The idea of to establish a BTS big shareholders’ club

[luckybit]

i should we want a lockup?

i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.

we need active user.

I agree Shentist.  I'm not a big fan of locking up shares.  I mean I can somewhat understand the sentiment to try to artificially create a perception about the market value of an ecosystem, but is it logical?  Is everyone considering the unintended consequences?  It's like trying to discourage people from acting as they would normally and letting the free market work.   Why give favors or brownie pts or anything to weaker holders, non-believers, or people who just need liquidity compared to those newer believers, potentially stronger holders who would have better prices to buy in? 

If we are trying to intervene with the free market, we should create a BTS big trader's club that promises to buy & sell 5 million BTS in a month.  We should refund all transaction fees.  Locking up of BTS creates illiquidity does it not?

Also in the long run, we should probably favor those who use the platform more than those that just do nothing with it...(ex. giving more voting power to BTS holders that use it for transactions/transfers)....then BTS itself eventually might be used as a form of money in the distant future...

Fortunately the plan you're talking about has nothing to do with what we discussed.

Weak holders wouldn't be people who are whales with over 1 million BTS. At some point they believed or they wouldn't have acquired so many BTS.

At the same time if you purchase that many BTS and you're watching BTC go up, or Ethereum, or Storj, or Safecoin, or anything else, even if you don't believe in it at some point you're going to have to dump because the opportunity cost of holding becomes too high.

So the options we have is encourage people to dump so they don't miss the opportunities to invest in better newer or perhaps just rising older technologies, or we will have to promote loyalty. It's your choice.

There aren't any transactions for whales to put 1 million BTS to use. We don't have a bond market so they can't loan it out. The majority of people aren't going to risk trading 1 million BTS on an untested hard to use exchange even if they were professional traders and if they do trade they probably would only trade a small fraction while dumping the rest to put it on Poloniex so they can get interest.

There is no logical reason for someone to hold millions of BTS on Bitshares 2.0 for no interest when they can hold something else which gives them interest, unless they can know for sure other people are going to hold. Basically this is like game theory where if you know everyone else is going to dump you don't want to be that one bag holder who decides not to.

So if you have people locking their coins up then you know there are people like you who still believe, and who can't dump, and now you'll be more likely to lock yours up as well. The people saying Brownies shouldn't be used this way, wait what are Brownies for then? Are Brownies supposed to be treated as BitUSD? Were any of the people saying that around for Protoshares and Angelshares?

Angelshares was basically locked Protoshares. We don't have that anymore but we should and these ideas would basically take us back to that mentality but perhaps better because you'd get a reputation economy. When you mention the free market, a reputation economy is a market, a gift economy is a market, but it's not the kind of market you're used to so you believe it's somehow less than free?

In a gift economy no one is obligated to give anything to anyone. People feel guilty if they don't return the favor because in these societies there is the value of reciprocity. People give to receive, but they don't make any promises, and they don't expect or know how the favor will be returned. So it's not barter where you know exactly what you're trading for, but more like Christmas where you give a gift of some unknown value and receive a gift of some unknown value and hopefully it all balances out.

If you would like to dump and encourage others to dump then go ahead. Ethereum and Bitcoin are waiting. If you'd like to encourage people to hold then without a Bond market, Prediction markets or any of the use cases to make a person actually use Bitshares you're basically asking people to hold a lot of Bitshares and essentially do nothing with them, not even for Brownies but out of charity to the market so that people dumping can get better prices.

I don't think it's wise to punish the most loyal holders with low priced BTS and make them bag holders.

[Akado]

Isn't it exactely what the bond market is about. Loaning money and get interest ?
Any info in when it would be in place ?
If I remember well it's not a part of the recent BM proposal ? Why is that ? Isn't it one of the "big feature" we need ?

  I'm also curious where bond market development currently sits on the to-do list, it seems to have drifted off the radar...

Interested as well

[merivercap]

i should we want a lockup?

i want them to trade on our exchange. in my opinion it is not a good idea.

we need active user.

I agree Shentist.  I'm not a big fan of locking up shares.  I mean I can somewhat understand the sentiment to try to artificially create a perception about the market value of an ecosystem, but is it logical?  Is everyone considering the unintended consequences?  It's like trying to discourage people from acting as they would normally and letting the free market work.   Why give favors or brownie pts or anything to weaker holders, non-believers, or people who just need liquidity compared to those newer believers, potentially stronger holders who would have better prices to buy in? 

If we are trying to intervene with the free market, we should create a BTS big trader's club that promises to buy & sell 5 million BTS in a month.  We should refund all transaction fees.  Locking up of BTS creates illiquidity does it not?

Also in the long run, we should probably favor those who use the platform more than those that just do nothing with it...(ex. giving more voting power to BTS holders that use it for transactions/transfers)....then BTS itself eventually might be used as a form of money in the distant future...

[luckybit]

I think it would be less about Reward and more about Risk to most. 

The reward would simply need to help balance that risk.

I personally think this could be a browniable event.  Not sure, honestly, how bitassets could be given to whales who lock their tokens.  However, something like brownies (which I am fairly certain will become a huge sharedrop target), could be paid as a form of "interest" on locked funds.  But bitassets, if it can be done...would be great too.

Easy, each of us should think of our personal tokens as "speech". We then use our personal tokens to "vote" for the the people who prove themselves supporters through their actions.

So if someone is willing to lock up a million BTS, that is proof.  Then to confirm it we could vote for them by sending our tokens to them. Then later on we know the accounts who cared the most about supporting Bitshares as whales, and we can sharedrop on them later. Sort of like "Friends of Bitshares" or whatever.

It's not a promise of reward because we don't really know enough to say which among us will launch something great or be in the position to return the favor. Reciprocity is point of the gift economy though and that is essential to how it works.

Someone does something you approve of, you remember them, and in the future you do something to return the favor. It could be as simple as priority for certain kinds of roles or jobs or voting them as the proxy, or into witnesses of different blockchains, or sharedrops or whatever. By doing this we encourage loyal growth and faith in the future of the technology we are helping to build.

[luckybit]

I prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.

Brownies don't really promise any "reward". People can sharedrop on them though and let's be honest, the faithful supporters of Bitshares is probably the best target you can sharedrop on next to developers. So I would say if anything it's a way to target the sharedrops to precisely the people who are true believers.

But of course it's not promised that that will happen which is why it would take an act of faith.

If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.

Does the blockchain currently support locking it up like that? Timelock? If it does then why not use Brownies for this? What else are they for?

Additionally if any of us have personal tokens (I do), we can figure out a way to gift some of them to people who do this. The personal tokens don't express anything other than our gratitude and support for their decision. It's like a form of voting.

We can see the named accounts just fine, all it really takes is for one whale to go first, no scheme is needed.  I'm sure someone will put their name and balance in glowing pixels with a big heart icon right next to it for all to see.

Let your word be your bond, literally.

I think it should be more formal than that if we want to make it a real trend. I doubt people are going to lock up unless they can know their reputation is in the permanent record of the blockchain so they can prove they did this. So one way is we can just make personal tokens and all agree to gift them to people who lock up.

Not all of us will be in a position to thank them in the future but some of us probably will be. No need for promises but only intentions. We can intend to reward loyalty in the future and the tokens would be proof of their faith and loyalty.

[lovejoy]

I think it would be less about Reward and more about Risk to most. 

The reward would simply need to help balance that risk.

There's a loss of opportunity, for sure, in holding your funds anywhere.  Risk?  I think the risk is only if you think BTS will go to zero, or the project will die.  However if you believe this, you will not lock up 1,000,000 BTS purchased at any price, for any amount of UIA which will likely prove equally worthless in such an event.  So it's a moot point, as far as i can see.

[fuzzy]

I think it would be less about Reward and more about Risk to most. 

The reward would simply need to help balance that risk.

I personally think this could be a browniable event.  Not sure, honestly, how bitassets could be given to whales who lock their tokens.  However, something like brownies (which I am fairly certain will become a huge sharedrop target), could be paid as a form of "interest" on locked funds.  But bitassets, if it can be done...would be great too.

[lovejoy]

I prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.

If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.

And then what is "the promise of reward" and where is it coming from?

Do you mean, what's the motivation for holding without monetary incentive to do so?  Maybe I'm out on a limb here, but i'm suggesting honor and reputation alone... that's probably considered crazy and impractical in this crowd though?

I would perhaps suggest that holding for a (publicly declared) fixed period, at one's discretion, and contributing to the likelihood of a rise in price through shaping perception will be benefit enough in the long term, am I right?  I don't know.

You may call me a dreamer... but i'm also not a large stakeholder, so, my opinions cost very little in these latitudes.

[lovejoy]

This discussion needs to continue. If we can get the right pieces in place, it could really help BitShares. Bond market would be best. But if we have to wait on that, it may be worth trying this through other means. As opposed as I am to doing anything meaningful in Brownies, I actually think that they could serve as a good test market for this.

What is the rationale of limiting this to holders with 5M net worth? If that's mostly exchanges, then not much is going to be locked up by doing this. Might it be possible to include ANY sized accountholder? If it must be limited to the larger ones, then I would think a 1M or 2M limit would create a good-sized group.

Agree... I don't see any rationale in 'big only', anyone is capable of making such a pledge, and many small holders doing the same can result in an equally powerful sum of shares.

[donkeypong]

I prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.

If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.

And then what is "the promise of reward" and where is it coming from?

[lovejoy]

I prefer a voluntary, uncontrived pledge to one which is bought with a promise of reward.

If someone wants to pledge that they will hold their millions... let them stand up and say so.

We can see the named accounts just fine, all it really takes is for one whale to go first, no scheme is needed.  I'm sure someone will put their name and balance in glowing pixels with a big heart icon right next to it for all to see.

Let your word be your bond, literally.

[donkeypong]

This discussion needs to continue. If we can get the right pieces in place, it could really help BitShares. Bond market would be best. But if we have to wait on that, it may be worth trying this through other means. As opposed as I am to doing anything meaningful in Brownies, I actually think that they could serve as a good test market for this.

What is the rationale of limiting this to holders with 5M net worth? If that's mostly exchanges, then not much is going to be locked up by doing this. Might it be possible to include ANY sized accountholder? If it must be limited to the larger ones, then I would think a 1M or 2M limit would create a good-sized group.

[lovejoy]

Isn't it exactely what the bond market is about. Loaning money and get interest ?
Any info in when it would be in place ?
If I remember well it's not a part of the recent BM proposal ? Why is that ? Isn't it one of the "big feature" we need ?

  I'm also curious where bond market development currently sits on the to-do list, it seems to have drifted off the radar...

[fuzzy]

So that if there are 200 members who has 5 m BTS, the price of the BTS would be changed dramatically！

I still like the idea of luckybit's to open this up to anyone though who wants to play a role.

[BTS007]

So that if there are 200 members who has 5 m BTS, the price of the BTS would be changed dramatically！