Author Topic: It seems we have no CMO anymore  (Read 4772 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MegaFarmer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Both of us who are currently elected are struggling to not get outvoted by Newmine's supporters. Because they don't care what's being done, despite everything they say.

Not true, at least for me.
I really like what itsik78 has to say about how he will handle the CMO position and I honestly believes he understands what FreeTrade is doing with his pre-mine scheme as much as other NewMine supporters do.
I will give him a fair chance to prove himself and not vote for NewMine on that one.

I wasn't talking about itsik. He's not "currently elected".

The point I was trying to make was that I support itsik on the CMO position and not NewMine.
So I do not blindly vote for NewMine.

Offline seraphim

Both of us who are currently elected are struggling to not get outvoted by Newmine's supporters. Because they don't care what's being done, despite everything they say.

Not true, at least for me.
I really like what itsik78 has to say about how he will handle the CMO position and I honestly believes he understands what FreeTrade is doing with his pre-mine scheme as much as other NewMine supporters do.
I will give him a fair chance to prove himself and not vote for NewMine on that one.

I wasn't talking about itsik. He's not "currently elected".
Meet you on STEEM

Offline MegaFarmer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
I think the key is to keep it reasonable and be transparent....

With the questions that are being raised against you and you not answering any of the critical issues, I think you are the last person on earth that should make a statement like this.

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Your answer implies you have not read my post :)
I'm currently getting 0.0 for managing the Charity Award.

I know it probably doesn't feel right to you, but I think it would be appropriate for you to take a fee for administrating that. I think shareholders would rather see the job done properly for a reasonable fee if they can be confident that the awards are being made well. I think the key is to keep it reasonable and be transparent about the funds.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline MegaFarmer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
I'm currently getting 0.0 for managing the Charity Award.

Isn't that what charity is all about? About not being selfish and doing something for someone else without financial gain for yourself?
This is exactly why I'm voting for itsik78

Offline MegaFarmer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Both of us who are currently elected are struggling to not get outvoted by Newmine's supporters. Because they don't care what's being done, despite everything they say.

Not true, at least for me.
I really like what itsik78 has to say about how he will handle the CMO position and I honestly believes he understands what FreeTrade is doing with his pre-mine scheme as much as other NewMine supporters do.
I will give him a fair chance to prove himself and not vote for NewMine on that one.

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
Well, to end this discussion, you finally get a candidate: MVTEcmoP92qAeS8nMmM41pQJxmMgeJP4N8
Read more: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1879.0

I don't think the CMO funds are intended for charity. Saying that you will communicate the mesage about MMC while handing out the charity coins does not justify another $10k / month to me.
I will wait for itsik78 his voting account.

Your answer implies you have not read my post :)
I'm currently getting 0.0 for managing the Charity Award.

And yes I'm opposing itsik78's approach thats why I stepped up.

Offline MegaFarmer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Well, to end this discussion, you finally get a candidate: MVTEcmoP92qAeS8nMmM41pQJxmMgeJP4N8
Read more: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1879.0

I don't think the CMO funds are intended for charity. Saying that you will communicate the mesage about MMC while handing out the charity coins does not justify another $10k / month to me.
I will wait for itsik78 his voting account.

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
Well, to end this discussion, you finally get a candidate: MVTEcmoP92qAeS8nMmM41pQJxmMgeJP4N8
Read more: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1879.0

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!

Neither one has delivered so reality doesn't matter, the bigger promise from the more convincing person should win.   Unfortunately picking candidates based on big promises paid for in advance isn't very ideal.  Would be better if there were daily or weekly awards going to specific objectives that could then be voted on, so instead of CMO it would be "10,000MMC to whoever is most successful at promoting MMC this week" with that many coins maturing every week.   Then everybody who wants a chance at the prize actually does work for the project, and the community rewards the most effective.
 

Sounds a lot like MemoryCoin 1 - the problem is that is really difficult to get that level of interest from shareholders to evaluate and vote on each project. I think proxy voting could help - where shareholders can delegate voting to people they trust, but still retain control of it.

I think your prize model could work - ABL announces he is running for the CMO role, and will award 10,000 MMC to whoever is most successful at promotion this week, minus say a 10% fee admin and campaign fees. Having humans in the loop makes it quite flexible.

