Author Topic: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk  (Read 1780 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« on: June 15, 2015, 07:30:11 pm »
Why in the hell would anyone lock those threads?

This is why I go to bitcointalk to post this stuff. Or you can let the discussion continue here.

Offline onceuponatime

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #1 on: June 15, 2015, 07:33:55 pm »

This thread should be locked too.

There is now consolidation into one new thread:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16953.0.html

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2015, 07:43:57 pm »
BitShares greed 2.0 post coming soon on Bitcointalk.

Offline bytemaster

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2015, 07:49:12 pm »
BitShares greed 2.0 post coming soon on Bitcointalk.

Only person greedy around here is you newmine.    Everything the BitShares team has done has been given away as public domain even though every single person working on it received below market wages the entire time.   
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 klosure

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2015, 07:54:12 pm »
Why in the hell would anyone lock those threads?

Questionning if we want to adopt Graphene is not allowed.
Bytemaster already decided that we must adopt Graphene and become Cryptonomex' bitch.
If that doesn't prove my point, I don't know what does.
Wake up people.

Offline Riverhead

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2015, 07:59:35 pm »
Why in the hell would anyone lock those threads?

Questionning if we want to adopt Graphene is not allowed.
Bytemaster already decided that we must adopt Graphene and become Cryptonomex' bitch.
If that doesn't prove my point, I don't know what does.
Wake up people.

The thread was locked and consolidated which is much different than being deleted. It's all still there for anyone to read or post in the consolidated thread. Klosure you have demonstrated yourself to be well versed in the legalities and have fielded the slings and arrows in your Wake Up thread with facts and composure. Please don't play the victim now.

Offline fav

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4272
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2015, 08:01:31 pm »
This is why I go to bitcointalk to post this stuff. Or you can let the discussion continue here.

well, good bye and good luck. hope bitcointalk is a better place for you :)

btw, threatening to open a bitcointalk thread? do you expect anyone to be shocked now?

Join us on Telegram: https://t.me/btstalk

Offline cass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4311
  • /(┬.┬)\
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2015, 08:09:19 pm »
Could we please calm down and working together to get the best solution out for all involved parties! Pls do me this favour...

Quote
Klosure you have demonstrated yourself to be well versed in the legalities

indeed +5%
█║▌║║█  - - -  The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear  - - -  █║▌║║█

Offline cass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4311
  • /(┬.┬)\
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2015, 08:10:07 pm »
This is why I go to bitcointalk to post this stuff. Or you can let the discussion continue here.

well, good bye and good luck. hope bitcointalk is a better place for you :)

btw, threatening to open a bitcointalk thread? do you expect anyone to be shocked now?



this doesn't help here...
█║▌║║█  - - -  The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear  - - -  █║▌║║█

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2015, 08:12:33 pm »
Newmine & klosure, you both assume your interpretation of the situation is correct. The community has had a chance to digested the discussion you've worked hard to frame. Bravo. It would be great if you could at least try to see this situation from a different perspective.

I've listened to your arguments and I fail to see greed or impropriety.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2015, 08:19:17 pm »
BitShares greed 2.0 post coming soon on Bitcointalk.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2015, 09:41:35 pm »
Newmine & klosure, you both assume your interpretation of the situation is correct. The community has had a chance to digested the discussion you've worked hard to frame. Bravo. It would be great if you could at least try to see this situation from a different perspective.

I've listened to your arguments and I fail to see greed or impropriety.
when and where have I assumed anything? I am only asking questions, like wtf is cryptonomex?

Offline Pheonike

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2015, 09:57:31 pm »
"It looks like we funded the BitShares team to develop a proprietary toolkit software where all profits from this will not benefit the BTS holder but in fact destroy them?"

This sounds like an assumption to me.

Offline Riverhead

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2015, 10:04:06 pm »
"It looks like we funded the BitShares team to develop a proprietary toolkit software where all profits from this will not benefit the BTS holder but in fact destroy them?"

This sounds like an assumption to me.
Don't you watch the news? Put a question mark at the end and you say anything with impunity 8)

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2015, 10:05:54 pm »
Newmine & klosure, you both assume your interpretation of the situation is correct. The community has had a chance to digested the discussion you've worked hard to frame. Bravo. It would be great if you could at least try to see this situation from a different perspective.

I've listened to your arguments and I fail to see greed or impropriety.
when and where have I assumed anything? I am only asking questions, like wtf is cryptonomex?

BitShares greed 2.0 post coming soon on Bitcointalk.
You state here quite clearly that you believe the the motivation for forming Cryptonomex and the decisions around how Graphene will be deployed is the result of greed. That is an assumption because you have no empirical evidence for that, just suspicion. I've got no problem with you asking the questions, I just wish you could re-evaluate your perspective. Ok, so you are still not convinced as I am, fair enough. But assuming everything is the result of greed when BM has tried to explain the position the devs are in is not constructive and is unnecessarily discourteous.

Tuck Fheman

  • Guest
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2015, 10:52:38 pm »
BitShares greed 2.0

Proof of Greed (PoG) ... 57:25 bytemaster ... oh wait, from my point of view, that sounded like the exact opposite of greed. PoG haz failed. =/

ProTip : When attempting to lower the market price, you must use more than one sentence. Those old 2012 tactics don't play any longer. In 2015 you need at least 5 paragraphs, possibly a few diagrams or catchy FUD meme's to draw the attention of the ADD'rs (allegedly) and links! Links are the most important tool. You must link back to previous FUD post, FUD images, FUDsters, etc to back up the claims. Only those willing to do the work will ever figure out the master plan, and the others will simply accept what you say as, "could be true", which as we know is enough to prevent that buy or encourage that sell. Anyway, you've always been one of our champs here, but we see your batting avg slipping a bit, so we thought you could use a some batting tips to get you back up to .300. ;)



Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2015, 12:01:23 am »
Newmine & klosure, you both assume your interpretation of the situation is correct. The community has had a chance to digested the discussion you've worked hard to frame. Bravo. It would be great if you could at least try to see this situation from a different perspective.

