateways.

Step 2. Fiat value stays in BTS (via bitAssets) and never leaves... when folks want something to hold in their hands cryptosmith and other services allows direct conversion to tangible assets (bitGold -> gold).

Step 3. Everyone suddenly realizes their wealth is sovereign unto themselves.

Step 4. Change the world.

Am I the only one outside of the core devs that understands BTS, VOTE and DNS are the holy trinity?

Together these things form and incomprehensibly powerful tool that can change the course of human history.

Separate they are a passing novelty in a far flung and rarely visited corner of the internet.

The devs, particularly BM, are hunting much bigger game than most folks think.

Bitshares is not about bitAssets or banking...

All of this. Obviously these are ambitious goals, but it's exactly where BTS needs to position itself and exactly how BTS will absolutely explode. All of this is possible. Thank you OldMan for your wise words. You help remind me why I'm here in the first place.

(Are you really that old? Hah.)
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 01:16:06 pm by nomoreheroes7 »

Offline speedy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: speedy
You should speak your mind more. Silence is taken as conformity here. But being vocal is also the enemy, regardless of intention.

Here, https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,10148.msg132915.html#msg132915 Gentso1 clued in to what was really happening and BM stated the finances were fine even though we got paid delegate dilution because finances were not in fact fine. I agreed with Gentso1.

I also was demanding one sentence why VOTE was all of a sudden some became a "secret sauce" and I never got a response to the question. Only some BS about how voting is corrupt and BM has to try and change it blah blah blah.....VOTE merger was a scam and will alway be a scam. It will never work. DNS had a chain and Toast was the lead developer. BM didn't have to split time with DNS. So this was all about getting VOTE, the DAC least potential to become the reason we needed to give i3 more shares and Adam a huge stake.

Newmine is right in at least that VOTE is never going to work. Its just a fantasy that you can convince governments to move voting systems over to a blockchain that they dont even have a stake in.

Am I the only one outside of the core devs that understands BTS, VOTE and DNS are the holy trinity?

Together these things form and incomprehensibly powerful tool that can change the course of human history.

DNS is not going to work either, at least not as a self-sustaining profitable business.

For blockchain-based DNS to work, browsers need to be integrated with the software to lookup ips from the blockchain. That means getting the likes of Mozilla and Google Chrome on board. Does anyone think they would ever care about anything we have to be incentivized to partner with us? No. In the remote possibility that more than a few geeks started to care about looking up websites from blockchains, Google or Mozilla would just add their own blockchain into their browser. Again they have no stake in BTS either. Even if BTS had a $1 billion market cap they wouldnt care.

Once the core BitAssets take off then yes it might be worth it to add on DNS into BTS later, but this was never going to be a catalyst for large user growth.

Just my opinion.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 06:32:00 pm by speedy »

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
Yeah  I'm with svk, Ander & Fuzzy on the 'merger' subject. 

I started following BTS after the 'merger' but it was always a puzzle why it was necessary.  Building a conglomerate seemed contrary to the ethos of decentralization and also business competition.  The 'merger' was spun as the creation of a  'SuperDAC' and I understand putting everything in a positive light for marketing, but I think from a business perspective it would be good to reflect on the 'merger' to decide if it was worth it.  It was really just an acquisition of Vote & DNS for 20% of the company post-merger.   Was that a good decision? 

I don't think so.  We're a long away from the days of vertical integration and monopolization as Rockerfeller did with the oil industry  Most businesses in the last couple decades have seen the value of spin-offs, breaking up supply chains to focus on core competencies.  Big businesses with a lot of cash acquire smaller companies to stifle competition, but it decreases the overall value-creation process.  In this case the acquisition is odd because it looks more like a startup acquiring two businesses that are entirely unrelated.  It's like Facebook in the early days trying to acquire an early-stage McDonalds and early-stage Exxon.  (I know, I know there is tech overlap, but I'm trying to make a point.)  Devs could have worked on multiple projects and had two sources of income.   The value of Vote, DNS and BitsharesX would be valued much more highly as separate companies than as a MonopolyDAC. 

I'm very excited about Vote & DNS, but I think they're much more valuable on their own.  Besides shouldn't a voting blockchain be separate from an asset exchange blockchain?  Why add confusion to different consumer demographics? 

The reason why I discuss this rather than let it get swept under the rug is we can always reverse actions.  If there's eventually a demand to spin-off Vote & DNS down the road I'll be in favor.   Bring the total shares back to 2 Billion and spinoff Vote & DNS with a % equity in DAC shares.  Total combined marketcap of all three would be much greater and each DAC would focus on core competencies. 

The funny thing with all this is the original thread was complaining about delegate pay when I think more BTS should be spent on delegate pay for everything, especially for faster and quality core development.  Imagine taking 100 million of the 500 million BTS used to acquire  Vote & DNS and using it to fund faster & better tech development.  The DAC delegate pay model was a core advantage over other ecosystems that struggle to make ends meet.   Why don't we use more delegate spots to double the salary of developers or get new developers to help?   Feeling like there is not enough funds for development is self-induced.  Heck we could have used all 500 million BTS we used to purchase Vote & DNS to fund Bitshares development over time instead.   That would have been better use of dilution.

Pretty sure all three of those guys were totally "pro" merger once they all went to the mumble chat and "all 23" came to a consensus of how great it "actually" was going to be.

I made a proposal to increase delegate pay here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14379.msg187215.html#msg187215 but nobody remembers that or mentions that.

For the record I was never in that mumble chat nor did I really agree with the merger, but it all happened during a time I was on vacation travelling and as a result I was not very vocal, which I regret. I did try to speak out against the allocations, especially for DNS and VOTE which felt very unfair to me, but didn't get much traction.

You should speak your mind more. Silence is taken as conformity here. But being vocal is also the enemy, regardless of intention.

Here, https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,10148.msg132915.html#msg132915 Gentso1 clued in to what was really happening and BM stated the finances were fine even though we got paid delegate dilution because finances were not in fact fine. I agreed with Gentso1.

I also was demanding one sentence why VOTE was all of a sudden some became a "secret sauce" and I never got a response to the question. Only some BS about how voting is corrupt and BM has to try and change it blah blah blah.....VOTE merger was a scam and will alway be a scam. It will never work. DNS had a chain and Toast was the lead developer. BM didn't have to split time with DNS. So this was all about getting VOTE, the DAC least potential to become the reason we needed to give i3 more shares and Adam a huge stake.