The idea of to establish a BTS big shareholders’ club

[kuro112]

I wonder if there are even 10 people with more than 5m bts

http://richlist.btsgame.org/

specifically, 30, of the 30 a good 10-15 are exchange wallets (hot and cold)

[Akado]

Of course I would think a bond market is the ultimate feature and have been promoting it but since we wont have that anytime soon what are we supposed to be doing for the next 6 months? Just lowering the fees and dumping?

That's exactly the problem. Hodlers won't have anything to do on BitShares, for them it won't have any utility except waiting in hopes this rises in the future. However, like you mentioned above, we should do the opposite, instead of sitting down doing nothing we should bring value in to the system. A bond market is a win win situation for hodlers and traders. Boosts liquidity and brings utility which consequentially will bring more value in.

I'm too tired about these fee voting discussions, I wish I could just vote and get over it but I can't even access my funds.

[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.

Holding BTS at this time is all most people can do until the bond markets are built to make them more active. Otherwise people with millions of BTS can only dump and move onto exchanges where there is more opportunity because of the opportunity cost.

Without a Bond Market or something to do with large amounts of BTS then why would anyone hold? So we have to encourage holding until a proper bond market and prediction markets can be set up.

Many people, however, think discussing about fees is the #1 top priority....

Unfortunately yeah people want to cut costs instead of add value. I don't even think many people see the value of a gift economy or reputation economy because it's not in $ and it's not traditional markets.

The value of faith is critical though. Without faith BTC itself would have never have gained the value it has. Without faith the dollar would have no value. And people who can use the blockchain to prove their level of faith, can encourage more faith.

It's true that whales who have to lock up their BTS will not be able to pursue opportunities elsewhere. At the same time they'd be loyal to BTS and it would be provable. In a company the founders often don't sell all their shares or dump in the startup phase but I guess in blockchains dumping is encouraged in the startup phase.

I think we should gift the accounts who go against the dumping trend with increased sharedrops to offset the opportunity costs. Of course I would think a bond market is the ultimate feature and have been promoting it but since we wont have that anytime soon what are we supposed to be doing for the next 6 months? Just lowering the fees and dumping?

[Akado]

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.

Holding BTS at this time is all most people can do until the bond markets are built to make them more active. Otherwise people with millions of BTS can only dump and move onto exchanges where there is more opportunity because of the opportunity cost.

Without a Bond Market or something to do with large amounts of BTS then why would anyone hold? So we have to encourage holding until a proper bond market and prediction markets can be set up.

Many people, however, think discussing about fees is the #1 top priority....

[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.

Holding BTS at this time is all most people can do until the bond markets are built to make them more active. Otherwise people with millions of BTS can only dump and move onto exchanges where there is more opportunity because of the opportunity cost. Holding is basically what they should be doing in a bond market but since there isn't one we can substitute with Brownies and have UIAs. Also in this case it's a reputation economy, so it's not about speculation but about proving you have faith in the project which does have some value. The fact that you'd be willing to lock up 1 million BTS means you risk whatever those BTS are worth in opportunity costs, which now you cannot dump to invest in Ethereum or some new project because they are locked.

Without a Bond Market or something to do with large amounts of BTS then why would anyone hold? So we have to encourage holding until a proper bond market and prediction markets can be set up.

What are we trying to do? to artificially pump the bts price?(I don't think it will work) or to destroy brownies? Brownies can be created out of thin air but proposing to create 5x more for something like this, is madness imo.

We need mass adoption or we die, it's as simple as that. "Tricks" are not going to save us.

Hard to encourage mass adoption when you cannot hire developers. A higher price means it's more sustainable to hire developers to build features like the bond markets, prediction markets, margin trading, and other features which could bring the mass adoption you want.

Mass adoption is expensive and without a rising price how do we pay for it? We have a chicken and egg problem where you can't attract liquidity without certain features, and those features become more difficult to build as the price of BTS falls because those features are currently funded by dilution of BTS.

In Bitcoin people are encouraged to put BTC in cold storage. Early adopters aren't dumping all their BTC to buy mining rigs anymore. People seem to believe BTC will someday be $1000 again or $10,000. Without that faith and belief people would not be leaving altcoins with better technology to go into BTC. Would BTC have a market cap in the billions if not for faith in the future potential?

How do we restore faith in BTS? How do we reward the people who have faith? It's not a trick, it's what you do. When people who don't care about the future of the project have most of the shares then you get a very low price as they pump and dump. As for Brownies, if you believe Brownies are more important than BTS then isn't that a problem that a personal token on BTS is perceived as being more important than BTS itself? And how else do you reverse that if not by encouraging people to lock up BTS until it can be put to better use?

I say we should encourage whales to lock up BTS temporarily. If there were so many things to do with BTS we wouldn't even be having this discussion because liquidity would be there and the price would be way up. The fact is right now liquidity is not there and with these low prices, there does reach a point where it endangers the perception of the project itself.

[chryspano]

What are we trying to do? to artificially pump the bts price?(I don't think it will work) or to destroy brownies? Brownies can be created out of thin air but proposing to create 5x more for something like this, is madness imo.

We need mass adoption or we die, it's as simple as that. "Tricks" are not going to save us.

[Shentist]

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.

[luckybit]

Considering that I only earned about 30k working for BTS for 2 yrs, I don't think locking 1M shares up is actually "worth" 50k BROWNIE.PTS .. </opinion>

besides that, I like the idea ... but wouldn't want to be put on a "list"

I like the Brownies concept a lot but the inflationary use of it makes them worth a lot less! Stop throwing them around like that! To put things in perspective: I have gotten 8k brownies for my 2 years of contributions.

Are Brownies a currency or an asset or a gift?

If it's a currency then it has to be stable. If it's an asset like PTS then it's price doesn't really matter as long as it's sharedropped on. If it's a gift then none of this matters.

It would seem from Bytemasters own words that Brownies aren't to be a currency. It might or might not be an asset, and it appears to be a gift.  After the sharedrop the value will probably reset near zero just like with PTS so worrying about the price of it is really short term speculating and not evidence of long term faith in Bytemaster.

As for worth, what is worth more than having faith from whales? If whales have faith in Bytemaster and in Bitshares what is worth more than that?  Sure development matters but if the whales never have faith the price might never be enough to continue paying for development and the whole thing collapses. So you do need and want whales to have faith in the project, in Bytemaster's future potential, long term faith is better than short term speculation in terms of value.

30,000 PTS for 2 years of work? But if a person has 1 million BTS which they could dump right now but decide to use it to better Bitshares, doesn't that bring much more value and have a snowball effect if a few hundred do this?

But you can't get a few hundred to do this without having a fairly large incentive in the beginning. Just like with mining, in the beginning when people didn't know what mining was the rewards were high. Or just like with Angelshares which people agreed to lock up and initially were worth more than Protoshares.

[santaclause102]

Considering that I only earned about 30k working for BTS for 2 yrs, I don't think locking 1M shares up is actually "worth" 50k BROWNIE.PTS .. </opinion>

besides that, I like the idea ... but wouldn't want to be put on a "list"

I like the Brownies concept a lot but the inflationary use of it makes them worth a lot less! Stop throwing them around like that! To put things in perspective: I have gotten 8k brownies for my 2 years of contributions.

[luckybit]

The number of 1 m has accounted for 40% of 2.5 m .

 How much reward should be discussed.

I think  the reward could be  a little at beginning，for the BTS system operation no profits now .

Depend on others is inferior to rely on ourself.

The reward should be fairly lucrative in the beginning just like it was for early Bitcoin miners. The reward should decrease as it becomes obvious that having faith in the potential of Bitshares is producing rewards. The point is that if you don't have any faith in the beginning and you only develop faith in the end when the price is up then you're not actually taking the same risks as the people who lock up 1 million Bitshares today.

If you lock up 1 million Bitshares today you really have to be a true believer. No ordinary speculator would agree to do it for 50,000 Brownies which could ultimately end up being worthless tokens but that is the point. They would have to have enough faith in Bytemaster and in Bitshares to do the unthinkable.

If it turns out that their faith is redeemed then in the next cycle reduce the reward to 25,000 Brownies for example, similar to the reward halving mechanism in Bitcoin. You should decrease the amount of the reward tokens in every cycle, for every new generation of whales who play. The point is you want it to be that for each new generation of whales the amount of risk stays about the same in terms of opportunity cost.

So if BTS goes up in price the risk is not the same as it is now. If Brownies suddenly is seen as much more valuable the risk is not the same as it is now. Ultimately this is a gift economy, not a USD or fiat economy.

The nature of gift economies forms the subject of a foundational debate in anthropology. Anthropological research into gift economies began with Bronisław Malinowski's description of the Kula ring[3] in the Trobriand Islands during World War I.[4] The Kula trade appeared to be gift-like since Trobrianders would travel great distances over dangerous seas to give what were considered valuable objects without any guarantee of a return. Malinowski's debate with the French anthropologist Marcel Mauss quickly established the complexity of "gift exchange" and introduced a series of technical terms such as reciprocity, inalienable possessions, and prestation to distinguish between the different forms of exchange.[5][6]

According to anthropologists Maurice Bloch and Jonathan Parry, it is the unsettled relationship between market and non-market exchange that attracts the most attention. Gift economies are said, by some,[7] to build communities, and that the market serves as an acid on those relationships.[8]
Gift exchange is distinguished from other forms of exchange by a number of principles, such as the form of property rights governing the articles exchanged; whether gifting forms a distinct "sphere of exchange" that can be characterized as an "economic system"; and the character of the social relationship that the gift exchange establishes. Gift ideology in highly commercialized societies differs from the "prestations" typical of non-market societies. Gift economies must also be differentiated from several closely related phenomena, such as common property regimes and the exchange of non-commodified labour.

According to Chris Gregory reciprocity is a dyadic exchange relationship that we characterize, imprecisely, as gift-giving. Gregory believes that one gives gifts to friends and potential enemies in order to establish a relationship, by placing them in debt. He also claimed that in order for such a relationship to persist, there must be a time lag between the gift and counter-gift;

Daniel Everett, a linguist who studied a small tribe of hunter-gatherers in Brazil,[36] reported that, while they are aware of food preservation using drying, salting, and so forth, they reserve the use of these techniques for items for barter outside of the tribe. Within the group, when someone has a successful hunt they immediately share the abundance by inviting others to enjoy a feast. Asked about this practice, one hunter laughed and replied, "I store meat in the belly of my brother."[37][38]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy

[luckybit]

Luckybit I value a lot your opinions I just don't want this to be manipulated by traders and this is something that needs more thorough thought..
See below some replies to yours..

why establish a big shareholders club and not let every physical person to participate by locking BTS and reward them brownies (or even better another UIA or even better some bitusd) for doing so in proportion to their bts blocked and time blocked?

If you use another UIA it should still include a percentage of Brownies.  I don't know how it would work with another UIA which represents a basket of sharedrop tokens (including Brownies) so I would think Brownies is the easiest way to go about it in the beginning.

Brownies is the easiest way for sure in the beginning but changing the rules later on will not make people happy. Also there is always a risk of manipulating the price of Brownies since they can be used by people to get dumped once received by hedging opportunity costs. Market is irrational many times.

Locking 1 M for 1 month and get awarded 50k of Brownies is like receiving something worth c$830 for blocking something worth c$3,330 for 1 month...I know that I would definitely go buy 1m BTS on the market and bock them for 1M if I get awarded 50k Brownies and probably dump them as soon as possible...So I don't think this is a good idea since Brownies will become worthless..

You wouldn't get your Brownies all at once. It should be you'd get them slowly over time just as if you're mining with the maximum over a fixed period of time being 50k. If you're only in it for the dollar amount then you'll dump your Brownies but people only in it for the dollar amount will probably not want to lock up 1 million Bitshares for some period of time.

I Agree with the steady release of Brownies. As I said above, don't think that market participants won't find ways to mamupulate the price of Brownies..

Also who said it has to be 1 month? The amount of time could have a minimum and a maximum, and be randomly set so that you don't even know for sure if it's going to be 1 month, or more, or less. The length of time could also be a configurable parameter which gets voted on, but in any case once you agree to lock up you can't unlock it prior to the time limit agreed to.This is just a very quick idea.I am pretty sure others with trading bots and more sophisticated techiniques will find much better ways to manipulate the prices.. So this is the reason I would prefer people to receive stable bitasstes for locking their BTS than Brownies..

The point is if you dump your Brownies then you dump, but the person who doesn't dump would still have a better reputation than the person who does, and the longest locked holders could get additional UIA sharedrops according to the length of time they locked up. You can basically create an economy around reputation for being a whale supporter of BTS.

I think it would be more normal to earn 5% interest on the bitusd value of the locked BTS. For example, lock 1M BTS for 1 Month will earn c$15 bitusd. The question is from where the bitusd will be found?From the network reserve pool? Is this a good idea?

I don't think you get the point. The goal isn't to pay people USD. The goal is to encourage people to be long term holders by giving them additional future equity, sharedrops, opportunities, rewards, etc. So people who have a reputation for proving they are willing to lock up their Bitshares for long periods of time should be rewarded.

