No dilution. Now what? Everyone anti dilution please report.

[cube]

I still didn't get a decent reply about what to do. No plan whatsoever. Nice 

You probably getting a better response with a translated post to the Chinese board.  Perhaps wildpig can help?

[Samupaha]

I still didn't get a decent reply about what to do. No plan whatsoever. Nice 

I think we can now safely ignore the antidilution comments.

[Akado]

I still didn't get a decent reply about what to do. No plan whatsoever. Nice 

[Akado]

I'm not anti-dilution, but I am anti-dilution for now.

Akado, you said that if we don't dilute then the only way the price goes up is as the result of a pump.

Based on what I recall about Bitcoin's growth, the only time a new higher bottom was ever established was in the aftermath of a giant pump. Bitcoin only starting hanging consistently above 255 after the pump above a thousand dollars, for the most recent example.

I believe giant pumps are good. They bring more attention to the coin and motivate new people to hold in the hopes of moonglory.

Here is what I see happening if we lay off the dilution for a while:

Development may stagnant for a while and be limited to what people are willing to contribute voluntarily. The project doesn't die. We employ patience. During this time speculators become more confident that they won't be buying into just an ATM for the devs (and their sponsors). Given enough time, there will be a new pump or two, which will leave the price a little higher than it had previously been.

Rinse and repeat this process a few times, then all of a sudden we're in a position to fund a new feature without shooting ourselves in the foot in the process.

Yes, Bitcoin, my example above, does dilute, but this is different because that's not what's funding development. Miners are in more of a position to hold until the price goes up and sell at a time when it's more appropriate and healthy for the market. Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet.

Obviously I can't speak for the chinese, but this is my logic as a temporary anti-diluter.

I'm not saying we necessarily need dilution either. I mean, we don't need every single proposal that does something to get approved, they just need to be better managed.

I, however, disagree with your reasoning. What you propose is we bet on:
1. We find people to develop stuff
2. Those people prefer developing for BitShares instead of Ethereum and others
3. Those people - already a niche within a niche - are willing to do that for free
4. If we manage to do that:
4.1 Competition doesn't surpass us
4.2 We get pumped (when we can also get dumped)
4.3 That pump gets us to new higher lows
5. If this wasn't enough, rinse and repeat a few times

Well, that would work... on Bitcoin... in 2009

As for this sentence " Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet." I agree. People should take this into consideration.

All in all, I don't agree with this specific reasoning of yours, but overall, I agree in that funds need to be managed correctly. Of course we shouldn't approve every single proposal just because they are creating something that sounds great, but has no utility at all.

[unreadPostsSinceLastVisit]

...

I kind of understand this reasoning. So, when would we STOP voting down workers? At 20m cap? Or at 100m? Independent of HOW this is achieved. There should be a clear message as to when shareholders accept a 'dilution' (as in spending company funds)

@alt: since you are the major nay-sayer currently, I would like to get a clearer picture here.

I'm not sure how to do the math, so I'm not entirely certain on how to give an answer to that question. It should be a point where we can dilute substantially enough to use the funds for something good without having a major overall effect on the price. In my opinion at least.

honestly I'm not sure why I'm objecting so much. cheap bts is cheap bts in the long run.

objection withdrawn.

[xeroc]

I'm not anti-dilution, but I am anti-dilution for now.

Akado, you said that if we don't dilute then the only way the price goes up is as the result of a pump.

Based on what I recall about Bitcoin's growth, the only time a new higher bottom was ever established was in the aftermath of a giant pump. Bitcoin only starting hanging consistently above 255 after the pump above a thousand dollars, for the most recent example.

I believe giant pumps are good. They bring more attention to the coin and motivate new people to hold in the hopes of moonglory.

Here is what I see happening if we lay off the dilution for a while:

Development may stagnant for a while and be limited to what people are willing to contribute voluntarily. The project doesn't die. We employ patience. During this time speculators become more confident that they won't be buying into just an ATM for the devs (and their sponsors). Given enough time, there will be a new pump or two, which will leave the price a little higher than it had previously been.

Rinse and repeat this process a few times, then all of a sudden we're in a position to fund a new feature without shooting ourselves in the foot in the process.

Yes, Bitcoin, my example above, does dilute, but this is different because that's not what's funding development. Miners are in more of a position to hold until the price goes up and sell at a time when it's more appropriate and healthy for the market. Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet.

Obviously I can't speak for the chinese, but this is my logic as a temporary anti-diluter.

I kind of understand this reasoning. So, when would we STOP voting down workers? At 20m cap? Or at 100m? Independent of HOW this is achieved. There should be a clear message as to when shareholders accept a 'dilution' (as in spending company funds)

@alt: since you are the major nay-sayer currently, I would like to get a clearer picture here.

[Thom]

I am I big fan of delusion.... I think BM even has a post or something about that - "how to distribute delusion"..."benefits of delusion" or something...

No delusion , no fun!
anyway 

PS
I might have been slightly drunk posting this....

You mean "Delusional" ? (i.e. not deluTional", as in: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delusional?s=t) For once I think I might agree with you Tony! 

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Development may stagnant for a while and be limited to what people are willing to contribute voluntarily. The project doesn't die. We employ patience. During this time speculators become more confident that they won't be buying into just an ATM for the devs (and their sponsors). Given enough time, there will be a new pump or two, which will leave the price a little higher than it had previously been.

Rinse and repeat this process a few times, then all of a sudden we're in a position to fund a new feature without shooting ourselves in the foot in the process.

Yes, Bitcoin, my example above, does dilute, but this is different because that's not what's funding development. Miners are in more of a position to hold until the price goes up and sell at a time when it's more appropriate and healthy for the market. Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet.

Obviously I can't speak for the chinese, but this is my logic as a temporary anti-diluter.

So the expectation is that there is going to be a sudden rush of volunteer developers that are going to appear out of nowhere. Where are those volunteer developers now? If there were these volunteer contributors, don't you think we would not have any workers voted for now, because they rolls are already being fulfilled by these volunteers?

What is the PLAN to have these volunteers do programming that they are paid to do at a rate of $150 per/hr or more at other places? Why would they look at CMC and say: 'gee, I think I am going to ignore Ethereum and all these other alts and focus on this random Bitshares place down in the lower Top 10 area.' ?

