Please stop changing the rules of the game

[betax]

- I'm not sure there's any new BitShares toolkit? The toolkit BTS will be using is Graphene owned by CNX & if they want to sell it to start-ups or large companies I don't think BTS is guaranteed a piece of it?

I think that was originally one of the appeals of BitShares - that you would get a piece of lot of different DAC's. In a way Ethereum has picked up that mantle because they aim to make building Dapps easy and so as a holder of Ether you may get some value out of any Dapp that is built on it that ends up being successful even if 99/100 are duds.

So far, they seem to be "imposing"  the social consensus, but ideally it should be confirmed. A clear license would allow them to be marketed at higher levels, like Ethereum.

On your other Ethereum point, I totally agree with you, hence my other posts about a simple api / development for businesses / developers to built on top, together with the toolkit.  They can have the same model as Facebook / or other cloud provider, with a bigger incentive which are the referrals.

Regarding share dropping, BTS should benefit always. First they are the root (after the merger) for all the initial investors (AGS, PTS, BTSX, DNS, etc), we all can disagree on Follow my vote but we might get a surprise in one of the announcements.

Second if it does not happen, they will be root for evil FUD, (with reasoning) like Microsoft/
Third BTS (in general) avoids overall centralisation.


Brownie points should be make more clear, at least the how many are going to be distributed. The total supply, etc. This will avoid creating a market were people might end up upset.

[Empirical1.2]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's absolutely correct. The question investors are trying to answer though is what is BTS worth then?

I've previously described BTS as

Imagine if the founder of Microsoft left when it was still a struggling start-up, taking all the talent with him to form another company and then told Microsoft shareholders that they would now only receive a free windows license and if they wanted any further work done by Bill Gates or the talent that they would have to pay market rates. How much would Microsoft be worth in that scenario?

(Especially if Microsoft couldn't afford to pay market rates because it was still a struggling start-up and also paying off an expensive merger from just 9 months prior that it had largely engaged in to retain it's founder.)

If BTS has run out of money & the founder and talent of BTS have formed another company and will only work post BTS 2.0 for market rates. It seems like now BTS's main claim to fame is a free windows license (Graphene)

Nobody owes it/you/me anything it's just a question for serious investors of determining why they should put their hard earned money into BTS at this point.

For me the answer is that it's a punt that BitAssets 2.0, the good partnerships and the referral system are going to combine to rapidly gain traction and if they don't, it's curtains. So very speculative at this point.

Windows was not open sourced,  Bitshares is. I think the new licencing stops the likes of IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, or just an start up etc to come here, create a fork, deploy it internally and thanks everyone for giving me this free product. Bitshares can now longer live and developers can be sure that nobody will come up with a competing chain using the same code, hence removing their only way of living and passion.

They will make millions with this, excellent. Good for them.

Newcomers can get cheaper BTS than we did, well thanks for the Brownie points the active community will get some shares. I believe that is has been impossible to be active in the past few months before the 2.0 announcement as the ones in the know could not say anything, and the ones that did not know, there was not opportunity to help. (It makes me wonder why I was testing in DevShares for a while.)

They could not have told everyone that they were working on a better product, it will have been admitting failure on the first one (even if for me works..)

What I want to see is a new bitshares toolkit, with a licensing that is clear and you can pitch to the likes of IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, or just an start up.
For example 20% minimum to BTS, what is considered a competing chain and what is not. Examples of how to extend the toolkit etc. If it cannot be a new chain, but a valid addition to the chain by creating a hard fork, how you ensure revenue for the new company.

- Yeah, I hope they make millions, they've put in a lot of work these last few years.

- I'm not personally a fan of the Brownies for a few reasons I've already discussed.

- I'm not sure there's any new BitShares toolkit? The toolkit BTS will be using is Graphene owned by CNX & if they want to sell it to start-ups or large companies I don't think BTS is guaranteed a piece of it?

[betax]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's absolutely correct. The question investors are trying to answer though is what is BTS worth then?

I've previously described BTS as

Imagine if the founder of Microsoft left when it was still a struggling start-up, taking all the talent with him to form another company and then told Microsoft shareholders that they would now only receive a free windows license and if they wanted any further work done by Bill Gates or the talent that they would have to pay market rates. How much would Microsoft be worth in that scenario?

(Especially if Microsoft couldn't afford to pay market rates because it was still a struggling start-up and also paying off an expensive merger from just 9 months prior that it had largely engaged in to retain it's founder.)

If BTS has run out of money & the founder and talent of BTS have formed another company and will only work post BTS 2.0 for market rates. It seems like now BTS's main claim to fame is a free windows license (Graphene)

Nobody owes it/you/me anything it's just a question for serious investors of determining why they should put their hard earned money into BTS at this point.

For me the answer is that it's a punt that BitAssets 2.0, the good partnerships and the referral system are going to combine to rapidly gain traction and if they don't, it's curtains. So very speculative at this point.

Windows was not open sourced,  Bitshares is. I think the new licencing stops the likes of IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, or just an start up etc to come here, create a fork, deploy it internally and thanks everyone for giving me this free product. Bitshares can now longer live and developers can be sure that nobody will come up with a competing chain using the same code, hence removing their only way of living and passion.

They will make millions with this, excellent. Good for them.

Newcomers can get cheaper BTS than we did, well thanks for the Brownie points the active community will get some shares. I believe that is has been impossible to be active in the past few months before the 2.0 announcement as the ones in the know could not say anything, and the ones that did not know, there was not opportunity to help. (It makes me wonder why I was testing in DevShares for a while.)

