Author Topic: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!  (Read 3272 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2015, 04:54:32 pm »
With this index proposal you make this thread more and more inappropriate for the marketing subsection of this forum and more and more appropriate for the 'other projects' sub...

And while every project that has some kind of tokens (IOUs) on the BTS platform is probably beneficial to  Bitshares. And everybody is free to do whatever he/she likes with the business she owns, imo. I do not find appropriate each such project to receive delegate funding. Projects such as yours getting such funding should be held to a higher standard and required a higher level of return for the BTS system. I am truly sorry to see it but the first step that you took to separate this pool from Bitshares was to private-brand it as 'bunker-mining' as opposed to Bitshares-mining. Now you propose some index with no clear benefits to Bitshares, and yet you have probably 70 posts promoting the 7 delegates to subsidize the project.

So

What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?

So what would you suggest that would make the pool continue without relying on delegate payouts forever? At present i am operating at about a loss of $75 a day with this project which does absolutely nothing else but help bitshares. All the points you bring up as though this is a gone private project are misplaced. Integrating another part of bitshares into the operation provides a showcase to all our users of what they can do too with bitshares... you don't consider that marketing?

Bitshares needs usercases and if there is any to be had that is actually working and producing results this is it.

You are welcome to make recommendations that would address your concerns and make the pool profit on its own so it doesn't need delegate pay to operate.. looking forward to hearing them.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline svk

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2015, 05:00:07 pm »
Keep it simple until you have a stable user base and serous hashing power at the pool
+5%

UIA makes things too complicated imo, keep it simple and familiar if you want to attract new miners.

Envoyé de mon C6603 en utilisant Tapatalk

Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2015, 05:59:19 pm »
With this index proposal you make this thread more and more inappropriate for the marketing subsection of this forum and more and more appropriate for the 'other projects' sub...

And while every project that has some kind of tokens (IOUs) on the BTS platform is probably beneficial to  Bitshares. And everybody is free to do whatever he/she likes with the business she owns, imo. I do not find appropriate each such project to receive delegate funding. Projects such as yours getting such funding should be held to a higher standard and required a higher level of return for the BTS system. I am truly sorry to see it but the first step that you took to separate this pool from Bitshares was to private-brand it as 'bunker-mining' as opposed to Bitshares-mining. Now you propose some index with no clear benefits to Bitshares, and yet you have probably 70 posts promoting the 7 delegates to subsidize the project.

So

What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?


So what would you suggest that would make the pool continue without relying on delegate payouts forever?
What payout forever are you  talking about? You promised to make it the most profitable pool using delegate pay - you are months and months away from that goal (if ever). So reach the first goal before looking to change it to private self sufficient pool

At present i am operating at about a loss of $75 a day with this project which does absolutely nothing else but help bitshares.
I guess that is true, BUT I asked you how many delegates you need to make it non-money loosing for you and most profitable for the miners. You never answered that...my guess is far more than 7.

 All the points you bring up as though this is a gone private project are misplaced.
No they are not!  Using delegate pay to just build the pool infrastructure and quickly replace the bitshares product (bitUSD/Silver/Gold) with some index of coins you fancy is not enough return for the BTS ecosystem. You may find it more than enough, I am just stating my opinion - it is not nearly worth 7 delegates.

Integrating another part of bitshares into the operation provides a showcase to all our users of what they can do too with bitshares... you don't consider that marketing?
As I said earlier - there is some value in every IOU on the BTS DEX BUT -Not enough return to be worth 7 delegates!!!

Bitshares needs usercases and if there is any to be had that is actually working and producing results this is it.
Same as above - some value in each and every IOU - Not enough return to be worth 7 delegates!!!


You are welcome to make recommendations that would address your concerns and make the pool profit on its own so it doesn't need delegate pay to operate.. looking forward to hearing them.
I did not promise to make this thing work - you did! I am here to  try prevent abusing the system while you work on that.





Do you mind answering the initial question though
What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2015, 06:56:45 pm »

1. The index would not hold 'all' coins.. only ones that have certain liquidity. There would be certain technical limitations, but we likely would hold something like a TOP 9. We would continue to mine and profit from the smaller coins that we can liquidate immediately, but that liquidation would go straight to BTC or LTC in the index. More likely BTC since that can be used for liquidity in our payouts and hashing power system.