This sort of denotes the whole problem with the position of anti-dilution.. there is no clear plan for growth... it seems entirely predicated on this crypto-currency 1.0 'we're a coin' type thinking that says if we have no spending of any kind, then value should increase.. and everything is sunshine lollipops and rainbows everyday then.

If you think leaving it to chance is really a competitive advantage over other networks that are well funded to the tune of millions to further develop their core platforms.. just who do you think is going to be in the lead of that race over time?

[unreadPostsSinceLastVisit]

I'm not anti-dilution, but I am anti-dilution for now.

Akado, you said that if we don't dilute then the only way the price goes up is as the result of a pump.

Based on what I recall about Bitcoin's growth, the only time a new higher bottom was ever established was in the aftermath of a giant pump. Bitcoin only starting hanging consistently above 255 after the pump above a thousand dollars, for the most recent example.

I believe giant pumps are good. They bring more attention to the coin and motivate new people to hold in the hopes of moonglory.

Here is what I see happening if we lay off the dilution for a while:

Development may stagnant for a while and be limited to what people are willing to contribute voluntarily. The project doesn't die. We employ patience. During this time speculators become more confident that they won't be buying into just an ATM for the devs (and their sponsors). Given enough time, there will be a new pump or two, which will leave the price a little higher than it had previously been.

Rinse and repeat this process a few times, then all of a sudden we're in a position to fund a new feature without shooting ourselves in the foot in the process.

Yes, Bitcoin, my example above, does dilute, but this is different because that's not what's funding development. Miners are in more of a position to hold until the price goes up and sell at a time when it's more appropriate and healthy for the market. Let's dilute for new features at times when it's appropriate and healthy for the market, not at times when it will drive the price into the toilet.

Obviously I can't speak for the chinese, but this is my logic as a temporary anti-diluter.

[fav]

I think you guys overestimate the marketing buzz of "0 fees" by a margin of 1000. it's not a big deal in my opinion, or did you ever hear from whatever was that 0 tx fee coin called?

[Empirical1.2]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

I agree 0.5 BTS achieves pretty much the same results for 0 costs for the time being.

Except for the marketing buzz yu could create with 0 fee. But considering how we suck at marketing you may be right

True, I agree there is a marketing benefit to 'zero fees' but for the time and cost, I don't think right now, it's worth it vs. $0.002 fees.

Atm I would personally support

1. Dilution for BitAsset yield as it's fairly cost neutral (Creates millions of BitUSD with thousands of holders, removes BTS from exchanges)

2. Dilution for BitAsset liquidity but cost/benefit has to be right. (NuBits seems to maintain their liquidity operations very cheaply https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21547.msg281032.html#msg281032  vs. $1000 a day proposed in current liquidity proposal. )

3. BitUSD Dice. I've noticed more Chinese support for this provided it can potentially be removed at a later stage. (That should be fairly low cost to develop and bring in profit from day 1. Hopefully someone will offer to develop it via Stealth.)   

[xeroc]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

I agree 0.5 BTS achieves pretty much the same results for 0 costs for the time being.

Except for the marketing buzz yu could create with 0 fee. But considering how we suck at marketing you may be right

[Empirical1.2]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

I agree 0.5 BTS achieves pretty much the same results for 0 costs for the time being.

[xeroc]

http://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=21552.0

There is so much man power around in the forums and they all deserve to some compensation for their work and time.

It makes no sense to ask for other's time to make every shareholder rich if they can't get a cut.

The link above clearly shows us that we can quite some bang for the bucks.

[tonyk]

I am I big fan of delusion.... I think BM even has a post or something about that - "how to distribute delusion"..."benefits of delusion" or something...

No delusion , no fun!
anyway 


PS
I might have been slightly drunk posting this....

[gamey]

sorry, but I don't understand.

i thought that the total number of BTS was capped.

Are we referring to the increasing fee pool as "dilution" now?

Dilution would be any increase in the fungible shares. Nothing more.

[giant middle finger]

sorry, but I don't understand.

i thought that the total number of BTS was capped.

Are we referring to the increasing fee pool as "dilution" now?

[gamey]

I tried to explain this earlier. Everyone is "anti-dilution".  Some seem to be against ALL dilution.  Why?

I suspect that culture barriers make these people seem a lot more common?

There is so much conflated bullshit a real answer will never come about.

People are pissed they lost a lot on their investment. This forum gives them a nice outlet. People process these minority opinions as being more significant than they might be?  (The lack of people explaining why they are against all dilution seems to support this...)

Chinese are pissed off at the large amounts of money they see the Western guys receiving.  We see this when a Western developer says he could get a job being paid better.  Toast was ridiculed at times for saying he could have a job at Google. (I should look up where he is working for now.. ohhhhhhhhhhh he didn't stay a Google long after leaving BItshares.. better things for him I guess? )  Oh well anonymous vacuum salesman dude won in the end. Who knows what was lost... and who knows the one man who should be blamed for that decision ??

My point is my perception of this whole debacle is far different from what others see.... I think people need to figure out where the problem is and where the blame from poor judgement should be placed. We can all go off on our own complaints about why Bitshares possibly shit the bed. Dilution is bad, taxes are bad, but what are the alternatives ?

I can't imagine voting on 0 dilution and holding and praying.

[clayop]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

Can't we just give the new user a choice when they create an account of what type of fee schedule they want ?

And they can change it for 1000 BTS anytime

Like how certain UIA options can only be changed once

That still needs development costs.

how much?

have you heard of IOTA?

Do you know that they are going to be the world's first "free" blockchain?

Do you know what multiple of BTS their market cap currently is?

Hint: it's currently trading on the NXT asset exchange

They will launch with a monopoly of the freeloader market, and then you can see just how much "reward" you would have received for your "risk"

This is where I would typically ask:

What are we men or mice, but obviously we all know,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fuz2XiyjQAo#t=3m9s

BM may know.

Can you guarantee our market cap multiplies after we have (conditional) zero fees?

Don't be so much excited by "free". There's no free lunch. We should know the details about the zero fee system and evaluate the net benefit or loss of it.

[Erlich Bachman]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

Can't we just give the new user a choice when they create an account of what type of fee schedule they want ?