They could not have told everyone that they were working on a better product, it will have been admitting failure on the first one (even if for me works..)

What I want to see is a new bitshares toolkit, with a licensing that is clear and you can pitch to the likes of IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, or just an start up.
For example 20% minimum to BTS, what is considered a competing chain and what is not. Examples of how to extend the toolkit etc. If it cannot be a new chain, but a valid addition to the chain by creating a hard fork, how you ensure revenue for the new company.

[Empirical1.2]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's absolutely correct. The question investors are trying to answer though is what is BTS worth then?

I've previously described BTS as

Imagine if the founder of Microsoft left when it was still a struggling start-up, taking all the talent with him to form another company and then told Microsoft shareholders that they would now only receive a free windows license and if they wanted any further work done by Bill Gates or the talent that they would have to pay market rates. How much would Microsoft be worth in that scenario?

(Especially if Microsoft couldn't afford to pay market rates because it was still a struggling start-up and also paying off an expensive merger from just 9 months prior that it had largely engaged in to retain it's founder.)

If BTS has run out of money & the founder and talent of BTS have formed another company and will only work post BTS 2.0 for market rates. It seems like now BTS's main claim to fame is a free windows license (Graphene)

Nobody owes it/you/me anything it's just a question for serious investors of determining why they should put their hard earned money into BTS at this point.

For me the answer is that it's a punt that BitAssets 2.0, the good partnerships and the referral system are going to combine to rapidly gain traction and if they don't, it's curtains. So very speculative at this point.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I concur.. this share drop expectations stuff is just nuts. These attitudes have likely cost everyone 99% of any future prospects of any kind of sharedrops that may have come.

Try going to a bank and telling them that you are entitled to their stocks because you had kept $50 in deposits in their bank the year before. Watch how fast you get taken out by security throwing the same kind of hissy fits we see on here.

They need to go build something for themselves and see how it is when the shoe is on the other foot and the mob screams to suck on your teet.

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.

That's a healthy attitude. All this "you-owe-me-something" culture is producing is disappointment.

Well said!

[pgbit]

Where's the summary of brownie points sharedrop? Missed the details...

[brainbug]

Don't forget, several people "continuously" have to sell BTS to fund daily living, etc.

[liondani]

That's a healthy attitude. All this "you-owe-me-something" culture is producing  disappointment.

The only thing that produce disappointment* is the BTS price drop (specially for the early investors)...
If the price would be climbing all these months I would "give a shit"  for the ... "you-owe-me-something" culture.


PS     and the suspicion that on these price levels the pressure could be very likely  the result of traders that have...  inside informations!
PS2   I miss you @tonyk

[xeroc]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.

That's a healthy attitude. All this "you-owe-me-something" culture is producing is disappointment.

Well said!

[Ben Mason]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Directly to the point. Well said. Let's get this sharing/gift economy off the ground! Let's incentivise everyone to give to each other and join the Bitshares network effect!

[fav]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jakub]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.

That's a healthy attitude. All this "you-owe-me-something" culture is producing is disappointment.

[d3adh3ad]

Identabit is using Graphene for their chain. They owe BTS nothing. They made an arrangement with a group of private devs called CNX to do so. These devs also owe BTS nothing. CNX chose to give BTS Graphene. Identabit chose to sharedrop. They didn't have to. Just like CNX didn't have to give BTS Graphene. Perhaps we should try to accept this new paradigm. It's my opinion that we as a community sound like whiny children right now. We do not own these devs or other chains that choose to sharedrop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[fuzzy]

These is not competition just fraud. First PTS, then AGS, BTSX, Delegates, now Brownie. Who Know what is next. As a post 2/28 investor I still collecting PTS dust. In development of these beautiful technology (fraud) I invested a lot. Result: few PTS. I even didn't received all BTS I need to wait December or something. Thank you. Now Borownie.Points is more valuable than AGS. Brilliant way for stealing.

It sucks you feel this way.  I am not even sure how many brownies points I have to be honest with you. I try not to look because I'd prefer to just keep trying to expand bitshares' and the dev teams reach.  At first I was concerned about the CNX thing potentially creating a conflict of interest but I actually think Dan's idea about brownies helped to solve that.  The only problem right now is that there seem to be few ways for anyone to get some other than going on a thread and posting what you believe you have done of value for bitshares (knowing you are going to be biased toward your own pockets, naturally). 

But in all honesty, believe Dan and the rest of the team ever intended to "steal" anything.  In fact, Bm actually gave a far larger sharedrop of the first BTS than was expected by social consensus...setting the precedent for others (Muse, PLAY, and DNS) to sharedrop above social consensus.  That is one example.

I think the REAL discussion we should be having is whether there should be other ways of getting brownie points that everyone from the community feels is within reach.
For instance, imagine if we had "social media quests" where providing a screenshot along with a link of yourself sharing content/projects from the bitshares community gives you a max of 5 brownies per day?

This way people feel like there is always a way to earn some.  Then you have an investment token and a token that can be easily attained with lthe accomplishment of various tasks.


*full disclosure: I also donated most of my btc after the 28th :/

[dritz3r]

However, with the advent of AngelShares we have a new obligation to do all we can to motivate 3rd Parties to honor those who built the ecosystem they are enjoying.  Our promise to promote, support and endorse only those 3rd Party DACs that honor our stakeholder's contributions is an important benefit that 3rd Party developer's get for honoring the Social Consensus.  To dilute that for future DACs would be counterproductive and contrary to the expanded Social Consensus developed in December.  This is being codified further in the Social Consensus Software License (SCSL) bounty.