Okay. IMO this is only slightly related to mining but having a crypto index would be nice anyway. So if you can, go for it.

2. I think I may not have been clear in presenting the idea of the index in contrast to the BTS peg. We would either operate by a BTS peg OR an index value of coins we hold. We couldnt do both at the same time. In regards to putting in.. they are getting a service out of it. Money in goes into the pool that powers provides more hash power to the pool that in turn produces more mined shares in the pool that are then paid back in MINING. Their MINING balance would just continue to grow on the shares returned from the pool. It can then be cashed out in any bitAsset of their choosing when they like. All holders of MINING will get shares paid out to them proportional to their holding.

Yes, I understand that. I just don't get how you would realize it. For simplicity let's just assume you would choose to peg the UIA 1:1 to BTS.
In this case you would have to hold x BTS if x MINING are held by miners/investors. Otherwise you can't hold the peg if BTS price rises (relatively to the value of  your hashpower investment). So where are you getting the money from to rent hash power as you have to hold all invested/mined BTS in order to guarantee the peg?

Differently said I don't understand how you can have an UIA that is 100% exposed to BTS price and yet generates "dividends" from mining.

The only way I could imagine it to work is by actually using the bonus payouts (generated by fees and spread) to rent the additional hashing power.

The BTS isn't held it's converted to hashing power via various means of leasing hashing power. It's a service. If we were going to go the way of the bts peg.. we would operate with some reserve of bts that comes out of the mining profits. In other words we would be continually cycling the BTC payments for leased hash while taking a reserve in BTS for potential payout requests. We bear some risk by setting the peg to BTS, but as I expressed originally, this is a BItShares project, and not using BTS would not be right.

It works more efficiently and with no/less risk though if we have rig leasers and our own equipment to pay directly in BTS vs. BTC. That's a whole other thing though.

I prefer not to go the way of the peg to BTS, but the way of the index market that make it more efficient in its liquidity. This way the exposure is minimal for everyone.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2015, 04:32:53 am by DataSecurityNode »
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2015, 07:04:34 pm »
With this index proposal you make this thread more and more inappropriate for the marketing subsection of this forum and more and more appropriate for the 'other projects' sub...

And while every project that has some kind of tokens (IOUs) on the BTS platform is probably beneficial to  Bitshares. And everybody is free to do whatever he/she likes with the business she owns, imo. I do not find appropriate each such project to receive delegate funding. Projects such as yours getting such funding should be held to a higher standard and required a higher level of return for the BTS system. I am truly sorry to see it but the first step that you took to separate this pool from Bitshares was to private-brand it as 'bunker-mining' as opposed to Bitshares-mining. Now you propose some index with no clear benefits to Bitshares, and yet you have probably 70 posts promoting the 7 delegates to subsidize the project.

So

What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?


So what would you suggest that would make the pool continue without relying on delegate payouts forever?
What payout forever are you  talking about? You promised to make it the most profitable pool using delegate pay - you are months and months away from that goal (if ever). So reach the first goal before looking to change it to private self sufficient pool

At present i am operating at about a loss of $75 a day with this project which does absolutely nothing else but help bitshares.
I guess that is true, BUT I asked you how many delegates you need to make it non-money loosing for you and most profitable for the miners. You never answered that...my guess is far more than 7.

 All the points you bring up as though this is a gone private project are misplaced.
No they are not!  Using delegate pay to just build the pool infrastructure and quickly replace the bitshares product (bitUSD/Silver/Gold) with some index of coins you fancy is not enough return for the BTS ecosystem. You may find it more than enough, I am just stating my opinion - it is not nearly worth 7 delegates.

Integrating another part of bitshares into the operation provides a showcase to all our users of what they can do too with bitshares... you don't consider that marketing?
As I said earlier - there is some value in every IOU on the BTS DEX BUT -Not enough return to be worth 7 delegates!!!

Bitshares needs usercases and if there is any to be had that is actually working and producing results this is it.
Same as above - some value in each and every IOU - Not enough return to be worth 7 delegates!!!


You are welcome to make recommendations that would address your concerns and make the pool profit on its own so it doesn't need delegate pay to operate.. looking forward to hearing them.
I did not promise to make this thing work - you did! I am here to  try prevent abusing the system while you work on that.





Do you mind answering the initial question though
What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?

Hold on right there... you just accused me and/or this project of 'abusing the system'. Active and present tense.