I'm calling these hybrid solutions Proof-of-Value.  Basically the humans in the loop whether it's one manager or a reddit style crowdsource are determining and ranking the value of contribution as the proof of work for those coins being distributed.
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile

Neither one has delivered so reality doesn't matter, the bigger promise from the more convincing person should win.   Unfortunately picking candidates based on big promises paid for in advance isn't very ideal.  Would be better if there were daily or weekly awards going to specific objectives that could then be voted on, so instead of CMO it would be "10,000MMC to whoever is most successful at promoting MMC this week" with that many coins maturing every week.   Then everybody who wants a chance at the prize actually does work for the project, and the community rewards the most effective.
 

Sounds a lot like MemoryCoin 1 - the problem is that is really difficult to get that level of interest from shareholders to evaluate and vote on each project. I think proxy voting could help - where shareholders can delegate voting to people they trust, but still retain control of it.

I think your prize model could work - ABL announces he is running for the CMO role, and will award 10,000 MMC to whoever is most successful at promotion this week, minus say a 10% fee admin and campaign fees. Having humans in the loop makes it quite flexible.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline seraphim

Both ways work.
emre & s4l1h got elected cto based on what they already did.
I got elected cso because I announced to set up a team. Couldn't have done that without having the coins to pay them.
itsik78 also has good chances of getting elected for the same idea, again, he can only create a team when he got the coins.

Both of us who are currently elected are struggling to not get outvoted by Newmine's supporters. Because they don't care what's being done, despite everything they say. If they take the cso office and keep on saying 20% is enough, I won't be able to keep as many people working on support issues as there are now.

As we can see with the cmo position, people will get sacked when they don't deliver. Votes are counted every 2 hours, so it can happen any time.
It's the responsibility of the community to select a good candidate, or spoil the vote if there's none.
With only 3-8% of coins voting, around half of those voting for "themselves", and only about two candidates per office, I think the way the community handles this is much more of a problem than any existing candidate out there who is at least doing something.
Meet you on STEEM

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Who are you for tell how much value my work, and work of another people ? I've 40 y.o. and all my life spend to study and to work everytime in new big projects. I work some advisor and many big company in the r.l. pay me very much for my services. Of course, for unlucky people can looking very much, but it's not. Background have a value. Time have a value.

I agree with you and I know you're doing highly skilled work. $300/day is not excessive at all - about $100,000/year.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline itsik78

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
Really what needs to happen is people need to do the work first, then announce their candidacy attached to the work they've already done proving they are worth the time and money.   

This is not a perfect system, but it's much better than what results here which is people arguing over what they would do when really it would be better if all them just did it and then based on their results were voted on by the community.  Paying people in advance, constantly, 24hrs a day means that the person either has to perform IMMEDIATELY upon taking the role or risk someone else coming along and making bigger promises. 

Neither one has delivered so reality doesn't matter, the bigger promise from the more convincing person should win.   Unfortunately picking candidates based on big promises paid for in advance isn't very ideal.  Would be better if there were daily or weekly awards going to specific objectives that could then be voted on, so instead of CMO it would be "10,000MMC to whoever is most successful at promoting MMC this week" with that many coins maturing every week.   Then everybody who wants a chance at the prize actually does work for the project, and the community rewards the most effective.
 

I totally agree with that.
The current system, as we've seen especially in the CMO role, is flawed.
But there isn't much that can be done now (unless there are plans for MMC3...?) other than HOPING you are voting for someone that would actually perform.
Also, I hope that more people in the community will vote as it seems only a handful of people really care...
When that happens, the hammer will hit very quickly on the non-performing head.
As you say, it's not ideal, but still, that is the situation and we have to make the best out of it.


Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Really what needs to happen is people need to do the work first, then announce their candidacy attached to the work they've already done proving they are worth the time and money.   

This is not a perfect system, but it's much better than what results here which is people arguing over what they would do when really it would be better if all them just did it and then based on their results were voted on by the community.  Paying people in advance, constantly, 24hrs a day means that the person either has to perform IMMEDIATELY upon taking the role or risk someone else coming along and making bigger promises. 

Neither one has delivered so reality doesn't matter, the bigger promise from the more convincing person should win.   Unfortunately picking candidates based on big promises paid for in advance isn't very ideal.  Would be better if there were daily or weekly awards going to specific objectives that could then be voted on, so instead of CMO it would be "10,000MMC to whoever is most successful at promoting MMC this week" with that many coins maturing every week.   Then everybody who wants a chance at the prize actually does work for the project, and the community rewards the most effective.
 
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com