Maker sharedrop on the BitShares community

[Stan]

Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?

There are several good reasons why people might choose not to claim all their shares until the time is right:

• Awaiting better privacy technology
• Tax planning in some jurisdictions
• Waiting to get confident with a wallet that works for them
• Being too busy changing the world to mess with importing a bunch of scattered wallets from an old PTS mining farm.

So I wouldn't assume that those unmoved shares are abandoned or uninterested... 

[Rune]

Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it

Seems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.

Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)

Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?

Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said

I was joking - I know you weren't trying to "talk me out of it"

I think brownie.PTS sharedrop might be a better idea though, but as far as I can understand it is basically the list that I posted already? You get brownie.pts for attending beyond bitcoin hangouts right?

[Rune]

Which brings me back to...why not here? Or on both chains...or on your own DPOS Ethereum chain?

So the important thing to understand is that we didn't choose Ethereum, we chose the EVM. Ethereum is just the first blockchain implementing the EVM, and implementing it is something many blockchains could potentially do in the future, with huge benefits such as being sidechains with each other by default. Right now I know if at least 2 other public blockchains that will be supporting the EVM, and Maker will be able to move part of itself and all of its assets onto these blockchains as well, existing simultaneously on every EVM chain.

There are two main reasons for choosing the EVM 1) it is easier and more efficient to build custom applications like Maker there than in any other way (due to the insanely good solidity scripting language). 2) It is easier to integrate with, and provide financing to, other DAO and dapps that reside in the same ecosystem.

Bitshares is more specialized for providing specific, hardcoded and very efficient products like bitUSD whereas the EVM is a general purpose protocol that can exist on multiple blockchains. Perhaps at some point bitshares might implement it as well, but I have no real idea about the feasibility of this.

[xeroc]

Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it

Seems I didn't express myself perfectly.
It never was the intention to "talk you out" of sharedropping onto BTS .. I rather wanted to bring additional thoughts on the table.

Heck, I would definitely profit more from being sharedropped via BTS than I would with Brownies .. but that is not the point .. it is not about throwing away money ..
it is about reaching potentially interested people... And I am not certain that every BTS holder has a clue about what is going on with rune's maker .. I would even go as far as stating that brownie.pts holders are most active in the community (and you may want to sharedrop those)

Side fact: BTS has 393,395,829 BTS UNCLAIMED right now .. why sharedrop those?

Just thoughts trying to be as objective as possible with the goal to bring something new to the table ..
nuf said

[fuzzy]

IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.

Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)

Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.

Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it

I am 100% sure Rune would want to.  Strategically it would be a brilliant way to bring bitshares community members and give them exposure to ethereum.  Exposure means some of their time (and experience/mindshare) goes toward contributing to Maker and Ethereum.  This is actually one of the reasons we always thought sharedropping would be so valuable--astute people who want to compete will have a list of individuals on every applicable blockchain to recruit as a citizen (or far more).  The addition of human capitol to any project in this space--especially from passionate, intelligent contributors who pool in this sphere--is priceless. Yet another idea that started here
Which brings me back to...why not here? Or on both chains...or on your own DPOS Ethereum chain?

[Rune]

IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.

Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)

Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.

Don't worry - he can't talk me out of it

[xeroc]

Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.

Why would "not-being-sharedropped" ruing the BTS valuation?

I'd rather be as objective as I can independent of my personal position in terms of "stake".
Can I not put my opinion here? Does it not make sense to (at least) consider sharedropping onto brownie.pts?

Since rune does not use any of the bitshares technology he is free to do what every he likes .. no social "contract" applies. Even though I would welcome any sharedrop ontop of BTS, I am not so certain it achieves rune's goals. That's all I wanted to express ..

[fuzzy]

Don't forget that by sharedropping on the community, you are also potentially gaining substantially from the services our community has built (for instance potential for being listed on metaexchange and beyond bitcoin hangouts are just a couple). 

Out of curiosity, though...why not just build this on bts and try to compete directly with bitUSD?  It seems pretty clear that ethereum not as capable (at present) to compare with bitshares both on a governance side (ethereum needs it's own "foundation" while bitshares has implemented separations of power and delegates)...and that isn't even talking about scalability and throughout potential.

I'm glad to see you back too.  But am definitely curious why ethereum seemed the better choice, considering what you are doing and that our community would indeed be one of the most valuable places on the net for what you are trying to do.

[Ander]

IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.

Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)

Xeroc, stop trying to ruin the BTS value, and let someone sharedrop on BTS.
Seriously, what are you trying to do.

[xeroc]

Doing a sharedrop on the bitshares community is obviously something I have been
thinking about since the beginning of eDollar (which was basically "rip off
bitUSD and put it on ethereum").

I am glad to hear this. We kind of miss you here

That being said, getting the support of the bitshares community would obviously
be incredibly valuable to us. One thing I'd love would be be to just get the
critical eyes of this community attempting to butcher the mechanics of the DAI
cryptobond peg. But more crucially would be to get valuable stakeholders from
the only community that has real experience with the messy task that is DAC
governance. Maker will have some really complicated governance - such as a
futarchy controlling root access and upgrades/hard forks - so we obviously would
love to know that there are experienced and intelligent voters out there
participating in the governance process.