Justify in detail such a serious accusation.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2015, 07:10:08 pm »
How did I accuse you?

I just said that I do not intend to put a business plan for you and am not here for that [putting business decisions for you]. The only thing I do is make sure YOUR plans are NOT abusing the system.

And I ask the question 2 times...should I write a third time????????






What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?



« Last Edit: June 07, 2015, 07:11:40 pm by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2015, 06:44:28 am »
With this index proposal you make this thread more and more inappropriate for the marketing subsection of this forum and more and more appropriate for the 'other projects' sub...

And while every project that has some kind of tokens (IOUs) on the BTS platform is probably beneficial to  Bitshares. And everybody is free to do whatever he/she likes with the business she owns, imo. I do not find appropriate each such project to receive delegate funding. Projects such as yours getting such funding should be held to a higher standard and required a higher level of return for the BTS system. I am truly sorry to see it but the first step that you took to separate this pool from Bitshares was to private-brand it as 'bunker-mining' as opposed to Bitshares-mining. Now you propose some index with no clear benefits to Bitshares, and yet you have probably 70 posts promoting the 7 delegates to subsidize the project.

So

What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?


Significantly more transactions per day
Significantly more users
Significantly more volume
Additional Markets activity and volume in the DEX between other MIAs
Unique innovative approach available only through BitShares
Supports at least two other BitShares projects, MetaExchange and CryptoSmith today, and likely more tomorrow
Attract not just miners, but crytpo traders to BitShares
All our Delegate based bonuses and support would not be needed soon after this.



So what would you suggest that would make the pool continue without relying on delegate payouts forever?
What payout forever are you  talking about? You promised to make it the most profitable pool using delegate pay - you are months and months away from that goal (if ever). So reach the first goal before looking to change it to private self sufficient pool


To be clear, when you say 'you', it's not me.. its Rgcrypto, fuzzy, xeldal, and me that are all supporting this project. It was bytemaster and nethyb who ran this before me that made it into the most profitable pool and then got a delegate to continue that and get further development.. until the marketcap fell through and the amount of a 100% delegate didn't even cover the profitability part.

We are months and months away from that goal because we haven't gotten enough delegates voted in to get there. We are dominating in one algo, but not in all of them. We just don't have the funds. Thus the bid for the multiple delegates. It's not the number of delegates that matters, it's the amount that they can bring to the project to make it go forward. The low market cap forces this reality with the current system we have to work with.

Perhaps you don't agree with this, but my very first objective to becoming a 100% Delegate, it to STOP being a 100% as FAST as possible. Every plan going in to becoming a 100% Delegate, and I have posted this in the past, should have an exit strategy. I have lost count of how many times now I have repeated over and over that the multiple delegates are TEMPORARY.

I have no desire to occupy 7 of them for a lengthy period of time. I want this to stand on it's own legs and become the volume and user base powerhouse driver to BitShares I know, and many others here know it can be. This number of delegates is all going to be moot in the coming months. I have stated such in our bid. A single worker proposal would be better suited. We have no business being a witness for this project. Nonetheless, we are working with what is available with the system we got.

What you are saying now about reaching our first goal before going forward seems to suggest that we should just continue to suffer personal losses, take delegate payments towards the project that aren't enough, and just not do anything until we get the delegates elected? That's a plan for failure in my estimation, and will just cause this project to suffer a slow death.

Shortly after we took over this project, a 100% delegate pay floated around $10 a day. It's gone up since then thankfully, but with those amount of funds available, we can't even have a reasonable discussion with a developer about the things we need to get done. The response I have actually gotten has been a 'well lets talk when you get the rest of the delegates elected.. it would be at least a good start' << yes.. this in response to 7 100% delegates pay.

You keep repeating the number 7 as though its some massive number, and while historically its the highest ever (currently 4 100% delegates to btsnow is the highest), it doesn't really amount to much in terms of funds.We are working within its limitations of how the system works to get funded by the blockchain, and the reality of the market cap on what a 100% delegate produces simply is not enough. At the time we got our bid started, if we managed to get ALL of them voted in, we would realize the equivalent to a minimum wage payout. It would help with bonuses, but our development of the pool would have to be carefully staged with the limited resources.


At present i am operating at about a loss of $75 a day with this project which does absolutely nothing else but help bitshares.
I guess that is true, BUT I asked you how many delegates you need to make it non-money loosing for you and most profitable for the miners. You never answered that...my guess is far more than 7.