And they can change it for 1000 BTS anytime

Like how certain UIA options can only be changed once

That still needs development costs.

how much?

have you heard of IOTA?

Do you know that they are going to be the world's first "free" blockchain?

Do you know what multiple of BTS their market cap currently is?

Hint: it's currently trading on the NXT asset exchange

They will launch with a monopoly of the freeloader market, and then you can see just how much "reward" you would have received for your "risk"

This is where I would typically ask:

What are we men or mice, but obviously we all know,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fuz2XiyjQAo#t=3m9s

[Pheonike]

What is even worse, we have the means to support those that provide work to the ecosystem and still they get beaten down because they need to justify them selves over and over and still dont get anything out of it.
Feom a developers perspective, its no wonder people prefer the much more healthy developer community at ethereum.

I hope those that are in the anti "dilution" camp include this image damage in their calculations.

You do know people who develop smart contracts in ethereum mostly find their own funding right ? Even with tons of dollars in Ethereum , a lot of smart contract developer can not be paid by Ethereum .

Augur for instance , and our old friend Rune and Toast .

Go to ethereum , see if they will open their wallet for you . Mostly won't . You'll have to find business model yourselves even you switch to Ethereum .

But they are not building core functionality for ethereum. They are not building the platform, they are using the platform for their project. Big difference.

IMIO, graphene's core functionality is completed. What we're doing is adjustment and improvement. We should think about that the benefits from the improvements are greater than their costs. E.g. if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now.

If Graphene was the product we are selling I would agree. But we are not selling Graphene, we are are selling a DEX. Liquidity is a core function for an exchange which means any tools that provide that functionality are core tools to a successful product.
 

[clayop]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

Can't we just give the new user a choice when they create an account of what type of fee schedule they want ?

And they can change it for 1000 BTS anytime

Like how certain UIA options can only be changed once

That still needs development costs.

[Erlich Bachman]

if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

Can't we just give the new user a choice when they create an account of what type of fee schedule they want ?

And they can change it for 1000 BTS anytime

Like how certain UIA options can only be changed once

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

What if the entire anti-dilution movement which is primarily coming out of China is merely them seeing the rate of pay for Westerners and comparing it to their own and they are being told that they are taking too much from BTS and have to be stopped?

What if it was something that simple?

We have seen threads talking about 'shame' ... maybe this is how they are viewing things?

You can say it better . It may because they've believed the magical sentence "if you don't let us dilute , development will stop ., price will be down to 90% or be taken by Vote the monster DAC" . Oh , that was when the price was still high before the merger .

They've also believed prior to 2.0 , BM said "all dilution in 2.0 will vest in years , no fear of dilution anymore " , and then ............

Tell me something, do you still feel like this anti-dilution movement is out-of-the-blue and totally unreasonable after all the reason I've presented to you ? 

Still feel this is a Chinese issue ? Or BM issue ?

Yes... none of it comes anywhere close to answering the very reasonable question the OP has put forward as to the anti-dilution voting against ALL workers.

Instead all you have showcased is some kind of grudge particularly aimed at BM with no real rational plan for Bitshares. The objective here is to give the anti-dilution a forum to explain the reasoning and how it is going to help bitshares. Based on your reply, I would have to conclude it is nothing more than a blame game designed to 'shame' BM perhaps into doing more work for free? That is about the only positive accomplishment I think it is expecting to achieve. I certainly hope that is not the case. I think the OP and others are still waiting for some kind of real 'report'. 

Please stop leaving us all guessing here.

[clayop]

What is even worse, we have the means to support those that provide work to the ecosystem and still they get beaten down because they need to justify them selves over and over and still dont get anything out of it.
Feom a developers perspective, its no wonder people prefer the much more healthy developer community at ethereum.

I hope those that are in the anti "dilution" camp include this image damage in their calculations.

You do know people who develop smart contracts in ethereum mostly find their own funding right ? Even with tons of dollars in Ethereum , a lot of smart contract developer can not be paid by Ethereum .

Augur for instance , and our old friend Rune and Toast .

Go to ethereum , see if they will open their wallet for you . Mostly won't . You'll have to find business model yourselves even you switch to Ethereum .

But they are not building core functionality for ethereum. They are not building the platform, they are using the platform for their project. Big difference.

IMIO, graphene's core functionality is completed. What we're doing is adjustment and improvement. We should think about that the benefits from the improvements are greater than their costs. E.g. if we can attract more users and businesses with 0.5 BTS fee with 0 costs, compared to conditional 0 BTS fee with 50k USD cost, we'd better to choose the first option now. 

[Pheonike]

What is even worse, we have the means to support those that provide work to the ecosystem and still they get beaten down because they need to justify them selves over and over and still dont get anything out of it.
Feom a developers perspective, its no wonder people prefer the much more healthy developer community at ethereum.

I hope those that are in the anti "dilution" camp include this image damage in their calculations.

You do know people who develop smart contracts in ethereum mostly find their own funding right ? Even with tons of dollars in Ethereum , a lot of smart contract developer can not be paid by Ethereum .

Augur for instance , and our old friend Rune and Toast .

Go to ethereum , see if they will open their wallet for you . Mostly won't . You'll have to find business model yourselves even you switch to Ethereum .

But they are not building core functionality for ethereum. They are not building the platform, they are using the platform for their project. Big difference.

Its the difference between building windows and making a program that's runs on widows.  Plus companies like Microsoft not only pay their employees, they also pay outside developers to build software for their platforms.

[Erlich Bachman]

OK, great discussion on finding a balance on this important balance between two options. Now where is the poll so I can see where the community stands on consensus for this particular proposal?

[btswildpig]

What if the entire anti-dilution movement which is primarily coming out of China is merely them seeing the rate of pay for Westerners and comparing it to their own and they are being told that they are taking too much from BTS and have to be stopped?

What if it was something that simple?

We have seen threads talking about 'shame' ... maybe this is how they are viewing things?

You can say it better . It may because they've believed the magical sentence "if you don't let us dilute , development will stop ., price will be down to 90% or be taken by Vote the monster DAC" . Oh , that was when the price was still high before the merger .

They've also believed prior to 2.0 , BM said "all dilution in 2.0 will vest in years , no fear of dilution anymore " , and then ............

Tell me something, do you still feel like this anti-dilution movement is out-of-the-blue and totally unreasonable after all the reason I've presented to you ? 

Still feel this is a Chinese issue ? Or BM issue ?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

see what   BTSdac do
why develop  must dilution?

What did they do?

[btswildpig]

What is even worse, we have the means to support those that provide work to the ecosystem and still they get beaten down because they need to justify them selves over and over and still dont get anything out of it.
Feom a developers perspective, its no wonder people prefer the much more healthy developer community at ethereum.

I hope those that are in the anti "dilution" camp include this image damage in their calculations.

You do know people who develop smart contracts in ethereum mostly find their own funding right ? Even with tons of dollars in Ethereum , a lot of smart contract developer can not be paid by Ethereum .

Augur for instance , and our old friend Rune and Toast .

Go to ethereum , see if they will open their wallet for you . Mostly won't . You'll have to find business model yourselves even you switch to Ethereum .

[sudo]

see what   BTSdac do
why develop  must dilution?

[sudo]

FBA is good
make income  base on bitshares
divide the income  that's ok

[freedom]

To sustain BTS's marketcap , investors are always more important than users . Especially "speculators" . So-called Long term investors only provide liquidity once .

So basically you think that BTS is just another pump'n'dump coin and not a share of a DAC?

BTS is shares . Shares are pump and dumps according to basic and simple economical common sense .

Every shares in the world is about predicting its potential/future and speculative on it short term/long term beyond or below their actual value.

BTS has no product . Even the basic product is built on top of shares . Hence another speculative design .

If I have the time , I could write a thesis to explain it . Sadly I don't .

In order to have a profitable business with actual economical income , you need outside income . But BTS by design can only accept inside shares as income . It's the exact meaning of "inner-circulation" . People can only pay the system by the speculative value of BTS , not by real outside money like fiat/btc . And BTS holders can not get dividend from actual outside value .

Hmm....I think I may lost you here .

If I build a machine that provides a service that people find useful,
and people pay "real" money to buy tickets to use that machine,
then that machine is a valid business. 

The fact that people speculate on the future value of those tickets is a completely orthogonal proposition.

I don't think so. It's stupid. You can use a robot to do these by a worker, do not need to dilute, no users who come to the transaction?

[chryspano]

If this is true then where is the thread with their "concerns"? are they shy?

I will be the bad guy and say that it has purely to do with FUD, pump and dumps, lack of information, anti-dillution dogmatism and frastration from low price. It's easy to sway puplic opinion when most of them don't bother to read (or can't read) the English forum. In desperate times people can believe anyone and anything, FUDers included, pump and dumpers included. All you need is a delusional alt a buthurt btswildpig and some malice/bad intentions from a third actor and here we are...

No one so far answered the op, noone answered my other question about the end of the merger "inflation" in 8 months and the effect they expect to have on the price, they are just running around like headless chickens.

Here is my question once more and they know where to find the OP if they are in the mood to answer...

What about the 12% inflation from the merger? in 8 months it ends, don't you think that this is more than enought for the price? It's much more that a "halving" in btc terms. From 18% inflation we drop to 6% this not enought? we need to kill EVERY worker right now?

[onceuponatime]

What if the entire anti-dilution movement which is primarily coming out of China is merely them seeing the rate of pay for Westerners and comparing it to their own and they are being told that they are taking too much from BTS and have to be stopped?

What if it was something that simple?

We have seen threads talking about 'shame' ... maybe this is how they are viewing things?

That's very likely a big part of it.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

What if the entire anti-dilution movement which is primarily coming out of China is merely them seeing the rate of pay for Westerners and comparing it to their own and they are being told that they are taking too much from BTS and have to be stopped?

What if it was something that simple?

We have seen threads talking about 'shame' ... maybe this is how they are viewing things?

[xeroc]

What is even worse, we have the means to support those that provide work to the ecosystem and still they get beaten down because they need to justify them selves over and over and still dont get anything out of it.
Feom a developers perspective, its no wonder people prefer the much more healthy developer community at ethereum.

I hope those that are in the anti "dilution" camp include this image damage in their calculations.

[tbone]

If the intent of the anti-dilution crowd is to act as a counter-balance to those who might dilute to fund any and every worker proposal under the sun, then I can appreciate that.  And in that case we can all participate in very healthy debates as to which proposals are worthy and which are not.  After all, we do need to make sure we're spending wisely. 

But if their intent is to prevent any dilution whatsoever, then they are in favor of zero development, total stagnation, and a slow but sure death for Bitshares.  That is a fact.  No business can be sustained without maintenance and ongoing development, especially in a highly competitive and fast-paced environment.  Anyone who would take a completely hard line against dilution is either woefully ignorant or intends to sabotage Bitshares and should be shunned from the community.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I would like to see the OPs question answered also.

I would like to know what the grand master plan is because it seems like a go nowhere proposition.

I have attempted to get clarification in numerous conversations only to be lead in circles from one topic to another with no clear answers.

I can't imagine any other way to ask in more open and clear terms than the OP has to explain the reasoning.

So it would be great if @alt  would join in here along with all his supporters to explain the grand plan.

[Stan]

People buy virtual currency because bitcoin is a deflation currency, it gives rise to expectations. If the bitshares continue to dilute, it is expected to depreciate, people will be far away from the bitshares. Everything we do is for more people to participate in, a project that is not involved in the project is a failure.


I support alt

Bitcoin is NOT deflationary, they are creating 3600 btc every day to pay miners and electric power companies.

Exactly, Bitcoin has dilution but has an incentive structure mask it. Why can't the anti-dilutue ppl see this. The dilution is not that important, it's how those funds are being used which is the most important. I can understand if you don't support a particular worker, but not to support anything just doesn't make sense.

Bitcoin dilution was paid to people with money to support the industry .
BTS dilution is paid to people with no money but the need the sell .
I even know bitcoin miners brought more bitcoin with their profit when Bitcoin price is low or going up . BTS delegate/worker ever done that ?

I fail to see you can compare the two . Mining created a barrier so that Bitcoin only falls into those people with the power to support it .

No one ties up capital where it won't earn money for them (and remains in business for very long).

Bitcoin miners get a rate of return above the cost of the capital they keep tied up.  If not, they invest in something that will treat their money better.  (Perhaps US Treasury bonds?    )

And miners do produce sell pressure that on the average exactly equals the rate of mining (dilution) - it's their whole business model. 

