Maker sharedrop on the BitShares community

[xeroc]

It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.

Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no-one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)

Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.

In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic

Just my thoughts ..

I guess having the possibility of a snapshot that could occur at any time would encourage folks not to leave their BTS on some external exchange and not to sell BTS even temporarily just to fool around promiscuously with other coins...

^^ THIS! but mainly because of what I stated in my previous post.

[Stan]

It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.

Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no-one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)

Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.

In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic

Just my thoughts ..

I guess having the possibility of a snapshot that could occur at any time would encourage folks not to leave their BTS on some external exchange and not to sell BTS even temporarily just to fool around promiscuously with other coins...

[Stan]

...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.

Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values  goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.

Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.

Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.

I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs.  Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even.  These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors.  That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.

Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.

I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.

Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.

In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.

Parable of the Generous Employer

I believe that anybody ought to be able to create whatever token of appreciation they like, and distribute it however they like, as a target for their own gifts or rewards. However, unless such tokens are non-tradeable and non-transferable, it seems that rewards dropped on such a token might spill over to those that have simply bought their way in rather than having made any genuine contribution or even offering any expected future contribution. Ultimately it could just become like any tradeable token as re-distribution in the secondary market over time dominates any initial or primary distribution. However its only early days for BROWNIES yet, so at this stage the distribution is probably very close to initial.

That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.

BM has said that anyone who buys Brownie.PTS is also a genuine contributor by giving value to what others have earned. 

So anyone can contribute by doing appreciated work or paying cash to indicate that you
appreciate tokens of appreciation enough to make them appreciate appreciably.

[xeroc]

But what I also meant with Brownie competing against BTS value is the direct price pressure from people selling BTS for Brownie.

True .. but a) that is free market .. and b) people wanting BROWNIES must first buy BTS

[triox]

It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.

In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic

Just my thoughts ..

I agree. The fact that the IDentbit has not set a snapshot date to a day prior to the announcement tells me that so far it's mainly a clever price pumping scheme.

But what I also meant with Brownie competing against BTS value is the direct price pressure from people selling BTS for Brownie.

[xeroc]

It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.

Actually there is one argument AGAINST using BTS as sharedrop target no-one brought up yet:
If you can recall PTS prices, what exactly happened after 28th of february last year?
BTS(X) market cap was effectively taken out of the PTS market cap at the time of the snapshot and the priced tanked big time.
Because BTS are used as collateral, this may result in ... you guess it .. a black swan (of course only if the airdropping market cap is large vs. BTS's market cap)

Also, IMHO, the goal of a snapshot is NOT to drive the price up (because it will go down again eventually) .... but to honor a community.

In my opinion, snapshots nowadays only make sense if you do them without further notice .. that way you
* do not drive price up
* prevent a price tanking at the time of the snapshot
* while you are still able to drop on your valuable demographic

Just my thoughts ..

[triox]

That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.

- You payed BTS to someone that BM appreciates
- you can not use BROWNIES as collateral (even though I like the sound if this idea) - hence, no competition to BTS .. just a different "community"/"use base"

It clearly IS competing against BTS as a sharedrop target and against BTS market value.

[xeroc]

That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.

- You payed BTS to someone that BM appreciates
- you can not use BROWNIES as collateral (even though I like the sound if this idea) - hence, no competition to BTS .. just a different "community"/"use base"

[triox]

...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.

Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values  goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.

Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.

Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.

I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs.  Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even.  These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors.  That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.

Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.

I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.

Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.

In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.

Parable of the Generous Employer

I believe that anybody ought to be able to create whatever token of appreciation they like, and distribute it however they like, as a target for their own gifts or rewards. However, unless such tokens are non-tradeable and non-transferable, it seems that rewards dropped on such a token might spill over to those that have simply bought their way in rather than having made any genuine contribution or even offering any expected future contribution. Ultimately it could just become like any tradeable token as re-distribution in the secondary market over time dominates any initial or primary distribution. However its only early days for BROWNIES yet, so at this stage the distribution is probably very close to initial.

That's a good point. The Brownie story only makes sense if they are non-transferable.
I myself have some Brownies, even though:
a) Bytemaster never gave any to me and probably doesn't "appreciate" me at all at this point
b) my "contributions" mainly consist of bitching on the forum
How does that fit the bill of most active and valuable demographic. As long as Brownies are tradeable they're a direct competition to BTS.

[starspirit]

...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.

Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values  goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.

Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.

Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.

I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs.  Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even.  These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors.  That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.

Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.

I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.

Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.

In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.

Parable of the Generous Employer

I believe that anybody ought to be able to create whatever token of appreciation they like, and distribute it however they like, as a target for their own gifts or rewards. However, unless such tokens are non-tradeable and non-transferable, it seems that rewards dropped on such a token might spill over to those that have simply bought their way in rather than having made any genuine contribution or even offering any expected future contribution. Ultimately it could just become like any tradeable token as re-distribution in the secondary market over time dominates any initial or primary distribution. However its only early days for BROWNIES yet, so at this stage the distribution is probably very close to initial.

Also, any issuer of a share drop can use whatever system they believe best suits their purpose. However, if the distribution of the target tokens on which the share drop will occur is highly discretionary and controlled by a different entity, there is at least some risk of ending up with distribution outcomes that don't match the original intentions of the share-dropper. It might be best to use a historic date to prevent such unexpected changes. So although there is never a perfect system and some compromise is always necessary, I expect these factors would all be considered carefully.

[clayop]

 

[Empirical1.2]

Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values  goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and   it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.

Careful, you don't want to lose your brownies...   

I may also seize brownie points from any account if you fall out of favor and anyone who complains in any way about how Brownie Points are issued or how I use Brownie Points is certainly not in my favor and may lose any Brownie Points they have earned.

 

[Stan]

...
I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.

Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values  goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.

Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.

Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.

I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs.  Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even.  These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors.  That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.

Since Underwood desires to give extra recognition to boost the enthusiasm of active contributors
And Dan's thank you note ledger is the most comprehensive quantitative documentation of such people that exists
Then it makes total sense for John to make use of that demographic mailing list.

I can't think of a better criteria for who should get a share than those who helped build the ecosystem.
The challenge is in determining how helpful each someone has been to the cause.
This is inherently subjective in any application where there is a wide range of ways in which supporters contribute.
There is no pre-defined formula that is sufficiently complete.

Managers seeking to acknowledge contributors to their mission always have this problem.
The brownie method is more open and quantitative than most performance reviews I have had in my career.

In the end, such things don't have to meet any criteria other than what suits the giver of the gift.
In this case, Underwood decided that Bytemaster's thank you note system was as good a metric as any.

Parable of the Generous Employer

[lil_jay890]

To put this in the nicest terms possible: have you people completely lost your fucking minds? Suggesting a sharedrop on ancient "AGS/PTS" that's supposed to be abandoned and worthless, and on BM's stupid toy that he has absolute control over ??

And how does that even make any logical sense? PTS is the demographic of random Chinese miners, and AGS are people who once invested in something two years ago, woo-hoo. How does sharedroping on them accomplish anything from Rune's POV?

I could maybe understand targeting some true community token, if we had anything like that, a'la LTBcoin - at least LTB has strict and known rules on it's releasing. But this "Brownie" nonsense is a centralized private monstrosity doled out by one capricious guy who can recall them from anyone at any point or assign 99% extra supply to himself.

Now this joke of a coin gets a sharedrop from Underwood's project and the gullible idiots are cheering because they feel they're part of the inside club. All this talk about openness and inclusivity and community values  goes out the window when there's a glimmer of chance for some extra cream from some hypothetical vapour of a project.
I've been here for over a year and it's like every step of the way this community is begging to both get themselves fleeced and further tank the project's perception and price.

Agree completely. Dan talked so much of freedom and decentralization... This brownie distribution that he has 100% control of flies in the face of much of what he has preached.

Brownies may have a place for dans or cryptonomex projects, but they should not be considered as a viable target for outside projects.

I think everyone's tune would be much different if bts cap was around the highs.  Some people are so underwater on their bts investment that they would cut off their left ear to get back to even.  These deals represent a light of hope for ill timed investors.  That light seems to be blinding many of their original Bitshares principles.

[Ander]

To put this in the nicest terms possible: have you people completely lost your fucking minds? Suggesting a sharedrop on ancient "AGS/PTS" that's supposed to be abandoned and worthless, and on BM's stupid toy that he has absolute control over ??

And how does that even make any logical sense? PTS is the demographic of random Chinese miners, and AGS are people who once invested in something two years ago, woo-hoo. How does sharedroping on them accomplish anything from Rune's POV?

I agree.

Also, by sharedropping on PTS you get to give free shares to cryptsy, who will steal the drop from their users.