At the current market cap where it is now, we actually would be in the perfect position to move forward with all the dev needed going forward, and providing necessary bonuses while we grow.

Keep in mind back then I didn't have this index idea. The index changes the dynamics a little bit, because it makes the pool no longer rely 100% on miners pointing their hash power towards the pool. It creates a service that provides an investment vehicle for funds to come into the pool that contribute to our hashing power and allow us to grow faster and thus become less reliant on the delegate pay to provide sufficient bonuses to be the most profitable pool.

Again though, takes temporary funds to develop something like this that in all likelihood is going to provide no return for the pool, but will payback in multiples to bitshares.



 All the points you bring up as though this is a gone private project are misplaced.
No they are not!  Using delegate pay to just build the pool infrastructure and quickly replace the bitshares product (bitUSD/Silver/Gold) with some index of coins you fancy is not enough return for the BTS ecosystem. You may find it more than enough, I am just stating my opinion - it is not nearly worth 7 delegates.

This is a mischaracterization of the service.. and perhaps why your position is misplaced. Likely my fault for not providing more details to it, but I also blame the format of the forum to make it all disjointed. So lets clarify that.

The entire pool infrastructure revolves around bitshares no matter what.

To mine the pool YOU MUST have a BitShares account. No escaping that.

To get paid out, YOU MUST use the BitShares network.

This index idea provides a bridge for the rest of the cryptoverse to have an easier entry point into BitShares.

Keep in mind the index is created out of a UIA and will be actively traded against other pairs in the DEX. Not in Cryptsy, not in Bittrex.. the BitShares DEX.

What I read from what you wrote is that this index would be some external thing that is about all the other coins.. it's not. The mining operation mines these coins.. it's where all the revenues are generated and funneled into BitShares. Beyond that, turning every miner into a BitShares user regularly has orders of magnitude of value and return to BitShares. The idea of the index using the UIA system would bring even further exposure to these users about what BitShares has to offer.

The idea of the index is to give it a value that is more representative of the crypto space which we are mining. If I wanted to take the 'like everyone else' approach to it, I would not have an index at all, and just peg the UIA to BTC. Then we can continue to be happy little passive bitcoin maximalists that rise and fall with it like everyone else. This is a BitShares project for BItShare, so we need to go against the grain, and produce something innovative, and useful. If I was going to take the peg approach, you can see I opted to take the risk of hitching it to BTS. It's all moot now though, the MINING operating on an index value of the major coins we mine as well as other crytpo assets we support makes more sense, provides innovation, and is useful.. how useful I suppose will depend on the formula we eventually settle on for what factors we contribute to the index.

Please tell me what is nearly worth 7 delegates? Exactly what do you think 7 delegates worth at the current market cap? What exactly is the measure of worth you are referring to? Perhaps if we can quantify these I can better understand your concerns.


Integrating another part of BitShares into the operation provides a showcase to all our users of what they can do too with bitshares... you don't consider that marketing?
As I said earlier - there is some value in every IOU on the BTS DEX BUT -Not enough return to be worth 7 delegates!!!


Refer to my question above regarding the quantitative value of worth so we can start comparing apples to apples.

To further clarify the 'some value to every IOU'. I will say it again, the index is a service idea, not an IOU. You buy MINING, you get hashing power service as part of the pool.

For miners who are actively mining, for their payout to go into MINING and get additional hashing power on their balance means greater profitability for them from the service vs. having their balance just sit there waiting to be paid out.

Regarding this as some kind of financial product is misplaced if this was how it was taken.


Bitshares needs usercases and if there is any to be had that is actually working and producing results this is it.
Same as above - some value in each and every IOU - Not enough return to be worth 7 delegates!!!


Same as above too.. please share the quantitative worth of a delegate and what must be delivered in your estimation to be worthy. Others may not agree with it, but at least you have a chance to set the bar here. :)

You are welcome to make recommendations that would address your concerns and make the pool profit on its own so it doesn't need delegate pay to operate.. looking forward to hearing them.
I did not promise to make this thing work - you did! I am here to  try prevent abusing the system while you work on that.


I did not make a promise either. You just said that. However, it's abundantly clear I am working on this; hard. Of all the projects I am working on, this one is a big loser for me financially. My prospects for seeing money out of this project are slim. The push back on getting the funding we need to make it work, make it even slimmer. There is a good reason why the mining poolscape is littered with broken links to what were once mining pools. The profitability is slim and the odds of ROI extremely difficult to realize. The ability to innovate takes major development resources. Only pools that did any kind of 'innovation' if you could call it that, were veiled ponzie schemes. This is why THIS BitShares project has such an advantage.. we got this awesome system for providing necessary funding to create something that can innovate the space and make it compete in ways others cannot. All it takes is a vote.

Do you mind answering the initial question though
What are the benefits for BItshares using the index approach to justify delegate subsidy?

The right questions will get the right answers. Provided an answer to your question above.


My answers above are in Yellow.

Hope this helps clarify on some points. I can see there are some misunderstandings, which is to be expected since this is something that is completely new and innovative. For me I can see it all clear as day, but I know without going into very great detail a lot of that gets lost in sharing it in text on the forum. It's just an idea at this stage. Which is why I am still seeking feedback about the merits of the different options.

I have a programmer working on the new core platform for the pool that will enable us to support additional algos and coins while introducing newer methods of mining that will enhance our profitability. I have been operating the pool for about 6 weeks now and everything has gone extremely slow because the funds just aren't there. Despite all this, we continue to be the biggest referrer of new users to BitShares than anyone else by a factor of nearly 1000%. This fact alone in my estimation, says this is worthy of additional funds to grow.

Go to http://vote.bunkermining.com to find out how you can Vote for BitShares growth! :)
« Last Edit: June 08, 2015, 06:57:19 am by DataSecurityNode »
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline mangou007

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #22 on: June 08, 2015, 10:57:05 am »
Tough question, seems hard to find a good answer...
Every possibility has its for and against, password field is just the easier way around... But mining pool sounds really interesting and probably the best way to go as IMO..
BitShares French ConneXion, le portail francophone de BitShares
BitShares French ConneXion, the BitShares French gateway
www.bitsharesfcx.com

Offline Permie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • BitShares is the mycelium of the financial-earth
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: krimduss
Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2015, 12:55:12 pm »
This post from a previous thread is relevant to your profit model and is worth repeating here!

There is over 4000BTC in value being mined every day between bitcoin and all the alts, and we aim to capture 9% of that space in a short period with our plan and run it straight into BitShares.

You're aiming to capture ~10% of that market? Sounds pretty ambitious and I'm a little sceptic.  Att the moment, 3600 BTC are mined everyday (that's what I recall reading around, I would appreciate if someone would confirm this).

Also, only small miners will move into alt coin mining, if not, they wouldn't continue to mine bitcoin this far. Meaning I don't see a significant amount of people move from btc mining into alt mining, this situation can change however depending on btc price and mining difficulty.

That leaves us with 400 btc per day, which is already the ~10% you claim to achieve. That means you will make almost >90% of alt coin miners move into your pool? I want it to happen but I honestly don't see it happening. I know I'm doing a lot of assumptions but I just can't see where you took those numbers from.

Also, I know it's relative as I understand it's difficult to put a timespan on these things, but assuming everything goes well (you have the monetary support you need with your delegates, etc), for when do you predict this to happen?

Sure.. to clarify some points.. we are going to be supporting more algos including bitcoin. Large cloud mining operations wil point to various pools for profitability and distribution of difficulty control. Once we are established part of the plan is to seek out agreements with these operations to bring hash to our pool. They want to mine not just bitcoin but anyting else that will support more profitability... for example merge mining. That's where we will position ourselves. So long as we are reliable (bunker helloooo), consistent in our payouts, and of course profitable.. they will happily send their hash our way.

Smaller miners are mining everything they can that makes money. There is more agility in alts because they have often higher profitability at certain points than bitcoin. Same thing big or small though, be reliable, be consistent.. be transparent.. and be most of all profitable.. and they will point their hash our way. I personally know of a handful of small miners whos combined hash generate close to 80BTC a day who are willing to give our pool a try once its ready. There are still a fair number of 'small' miners. Would only take impressing those handful with what they see to make them talk to all the others.

That's all the push... then there is the pull.. we will buy up our own hashing power to boost our overall pool.. leasing, cloud mining, and maybe even some of our own hardware (gpu only.. nuts to buy any asic whatever today).