People who just want cash will develop the reputation for immediately cashing out and compared to the people who hold longer, they'd probably not have an equal reputation. So it's kind of like how with Proof of Stake the older coin age means something, the same could be for the amount of time you keep your BTS locked up. If you set it to lock up for 1 month then 50,000 Brownies, and if you go longer than this then you could get priority in sharedrops because people launching new businesses or who are doing sharedrops probably want people who will be willing to lock up and not dump.

Earning bitusd for locking bts is like earning interest on your investment in this case bts. A BTS supporter never touches a certain amount of BTS no matter what. I think they would want to receive some bitusd, bitgold or a stable asset for holding those BTS rather than playing the market again by receiving Brownies which one day maybe worth 1BTS and the next day 20BTS depending on the news at that time and market traders who follow close pump and dump..I do not want Brownies to get manipulated the way BTS have been manipulated by traders in the past and quite often actually. Imagine I am a whale and lock 5Mil BTS for 1 month and receive within this month 250k Brownies which I dump on the market everytime I receive them..After this 1month (or whatever period) Brownies would be worth much much less now so once my BTS are unlocked I buy up all the Brownies I previously sold and keep them and next month I lock less BTS. I end up with many Brownies so people think I am a long term supporter and manage to lock less BTS next month..This is just a very quick idea.I am pretty sure others with trading bots and more sophisticated techiniques will find much better ways to manipulate the prices.. So this is the reason I would prefer people to receive stable bitasstes for locking their BTS than Brownies..

When you attach USD values then it's a lot higher chance it will be dumped. The fact is Brownies can always be worth nothing and Bytemaster pretty much makes it known that the Brownies can also be taken away. The fact is that Brownies are Bytemasters personal currency to do with as he wishes. The reason my idea could work is because any of us could pile on our own personal currencies which we could also take away from people who have the reputation to manipulate.

And if they dump they could miss out on a sharedrop so with each dump there is an opportunity cost to consider. Is the money they'd get from dumping right then going to be more than the value of potential sharedrops now or in the future?

If they only hold onto BTS for a period of months and then dump their Brownies then they'll get less sharedropped on them. When PTS was in a similar situation not many people dumped it so history shows that this seems to work. Angelshares couldn't be dumped but PTS wasn't dumped until immediately after the sharedrop.

Imagine I am a whale and lock 5Mil BTS for 1 month and receive within this month 250k Brownies which I dump on the market everytime I receive them..After this 1month (or whatever period) Brownies would be worth much much less now so once my BTS are unlocked I buy up all the Brownies I previously sold and keep them and next month I lock less BTS.

The whale who dumps would be seen dumping. People could add them to their blacklist when it comes time to sharedrop or simply only add token holders to their whitelist who held Brownies for a certain length of time. The point is there are a lot of ways to punish whales who try to manipulate using the features of Bitshares itself.

As far as changing the rules go, the rules should be dynamic but it should be that when you lock up then anyone can value what you are doing in any way they wish. They can reward you with personal currencies like Brownies but it doesn't have to be Brownies. The point here is to create a gift economy around faith in Bitshares rather than to create a speculators market.

Speculators will probably lose because speculators who have the reputation of not having as much faith as others can be punished. It is possible that we can take away the sharedrops from them and let them buy and sell Brownies or whatever tokens. But when the sharedrop comes then they'll understand the opportunity costs at that moment.

So the faith element is the fact that you believe future opportunities of holding onto Brownies and these personal tokens will be greater than immediately dumping them. If you don't believe that then dump the Brownies. I don't see Brownies as being designed to be a stable currency and you should be using BitUSD if you want that.

If you believe Bitshares will someday be worth 50 cents or even $1 then you're the kind of person we should give bonuses to, whether it be Brownies or some UIA which represents a basket of personal currencies including Brownies. The UIA could be perceived as worthless and dumped but if the length of time you hold it can improve your odds or your sharedrop opportunities then it all works. If you show that you're a long time faithful supporter then you would get maximum sharedrops because these kind of active supporters are the people who make the blockchain run.

[luckybit]

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 ?

There is no bond market though. Also locking up isn't the same thing. Locking up is for you to prove you have faith in the network itself while the bond market is just a profit opportunity.

[twitter]

good idea ... but would be better to set entry point tat 1 Million bts.   

the club better to include at least 100+ ppl

[tonyk]

I wonder if there are even 10 people with more than 5m bts

In my estimation about 100 with more than 1 mil. so with more than 5mil? 
35-45 people I would guess.

[BTS007]

The number of 1 m has accounted for 40% of 2.5 m .

 How much reward should be discussed.

I think  the reward could be  a little at beginning，for the BTS system operation no profits now .

Depend on others is inferior to rely on ourself.