Show me which mining cartel "with money to support the industry" is putting in more money on a sustained average than they are taking out by selling newly-mined bitcoins.

[Samupaha]

I cannot conclude which one was the major cause of the price move. Most likely, it was a combination of multiple factors.
However, I may say that at least anti-dilution didn't destroy our market cap.

Not investing in development doesn't show in the short term. It will be seen on the long term price change.

BTS price has been declining for a long time and my explanation is that we, as a DAC, haven't been able to attract customers. Investors don't want to buy shares of a company that doesn't have customers. Investors don't believe that shareprice can go up in the long term without customers.

Only solution is to attract more customers so people can believe that Bitshares will be profitable DAC someday. Without using the funds that are in reserve pool it's very difficult to fund new development that is necessary to get new customers. FBAs are one possibility but I don't remember "antidilution" people showing any interest in them.

[clayop]

The price at Feb 4 (when alt started anti-dilution post): $0.003215. Now $0.004176. +29.9%.

Just coincidence? During the same period, Dash went down -7.6%, Doge increased slightly, +6.7%

And you imply tht this effect is tge sole result of alts voting? I wonder what happens if the others that are working behind the scene doing business developmwnt and coding just do something else.

Or in other words, what fraction of that raise is a result of
- cnx developing stealth
- me developing python tools
- business development happening behind the scenes?
- educational material maturing constantly

Please tell me!

I cannot conclude which one was the major cause of the price move. Most likely, it was a combination of multiple factors.
However, I may say that at least anti-dilution didn't destroy our market cap.

[gamey]

I even know bitcoin miners brought more bitcoin with their profit when Bitcoin price is low or going up . BTS delegate/worker ever done that ?

didnt know I was supposed to tell you z
that I have put way more into BTS than just my 'time' .. you can also see that I have nevet sold any of my 'earned' BTS.

Your statement ia pretty disappointing.

Well he also said shares are 'pump and dumps' by basic economic sense.  Which is completely different from what I understand stocks to be. Some stocks are of nothing, but ...  To say stocks are pump and dumps by their nature is  like saying that anything you ever buy/sell is a pump and dump.  So people are on far different pages here.

I've still never seen what people expect to happen if development ceases.  ... what ... is ... the ... endgame ?

Personally I try to avoid being so negative. Mainly just because of all the people who still continue to pour their time and passions into this project.

[xeroc]

The price at Feb 4 (when alt started anti-dilution post): $0.003215. Now $0.004176. +29.9%.

Just coincidence? During the same period, Dash went down -7.6%, Doge increased slightly, +6.7%

And you imply tht this effect is tge sole result of alts voting? I wonder what happens if the others that are working behind the scene doing business developmwnt and coding just do something else.

Or in other words, what fraction of that raise is a result of
- cnx developing stealth
- me developing python tools
- business development happening behind the scenes?
- educational material maturing constantly

Please tell me!

[btswildpig]

I even know bitcoin miners brought more bitcoin with their profit when Bitcoin price is low or going up . BTS delegate/worker ever done that ?

didnt know I was supposed to tell you z
that I have put way more into BTS than just my 'time' .. you can also see that I have nevet sold any of my 'earned' BTS.

Your statement ia pretty disappointing.

I'm merely pointing out the fact that mining didn't killed Bitcoin is because those who mined have capital to sustain it long term .
Hence Bitcoin mining is unlike other coins dilution (especially all of the PoS coins , not just BTS) .

So it's wrong to even compare the two .  The role of the dilution is totally different .
In bitcoin , dilution is for allocation .

[xeroc]

I even know bitcoin miners brought more bitcoin with their profit when Bitcoin price is low or going up . BTS delegate/worker ever done that ?

didnt know I was supposed to tell you z
that I have put way more into BTS than just my 'time' .. you can also see that I have nevet sold any of my 'earned' BTS.

Your statement ia pretty disappointing.

[clayop]

The price at Feb 4 (when alt started anti-dilution post): $0.003215. Now $0.004176. +29.9%.

Just coincidence? During the same period, Dash went down -7.6%, Doge increased slightly, +6.7%

[btswildpig]

To sustain BTS's marketcap , investors are always more important than users . Especially "speculators" . So-called Long term investors only provide liquidity once .

So basically you think that BTS is just another pump'n'dump coin and not a share of a DAC?

BTS is shares . Shares are pump and dumps according to basic and simple economical common sense .

Every shares in the world is about predicting its potential/future and speculative on it short term/long term beyond or below their actual value.

BTS has no product . Even the basic product is built on top of shares . Hence another speculative design .

If I have the time , I could write a thesis to explain it . Sadly I don't .

In order to have a profitable business with actual economical income , you need outside income . But BTS by design can only accept inside shares as income . It's the exact meaning of "inner-circulation" . People can only pay the system by the speculative value of BTS , not by real outside money like fiat/btc . And BTS holders can not get dividend from actual outside value .

Hmm....I think I may lost you here .

If I build a machine that provides a service that people find useful,
and people pay "real" money to buy tickets to use that machine,
then that machine is a valid business. 

The fact that people speculate on the future value of those tickets is a completely orthogonal proposition.

You simple ignored the part that unlike real business , BitShares can not accept buyer's money . All new coming money will be falling in the hands of someone who was selling at that time and not directly in the system . It simply created liquidity , but not actual income that can be saved. And that is exactly how every speculative object works , not a company .

The machine you're describing only works if the machine is the only place selling the ticket .

It's a simple model . I'm sure some day you'll figure it out .

[Stan]

To sustain BTS's marketcap , investors are always more important than users . Especially "speculators" . So-called Long term investors only provide liquidity once .

So basically you think that BTS is just another pump'n'dump coin and not a share of a DAC?

BTS is shares . Shares are pump and dumps according to basic and simple economical common sense .

Every shares in the world is about predicting its potential/future and speculative on it short term/long term beyond or below their actual value.

BTS has no product . Even the basic product is built on top of shares . Hence another speculative design .

If I have the time , I could write a thesis to explain it . Sadly I don't .