So to reach 9% would mean approaching close to 400btc a day. That's further along when we have a convergence of pool, exchange, and market. Nonetheless you can see it's quite reachable from a few vectors even earlier on in our pool only operation.

The prospect of mining REAL GOLD and REAL SILVER are going to capture a segment also that wants to move away from bitcoin and/or alts to get real assets. There are potentially new markets even who will see this as an opportunity and will want to buy hash power from us and/or perhaps one of our partner cloud mining sources to mine for real gold silver.

So am not just looking at the current market, but the new markets which we will create.

Hope that answered your questions.
JonnyBitcoin votes for liquidity and simplicity. Make him your proxy?
BTSDEX.COM

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2015, 05:24:25 pm »

Significantly more transactions per day
Unique innovative approach available only through BitShares
Supports at least two other BitShares projects, MetaExchange and CryptoSmith today, and likely more tomorrow
Attract not just miners, but crytpo traders to BitSharesSignificantly more users
Significantly more volume
Additional Markets activity and volume in the DEX between other MIAs

All our Delegate based bonuses and support would not be needed soon after this.




I will put it down in one more form for the benefit of everybody else reading it .

With your 'index approach' you stop trying to sell the main BTS product [BitAssets] and center on selling an IOU (and yes it is IOU, all user issued assets are).
The benefits for BTS go down return-wise, orders of magnitude by this change of priority. What is left is - how much transaction fees can your project bring to the Bitshares ecosystem.

You can claim 'Significantly more users Significantly more volume Additional Markets activity and volume in the DEX ' but the math on that is simple - to break even on 3  100% delegates, the delegate pay must be equal to the new transaction fee volume. Your 3 delegates will get paid 150 BTS for every round of 101 delegates [101 blocks].

With a fee of 0.1BTS, you must generate 150/101/0.1=14.85  ~~ 15 transactions each and every block to just break even...  GoodLuck bringing that much users/transactions...

In other words, changing the idea behind this pool from educating the miners of the benefits of stable bitAssets (i.e. selling the idea of bitAssets to them) to some pool that offer some services while using some features of Bitshares is changing the proposition for all stakeholders and makes the pool not worth sponsoring with delegates. That is one man's opinion of course, but none of your statement is convincing enough that I am even close to being wrong on this.
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: [POLL] THROW DOWN! New Payment Options - Who Will Win?!
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2015, 12:58:14 pm »

Significantly more transactions per day
Unique innovative approach available only through BitShares
Supports at least two other BitShares projects, MetaExchange and CryptoSmith today, and likely more tomorrow
Attract not just miners, but crytpo traders to BitSharesSignificantly more users
Significantly more volume
Additional Markets activity and volume in the DEX between other MIAs

All our Delegate based bonuses and support would not be needed soon after this.




I will put it down in one more form for the benefit of everybody else reading it .

With your 'index approach' you stop trying to sell the main BTS product [BitAssets] and center on selling an IOU (and yes it is IOU, all user issued assets are).
The benefits for BTS go down return-wise, orders of magnitude by this change of priority. What is left is - how much transaction fees can your project bring to the Bitshares ecosystem.

You can claim 'Significantly more users Significantly more volume Additional Markets activity and volume in the DEX ' but the math on that is simple - to break even on 3  100% delegates, the delegate pay must be equal to the new transaction fee volume. Your 3 delegates will get paid 150 BTS for every round of 101 delegates [101 blocks].

With a fee of 0.1BTS, you must generate 150/101/0.1=14.85  ~~ 15 transactions each and every block to just break even...  GoodLuck bringing that much users/transactions...

In other words, changing the idea behind this pool from educating the miners of the benefits of stable bitAssets (i.e. selling the idea of bitAssets to them) to some pool that offer some services while using some features of Bitshares is changing the proposition for all stakeholders and makes the pool not worth sponsoring with delegates. That is one man's opinion of course, but none of your statement is convincing enough that I am even close to being wrong on this.

Well it seems once again I have not explained things well enough. There are three factors which I have tried to convey that make this analysis you just resented based on faulty premises and therefore end in a faulty conclusion.

I wish I had time at present to get into these details.. but it will have to wait for another day. You seem busy tearing apart bitshares 2.0 atm anyways with foregone conclusions. :)

In light of the upcoming changes later this year, what I have talked about here makes even more sense and gives us more vehicles to getting off delegate pay sooner than later.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+