Against FBA

[Empirical1.2]

One clear example of a good use case for an FBA would be a prediction market.

Augur raised $5.3 million to fund building and marketing their prediction market. https://sale.augur.net/
Augur have a specialist prediction market focused team of talent and entrepreneurs. http://www.augur.net/#team
Running a successful prediction market will take a lot of ongoing focus from that team.


Without FBA's

- BTS would not be able to get a miniscule fraction of that amount through dilution without crashing BTS so would struggle to compete with competitors without being able to raise funding for the PM specifically and directly.
- A prediction market would need to incentivise entrepeneurs and specialist developers, to develop market and manage the PM.  They can only be attracted and incentivised with a share of that specific business and it's revenue.

If the development is small and doesn't require a lot of ongoing management then as BTS has dilution (I'm not a fan) it should be considered but for larger projects FBA's are superior.

I say if you can't do with dilution you can't do with FBA, because the prerequisite to be a FBA buyer is to be a BTS believer. (is misleading the perception that FBA is bring more people on board, i think is the opposite because complicate things)

So by your reasoning BitShares can't have a good prediction market built on it?

Investing in an FBA or an independent UIA doesn't mean you need to be a huge believer in BitShares, just that you believe BitShares is a good platform for business.

Counterparty (XCP) for example has businesses that crowdfunded on their platform that are worth circa $5 million combined even though XCP is only valued at $1.8 million. So clearly you can attract new money if the UIA or FBA are good, and you have a platform that's good for business.

For example, some think a high performance blockchain like BTS would be great for decentralized gambling and they might invest in a decentralized casino FBA but they might not see as much value investing in BTS as a whole.

[theredpill]

One clear example of a good use case for an FBA would be a prediction market.

Augur raised $5.3 million to fund building and marketing their prediction market. https://sale.augur.net/
Augur have a specialist prediction market focused team of talent and entrepreneurs. http://www.augur.net/#team
Running a successful prediction market will take a lot of ongoing focus from that team.


Without FBA's

- BTS would not be able to get a miniscule fraction of that amount through dilution without crashing BTS so would struggle to compete with competitors without being able to raise funding for the PM specifically and directly.
- A prediction market would need to incentivise entrepeneurs and specialist developers, to develop market and manage the PM.  They can only be attracted and incentivised with a share of that specific business and it's revenue.

If the development is small and doesn't require a lot of ongoing management then as BTS has dilution (I'm not a fan) it should be considered but for larger projects FBA's are superior.

I say if you can't do with dilution you can't do with FBA, because the prerequisite to be a FBA buyer is to be a BTS believer. (is misleading the perception that FBA is bring more people on board, i think is the opposite because complicate things)

[Xypher]

One clear example of a good use case for an FBA would be a prediction market.

Augur raised $5.3 million to fund building and marketing their prediction market. https://sale.augur.net/
Augur have a specialist prediction market focused team of talent and entrepreneurs. http://www.augur.net/#team
Running a successful prediction market will take a lot of ongoing focus from that team.


Without FBA's

- BTS would not be able to get a miniscule fraction of that amount through dilution without crashing BTS so would struggle to compete with competitors without being able to raise funding for the PM specifically and directly.
- A prediction market would need to incentivise entrepeneurs and specialist developers, to develop market and manage the PM.  They can only be attracted and incentivised with a share of that specific business and it's revenue.

If the development is small and doesn't require a lot of ongoing management then as BTS has dilution (I'm not a fan) it should be considered but for larger projects FBA's are superior.

Can you define "larger" projects in this context?
The E-sports venture is right in line for a prediction market and I've had atleast 5 people give me the augur comparison. Even Bytemaster for that matter, but there's no way we can legitimately raise say 500k with a UIA due to the legalities involved. Maybe we could do a FBA . Maybe, but that's a slight possibility.

[Empirical1.2]

One clear example of a good use case for an FBA would be a prediction market.

Augur raised $5.3 million to fund building and marketing their prediction market. https://sale.augur.net/
Augur have a specialist prediction market focused team of talent and entrepreneurs. http://www.augur.net/#team
Running a successful prediction market will take a lot of ongoing focus from that team.


Without FBA's

- BTS would not be able to get a miniscule fraction of that amount through dilution without crashing BTS so would struggle to compete with competitors without being able to raise funding for the PM specifically and directly.
- A prediction market would need to incentivise entrepeneurs and specialist developers, to develop market and manage the PM.  They can only be attracted and incentivised with a share of that specific business and it's revenue.

If the development is small and doesn't require a lot of ongoing management then as BTS has dilution (I'm not a fan) it should be considered but for larger projects FBA's are superior.

[theredpill]

I'm the only one that think this is bad idea? I mean, I very appreciate the BM try to find a funding solution for things but this is so bad for BTS that for the first time ever I have consider moving on of this project, In the past after search all crypto projects at the time I end up here thanks of our community and values, and I would argue that FBAs are against both.

1 - Community or comum unity, our community token is BTS, creating other tokens means divide the community, make us not one set of values and goals anymore, now BTS have someone name in the chain and are in debt with then. If our value is to create a fair system, the FBA makes no sense.

2 - What the problem with dilution? - I mean, even if (is a big IF) that means a little short term drop in the price, if you are like me and really believe in the project, whats the matter? You can even buy some more at discount.

3 - Promises - Each token is like a promise, we cannot go on forever making promises upon promises to people, I understand that CNX have now little stake on the project, but this is not excuse for trying to use the BTS for making profit like that, to be honest I think is even disrespectful to old holders like me that lost more then 80% waiting things get done, now that they are, because of lack of capacity to approve things democratically, try to compromise future revenue streams like that. This smells like FED.

As an old stakeholder that sincere belief on the values of this project I urge the community to vote against this type of thing, BTS 2.0 is here and is great, now is time to democratize things, if we need funds we dilute, straightforward if we make money we burn, as one community, one token, one set of values. If you no matter who want a feature, raise the necessary approval in BTS terms, Will be my pleasure vote for you.

Let's price things in BTS not USD here please.

I would like to candidate myself as a proxy voter too, if you agree, my bts is theredpill.