I've listened to your arguments and I fail to see greed or impropriety.
when and where have I assumed anything? I am only asking questions, like wtf is cryptonomex?

BitShares greed 2.0 post coming soon on Bitcointalk.
You state here quite clearly that you believe the the motivation for forming Cryptonomex and the decisions around how Graphene will be deployed is the result of greed. That is an assumption because you have no empirical evidence for that, just suspicion. I've got no problem with you asking the questions, I just wish you could re-evaluate your perspective. Ok, so you are still not convinced as I am, fair enough. But assuming everything is the result of greed when BM has tried to explain the position the devs are in is not constructive and is unnecessarily discourteous.

Here is what I know as fact:

Invictus Innovations asked for money for Quixote/Keyhotee
Invictus innovations asked for money for AGS instead of POW mining
Invictus Innovations asked for Developer pay by diluting BTS through the merger and delgate pay
Cryptonomex, formerly Invictus Inovations is now asking for taking monetary supplements using the product BTS paid for before BTS holders ever got a final stable product.

Side note, if Bytemaster and team have been working on Cryptonomex while we have been waiting for 1.0, while a lot of people lost money with the "short rules", while price stagnated amidst many promises of marketing to come, while promise that never came to fruition came and passed, then I see a huge problem with motivation and trust in certain individuals. If any of this has been addressed, please point me to the thread.



All this

Offline Pheonike

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2015, 12:12:07 am »


Could you tell us who has the gun to your head to keep you here? And since we are about "questions", Why haven't they pulled the trigger yet?

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2015, 03:55:39 am »
Newmines questions are not without merit

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo
Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2015, 04:50:52 am »
Newmine & klosure, you both assume your interpretation of the situation is correct. The community has had a chance to digested the discussion you've worked hard to frame. Bravo. It would be great if you could at least try to see this situation from a different perspective.

I've listened to your arguments and I fail to see greed or impropriety.
when and where have I assumed anything? I am only asking questions, like wtf is cryptonomex?

BitShares greed 2.0 post coming soon on Bitcointalk.
You state here quite clearly that you believe the the motivation for forming Cryptonomex and the decisions around how Graphene will be deployed is the result of greed. That is an assumption because you have no empirical evidence for that, just suspicion. I've got no problem with you asking the questions, I just wish you could re-evaluate your perspective. Ok, so you are still not convinced as I am, fair enough. But assuming everything is the result of greed when BM has tried to explain the position the devs are in is not constructive and is unnecessarily discourteous.

Here is what I know as fact:

Invictus Innovations asked for money for Quixote/Keyhotee
Invictus innovations asked for money for AGS instead of POW mining
Invictus Innovations asked for Developer pay by diluting BTS through the merger and delgate pay
Cryptonomex, formerly Invictus Inovations is now asking for taking monetary supplements using the product BTS paid for before BTS holders ever got a final stable product.

Side note, if Bytemaster and team have been working on Cryptonomex while we have been waiting for 1.0, while a lot of people lost money with the "short rules", while price stagnated amidst many promises of marketing to come, while promise that never came to fruition came and passed, then I see a huge problem with motivation and trust in certain individuals. If any of this has been addressed, please point me to the thread.



All this
As you probably know I am a founder and I contributed PTS from the beginning, not much as I didn't have a great deal at the time. Then I contributed much more during the AGS fundraiser. Here's what I know;

Invictus wanted to build systems that helped people protect life, liberty & property. That journey has been a learning curve and at several points they've had to adapt or fail. When BitsharesX was launched any founder or AGS donator could have walked with several times the value of their donation. Those that stayed or bought in later have been through some difficult months.....a collapse in the price and a product that wasn't completely ready for mass adoption (you might recall the pressure for release.) So then we have funding issues and a conflict of interest, first leading to the merger and then the present situation. There is no escaping the fact that development has not been adequately funded for quite some time. The product was not in a fit state to adequately grow the network and build up the price and no money coming in. So they motivated themselves by adapting yet again by building Graphene. They gave themselves a toolkit they could use to generate extra income whilst at the same time enhancing the Bitshares code and protecting Bitshares from the clone wars, no easy accomplishment. Ultimately, they will have improved the Bitshares network (assuming Graphene delivers) and enabled it to continue in a way that is more befitting of the decentralised principal. As several community members have pointed out, once Graphene has enabled Bitshares to grow, it would be possible to completely rewrite the code....and any stakeholder at that point is likely to be in profit. The most important thing for me is that the project continues as it is so far the best chance in crypto to build a corruption resistant economy. That is why I stay and hold.

Added....
The marketing that has been promise could only come with the deployment of graphene's features. If Graphene delivers, no failure there.
Those that lost out shorting I really hope we can make whole by creating a bond market fund. They did take risks.
Building Graphene was a more effective means of keeping the project alive than building Bitshares 1.0.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2015, 05:04:22 am by Ben Mason »

Offline Pheonike

Re: I guess I am going to have to go to BitcoinTalk
« Reply #20 on: June 16, 2015, 04:03:56 pm »
Newmines questions are not without merit

They are more like accusations with quest marks at the end. Newmine only ask to question,

"I'm right?"
"Everyone else is wrong?"