In order to have a profitable business with actual economical income , you need outside income . But BTS by design can only accept inside shares as income . It's the exact meaning of "inner-circulation" . People can only pay the system by the speculative value of BTS , not by real outside money like fiat/btc . And BTS holders can not get dividend from actual outside value .

Hmm....I think I may lost you here .

If I build a machine that provides a service that people find useful,
and people pay "real" money to buy tickets to use that machine,
then that machine is a valid business. 

The fact that people speculate on the future value of those tickets is a completely orthogonal proposition.

[tonyk]

Regardless of his vote - alt is the most productive and beneficial thing that is happening to  BTS!!!!

You are mixing short term and long term benefits. It doesn't help much if alt is doing something that creates short term benefits for Bitshares right now if he is at the same time trying to hamper the development of Bitshares and prevent it becoming a succesful DAC.

"Trying to hamper" in your minds only, people. Read my previous post... he is not hampering ANYTHING as of now... but this does not prevent you all from crying wolf.

[Samupaha]

Regardless of his vote - alt is the most productive and beneficial thing that is happening to  BTS!!!!

You are mixing short term and long term benefits. It doesn't help much if alt is doing something that creates short term benefits for Bitshares right now if he is at the same time trying to hamper the development of Bitshares and prevent it becoming a succesful DAC.

[freedom]

Second, and most importantly his vote does not preclude workers being voted in  does it? I believe he will stop voting no to ALL worker then and there when it does . Until then it is just a way to show his believe in conservative spending.
You on the other hand make a big deal out of it, like it has prevented any development already! Take it for what it is - making a point and pointing that we (collectively as BTS holders) are generally on the side of useless spending... spending for the sake of spending more often than not.

I'm not. I'm just asking, what do anti dilution people expect. It's a simple question. That's all I want to know. I'm not defending worker proposals just because. If they aren't needed I don't support them, that's it. I also think we should be conservative, but come up with something worthy and take action.

Because the  dilution does not meet expectations.
If the bitshares is a company has closed down.But the workers still have to pay, do you think the company still needs the workers?

[btswildpig]

To sustain BTS's marketcap , investors are always more important than users . Especially "speculators" . So-called Long term investors only provide liquidity once .

So basically you think that BTS is just another pump'n'dump coin and not a share of a DAC?

BTS is shares . Shares are pump and dumps according to basic and simple economical common sense .

Every shares in the world is about predicting its potential/future and speculative on it short term/long term beyond or below their actual value.

BTS has no product . Even the basic product is built on top of shares . Hence another speculative design .

If I have the time , I could write a thesis to explain it . Sadly I don't .

In order to have a profitable business with actual economical income , you need outside income . But BTS by design can only accept inside shares as income . It's the exact meaning of "inner-circulation" . People can only pay the system by the speculative value of BTS , not by real outside money like fiat/btc . And BTS holders can not get dividend from actual outside value .

Hmm....I think I may lost you here .

[chryspano]

What about the 12% inflation from the merger? in 8 months it ends, don't you think that this is more than enought for the price? It's much more that a "halving" in btc terms. From 18% inflation we drop to 6% this not enought? we need to kill EVERY worker right now?

[Akado]

Second, and most importantly his vote does not preclude workers being voted in  does it? I believe he will stop voting no to ALL worker then and there when it does . Until then it is just a way to show his believe in conservative spending.
You on the other hand make a big deal out of it, like it has prevented any development already! Take it for what it is - making a point and pointing that we (collectively as BTS holders) are generally on the side of useless spending... spending for the sake of spending more often than not.

I'm not. I'm just asking, what do anti dilution people expect. It's a simple question. That's all I want to know. I'm not defending worker proposals just because. If they aren't needed I don't support them, that's it. I also think we should be conservative, but come up with something worthy and take action.

[Samupaha]

To sustain BTS's marketcap , investors are always more important than users . Especially "speculators" . So-called Long term investors only provide liquidity once .

So basically you think that BTS is just another pump'n'dump coin and not a share of a DAC?

[btswildpig]

People buy virtual currency because bitcoin is a deflation currency, it gives rise to expectations. If the bitshares continue to dilute, it is expected to depreciate, people will be far away from the bitshares. Everything we do is for more people to participate in, a project that is not involved in the project is a failure.


I support alt

Bitcoin is NOT deflationary, they are creating 3600 btc every day to pay miners and electric power companies.

Exactly, Bitcoin has dilution but has an incentive structure mask it. Why can't the anti-dilutue ppl see this. The dilution is not that important, it's how those funds are being used which is the most important. I can understand if you don't support a particular worker, but not to support anything just doesn't make sense.

Bitcoin dilution was paid to people with money to support the industry .
BTS dilution is paid to people with no money but the need the sell .
I even know bitcoin miners brought more bitcoin with their profit when Bitcoin price is low or going up . BTS delegate/worker ever done that ?

I fail to see you can compare the two . Mining created a barrier so that Bitcoin only falls into those people with the power to support it .

[Pheonike]

People buy virtual currency because bitcoin is a deflation currency, it gives rise to expectations. If the bitshares continue to dilute, it is expected to depreciate, people will be far away from the bitshares. Everything we do is for more people to participate in, a project that is not involved in the project is a failure.


I support alt

Bitcoin is NOT deflationary, they are creating 3600 btc every day to pay miners and electric power companies.

Exactly, Bitcoin has dilution but has an incentive structure mask it. Why can't the anti-dilutue ppl see this. The dilution is not that important, it's how those funds are being used which is the most important. I can understand if you don't support a particular worker, but not to support anything just doesn't make sense.

[gamey]

It would be nice to see someone address the original post.  It asked a very good question. 

What do these anti-dilution people expect to happen?

The current state of BTS is much better than the old BTS1.0 which BM thought that was enough to do the "big thing" and get "millions of users outside of crypto" .
If you think this is not enough , then why on earth would we believed the "big thing" in the first place ?

This doesn't make sense to me.  So because I believed in / hoped / followed (however you wish to label it) BitShares previously, and Dan was wrong...  as we all were about various things..   ?  Then what?  What is the end?

I don't have much of a stake in BitShares so I do not argue these things very much.  Not my thing.  I am just trying to understand the thoughts of others.

Do people think BM is sitting on such a pile of BTS that it should be enough incentive for his lifetime project ?

Passionate team of volunteers would be great.. but if that isn't happening.. then what?