I am sure we can find some here ..

Wanted to read through your stuff anyway.

But in the end it all comes down to cost vs benefit. Many sharedrops in various
communities have been complete failures, but I don't want to give up on the
concept; it just needs to be carefully planned and thought through. Which is why
the only solution I can think of is to post here and ask for input - in what
could basically be an open negotiation of sharedrop specifications.

IMHO, because you don't really use any of the BitShares tech (software-wise),
I'd say there is no need to sharedrop at all .. unless, of course you want to
grab and motivate the bitshares community as a whole.

Alternatively, you may consider not sharedropping BTS but Brownie.PTS (the
tokens handed out by BM as an appreciation of work done for the BitShares
ecosystem -- disclaimer: I have some)

That being said, I think you may want to answer the following question to
yourself: What "community" do you want to reach?

So far the ideas I’ve thought of are:

Do a flat rate vested sharedrop to all users who want it from a list of core
community members, such as
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17895.0.html . The amount could be in
the order of 100 USD worth of MKR per person at current valuation, or something
similar (open for negotiations).
or

Give vested MKR options to BTS holders proportional to their BTS holdings.
Something like 1 year vested MKR at 25-50% of the MKR market rate, with a max
buy proportional to their BTS stake (e.g. someone who owns 1% of all BTS could
buy 0.1% of all MKR at this price, or something like that).

IMHO $100 is enough to motivate people to take a closer look at the concept and
give valuable input. However, again, please consider sharedroppping on
Brownie.PTS instead (@stan).

I’m open for any other suggestions of what you think is best for both sides. I’m
also open for individual negotiations with community members, if you have
something to contribute. Ultimately I’m looking to get value in return for
whatever we end up doing, and the most valuable thing would simply be
establishing a relationship between Maker and the bitshares community.

I like the sound of that. Imho we can learn alot from each other while not being
competitors. We could even end up having gateways/bridges to each others'
tokens.

I’m also open for ideas on other ways Maker and bitshares can cooperate. One
thing we are going to do for certain is to approve BTS as collateral for the
dai, so people can do BTS margin trading at the dai interest rate. Of course
this doesn't really offer any more value to bitshares than bitUSD already gives.
Another thing that might be possible in the future is to make a privatized
bitUSD backed by the dai, but that will need cross chain functionality first.

Wow .. that sounds AWESOME .. though I don't know how to do that technically ..
in terms of cross-chain collateral .. but I like the idea .. much love, every
collateral ...

[Rune]

Doing a sharedrop on the bitshares community is obviously something I have been thinking about since the beginning of eDollar (which was basically "rip off bitUSD and put it on ethereum"). Nowadays the project has ballooned in scope and has become a fully featured collateralized p2p credit and insurance system regulated by an autonomous bank, insurer and market maker (but at its core it's still basically "complicated bitUSD").

The problem is I have no idea how to do a sharedrop in a way I will know is going to guarantee that both Maker and the community comes out ahead. The trend so far has been either 20% sharedrops or nothing, but when our market cap is already at 2 million USD this would amount to us giving away 400k USD.

That being said, getting the support of the bitshares community would obviously be incredibly valuable to us. One thing I'd love would be be to just get the critical eyes of this community attempting to butcher the mechanics of the DAI cryptobond peg. But more crucially would be to get valuable stakeholders from the only community that has real experience with the messy task that is DAC governance. Maker will have some really complicated governance - such as a futarchy controlling root access and upgrades/hard forks - so we obviously would love to know that there are experienced and intelligent voters out there participating in the governance process.

But in the end it all comes down to cost vs benefit. Many sharedrops in various communities have been complete failures, but I don't want to give up on the concept; it just needs to be carefully planned and thought through. Which is why the only solution I can think of is to post here and ask for input - in what could basically be an open negotiation of sharedrop specifications.

So far the ideas I’ve thought of are:

Do a flat rate vested sharedrop to all users who want it from a list of core community members, such as https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17895.0.html . The amount could be in the order of 100 USD worth of MKR per person at current valuation, or something similar (open for negotiations).

or

Give vested MKR options to BTS holders proportional to their BTS holdings. Something like 1 year vested MKR at 25-50% of the MKR market rate, with a max buy proportional to their BTS stake (e.g. someone who owns 1% of all BTS could buy 0.1% of all MKR at this price, or something like that).

I’m open for any other suggestions of what you think is best for both sides. I’m also open for individual negotiations with community members, if you have something to contribute. Ultimately I’m looking to get value in return for whatever we end up doing, and the most valuable thing would simply be establishing a relationship between Maker and the bitshares community.

I’m also open for ideas on other ways Maker and bitshares can cooperate. One thing we are going to do for certain is to approve BTS as collateral for the dai, so people can do BTS margin trading at the dai interest rate. Of course this doesn't really offer any more value to bitshares than bitUSD already gives. Another thing that might be possible in the future is to make a privatized bitUSD backed by the dai, but that will need cross chain functionality first.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts