We've been pretty clear that peertracks will not be all public in the way bitshares is, and are giving everyone an opportunity to get out (at higher than the crowdsale price no less) if they don't like that
is this FUD ? Any reason for doing this?
I really can't believe what I am reading! 
It's because there's no point answering to huge groups of stakeholders we don't know who only care about short-term returns and generally act like a hivemind. We would rather start at a low price and have real growth than to have a huge speculative market with a potential for big losses for everyone.
I understand your point of feeling not so entitled to give explanations to people you don't know (and who might only be interested in short term profit, but that's not the point). But in my perspective, the point is that without those people you don't know (IPO donators) that contributed to the Bitshares Music pre-sale, there wouldn't be any money for the project to lift-off.
This project is very secretive by nature, and there are a lot of unknowns about the actual Bitshares Music model. What I want to point though is that revealing some details about this model without revealing the "secret sauce" wouldn't harm the project so much, and shareholders wouldn't feel their concerns/questions are dismissed. If you were dealing with VC or angel investors you would have to disclose MUCH more details. I'm not asking to see the blue prints of the whole model, just a courteous answer when IPO shareholders have questions, because without them the project wouldn't have the funds it currently does. And a courteous answer can be "We cannot disclose that information just yet".
You even mentionned that Bitshares Music isn't the name the Music blockchain will officially have. What will it be? Is that part of the big secret too or is it not just defined yet?
Also, I understand Peertracks development is being done in parallel to the Bitshares Music blockchain, but that it is privately held by a few shareholders. Up to now, what percentage of the crowdfunding money went into developing Peertracks compared to the music blockchain? Maybe @cob might be able to answer this one. I know this question have already been asked, but IIRC there wasn't a crystal clear answer. That answer matters, because my initial understanding when I donated to the pre-sale was that the money was to be used to develop the blockchain, not some privately held front-end.
In the end, I won't be bitching around if the added value Peertracks gives to the music blockchain is significant enough to compensate for the fact Peertracks used part of the crowdfunding for development. It's an ecosystem, and without the growth of Peertracks there won't be any growth for the music blockchain. All I want to do is point to the fact that we don't know.
Lack of transparency can easily lead to speculation.
Too much transparency is worst, it creates panic.
Well, I guess just enough would be best
Topic: NOTES are listed ar CMC (Read 20529 times)