I will say that one thing about paid workers is that it makes those wishing to work for free less appreciated etc.  So it is possible it forms a negative incentive in some way.

[chryspano]

People buy virtual currency because bitcoin is a deflation currency, it gives rise to expectations. If the bitshares continue to dilute, it is expected to depreciate, people will be far away from the bitshares. Everything we do is for more people to participate in, a project that is not involved in the project is a failure.


I support alt

Bitcoin is NOT deflationary, they are creating 3600 btc every day to pay miners and electric power companies.

[btswildpig]

It would be nice to see someone address the original post.  It asked a very good question. 

What do these anti-dilution people expect to happen?

The current state of BTS is much better than the old BTS1.0 which BM thought that was enough to do the "big thing" and get "millions of users outside of crypto" .
If you think this is not enough , then why on earth would we believed the "big thing" in the first place ?

[tonyk]

imo what they are doing is plain stupidity and I'm all ears to be convined otherwise.

Diluting with a low price is bad, I think that's the point? Sure. But the important question is, what do we do then? We can't just wait for people to come and start trading out of nowhere because they won't. If we want to compete, we need to create incentives.

It would be nice to see someone address the original post.  It asked a very good question. 

What do these anti-dilution people expect to happen?

I tried above.
I'm not arguing about why we shouldn't dilute. I just want to know what should we do then. Wait for the price to go up? If that happens it will be because of a pump and no real demand, which is pretty useless.

I do not claim to know why he is voting against ALL workers. But I am pretty sure he is trying to make a point to people lake you two who are hard to get the point, apparently.

You follow the company line, reconfirm and multiply it by threads like this one. I have a question for you Akado. Do you do this propaganda for free? I think you do. So people can do something for free can't they especially when they believe. Well, while you have chosen to do company propaganda for free, he is doing the most useful thing for BTS for free. [arguably more productive than the devs who have proven to do years of work and have no product] He is doing what you even claim to be impossible - the most active trader on the dex.

Regardless of his vote - alt is the most productive and beneficial thing that is happening to  BTS!!!!

lol propaganda? I think I was never the type of doing so. Propaganda was when countless fee threads were made. When people spam each others posts to remove votes from proxy A to B, etc That commentary was completely senseless. Even though I have my own opinion, I always try to understand both sides and not act like a horse with patches on my eyes. I always try to consider all the info and take both sides into account. Like I said, even though I need to emphasize it again, I'm not judging whoever supports no dilution.

I asked a simple question. What comes after no dilution, if that was the case?

While alt is certainly one of the most valuable members in our community, how many alts do you think we have? How many people with the knowledge + willing to do stuff for free can you find? It's a niche within a niche. While it would be preferable to have more productive people with the right skills like him around, the fact we have to face is those kind of members are a rarity.

So that means maybe we should take other measures right? Or are we just going to sit around hoping for more people like that to appear out of thin air? That's my point.

"If Mohammed will not go to the mountain, the mountain must come to Mohammed." Unfortunately given most the community doesn't have the skills to be as productive as him or other members, the only thing they can do is risking their own money and trying to hire people to do what needs to be done.

Now if some stuff should have already been done and ready previously, that's something for another topic as I too, believe, 2.0 was premature, however, what other choices to we have? Whatever your opinion is, you are either "hostage" by no-dilution and consequently no development or by high market rates charged to this community. There's really not much to chose from. You either pay a lot to get stuff done or you don't and things might not go forward. Hence, me asking what is the plan if the community chooses not to pay for development? I'm not advertising the so called dilution, actually, I'm pretty uncomfortable with this situation because you can only choose one of those two options I mentioned.

That's why - if we choose not to pay for development - I'm asking what's the plan and what can we do to make BitShares better?

First off, I do not totally understand his motives that's why I do not proxy to him. I just vote for conservative spending...that being said if one does what I do it does not make a point... at all.
Second, and most importantly his vote does not preclude workers being voted in  does it? I believe he will stop voting no to ALL worker then and there when it does . Until then it is just a way to show his believe in conservative spending.
You on the other hand make a big deal out of it, like it has prevented any development already! Take it for what it is - making a point and pointing that we (collectively as BTS holders) are generally on the side of useless spending... spending for the sake of spending more often than not.

It would be nice to see someone address the original post.  It asked a very good question. 

What do these anti-dilution people expect to happen?

I tried above.

[freedom]

People buy virtual currency because bitcoin is a deflation currency, it gives rise to expectations. If the bitshares continue to dilute, it is expected to depreciate, people will be far away from the bitshares. Everything we do is for more people to participate in, a project that is not involved in the project is a failure.


I support alt

[gamey]

It would be nice to see someone address the original post.  It asked a very good question. 

What do these anti-dilution people expect to happen?

It is kind of like taxes. I hate them. I'm against a lot of useless government but actually feel government is not strong enough at least some ways.  So I'm anti-taxes, but so is everyone.  The question would be, if you don't think you should pay any taxes, how do you think X,Y,Z is going to happen?  Most people who are of this opinion just have severe cognitive biases that make them act irrationally.  Is that what is going on here with the no-dilution movement?

What do people see as the endgame with development ceasing?

[chryspano]

imo what they are doing is plain stupidity and I'm all ears to be convined otherwise.

Diluting with a low price is bad, I think that's the point? Sure. But the important question is, what do we do then? We can't just wait for people to come and start trading out of nowhere because they won't. If we want to compete, we need to create incentives.

I'm not arguing about why we shouldn't dilute. I just want to know what should we do then. Wait for the price to go up? If that happens it will be because of a pump and no real demand, which is pretty useless.

I do not claim to know why he is voting against ALL workers. But I am pretty sure he is trying to make a point to people lake you two who are hard to get the point, apparently.

You follow the company line, reconfirm and multiply it by threads like this one. I have a question for you Akado. Do you do this propaganda for free? I think you do. So people can do something for free can't they especially when they believe. Well, while you have chosen to do company propaganda for free, he is doing the most useful thing for BTS for free. [arguably more productive than the devs who have proven to do years of work and have no product] He is doing what you even claim to be impossible - the most active trader on the dex.

Regardless of his vote - alt is the most productive and beneficial thing that is happening to  BTS!!!!

You are so wrong Tonyk...

Disagreement in a forum is not "propaganda" and it's so unfair to compare someone that is posting posts in a forum in his free time with the true work someone is puting on bitshares especially when it's NOT in his free time. But, I agree that If we only want "free time" work for bitshares, then we probably don't need any worker proposals, lets see how far this will get us...

A football team that all it's players are playing for free in their free time and another team that some of their players are paid something because of their skills, place your bet to the winner!

Btw no one ever is doing anything for free, there is always a reward, either in the form of money a "feel good" emotion or a posible future reward, by increasing a little bit the reward we increase motivation and the odds of success.

[btswildpig]

If you want features , just give me 1 billion BTS , I will find companies to add features to the point that you will beg me to stop .

But I will tell you upfront with a straight face that the 1 billion BTS will be for nothing because centralized solution fund billions of dollars (not BTS) to develop their service and provide their customers with first class service/24 hours of customer support/fault backup center without a glitch .

I would really be lying if I tell you all the features in the world can compete with these real thing . Even if by some miracle the real users do come .......

And most importantly , I will dump 1 billion BTS , and the "real users" that I maybe able to get will contribute 100 BTS per person to the system (if there is 100,000 of them, and it's a number that most of you would think more than enough ) . So you do the math , how on earth will BTS profit from that "real users" ?? 

To sustain BTS's marketcap , investors are always more important than users . Especially "speculators" . So-called Long term investors only provide liquidity once .

[Akado]

imo what they are doing is plain stupidity and I'm all ears to be convined otherwise.

Diluting with a low price is bad, I think that's the point? Sure. But the important question is, what do we do then? We can't just wait for people to come and start trading out of nowhere because they won't. If we want to compete, we need to create incentives.

I'm not arguing about why we shouldn't dilute. I just want to know what should we do then. Wait for the price to go up? If that happens it will be because of a pump and no real demand, which is pretty useless.

I do not claim to know why he is voting against ALL workers. But I am pretty sure he is trying to make a point to people lake you two who are hard to get the point, apparently.

You follow the company line, reconfirm and multiply it by threads like this one. I have a question for you Akado. Do you do this propaganda for free? I think you do. So people can do something for free can't they especially when they believe. Well, while you have chosen to do company propaganda for free, he is doing the most useful thing for BTS for free. [arguably more productive than the devs who have proven to do years of work and have no product] He is doing what you even claim to be impossible - the most active trader on the dex.

Regardless of his vote - alt is the most productive and beneficial thing that is happening to  BTS!!!!

lol propaganda? I think I was never the type of doing so. Propaganda was when countless fee threads were made. When people spam each others posts to remove votes from proxy A to B, etc That commentary was completely senseless. Even though I have my own opinion, I always try to understand both sides and not act like a horse with patches on my eyes. I always try to consider all the info and take both sides into account. Like I said, even though I need to emphasize it again, I'm not judging whoever supports no dilution.

I asked a simple question. What comes after no dilution, if that was the case?

While alt is certainly one of the most valuable members in our community, how many alts do you think we have? How many people with the knowledge + willing to do stuff for free can you find? It's a niche within a niche. While it would be preferable to have more productive people with the right skills like him around, the fact we have to face is those kind of members are a rarity.

So that means maybe we should take other measures right? Or are we just going to sit around hoping for more people like that to appear out of thin air? That's my point.

"If Mohammed will not go to the mountain, the mountain must come to Mohammed." Unfortunately given most the community doesn't have the skills to be as productive as him or other members, the only thing they can do is risking their own money and trying to hire people to do what needs to be done.

Now if some stuff should have already been done and ready previously, that's something for another topic as I too, believe, 2.0 was premature, however, what other choices to we have? Whatever your opinion is, you are either "hostage" by no-dilution and consequently no development or by high market rates charged to this community. There's really not much to chose from. You either pay a lot to get stuff done or you don't and things might not go forward. Hence, me asking what is the plan if the community chooses not to pay for development? I'm not advertising the so called dilution, actually, I'm pretty uncomfortable with this situation because you can only choose one of those two options I mentioned.

That's why - if we choose not to pay for development - I'm asking what's the plan and what can we do to make BitShares better?

[tonyk]

imo what they are doing is plain stupidity and I'm all ears to be convined otherwise.

Diluting with a low price is bad, I think that's the point? Sure. But the important question is, what do we do then? We can't just wait for people to come and start trading out of nowhere because they won't. If we want to compete, we need to create incentives.

I'm not arguing about why we shouldn't dilute. I just want to know what should we do then. Wait for the price to go up? If that happens it will be because of a pump and no real demand, which is pretty useless.

I do not claim to know why he is voting against ALL workers. But I am pretty sure he is trying to make a point to people lake you two who are hard to get the point, apparently.

You follow the company line, reconfirm and multiply it by threads like this one. I have a question for you Akado. Do you do this propaganda for free? I think you do. So people can do something for free can't they especially when they believe. Well, while you have chosen to do company propaganda for free, he is doing the most useful thing for BTS for free. [arguably more productive than the devs who have proven to do years of work and have no product] He is doing what you even claim to be impossible - the most active trader on the dex.

Regardless of his vote - alt is the most productive and beneficial thing that is happening to  BTS!!!!

[chryspano]

Diluting with a low price is bad, I think that's the point? Sure. But the important question is, what do we do then? We can't just wait for people to come and start trading out of nowhere because they won't. If we want to compete, we need to create incentives.

I'm not arguing about why we shouldn't dilute. I just want to know what should we do then. Wait for the price to go up? If that happens it will be because of a pump and no real demand, which is pretty useless.

Trying to run with an injured leg is bad too, but if your life depents on it you should run like hell is after you.

I see no reasoning in what they are doing. Perhaps they believe that by taking bitshares as hostage they will force some people to buy more bts for votes and the price be pumped.

imo what they are doing is plain stupidity and I'm all ears to be convined otherwise.

[Samupaha]

I would like to emphasize (again) a point of view that we really don't have any dilution anymore. Quantity of BTS is hardcapped to 3.7 billion and that's it.

The real question is: how we should use the funds that are in the reserve pool? The whole point of our DAC is to grow reserve pool – it means that we are doing good business. The goal is to collect more fees from the customers than it costs to produce the service.

The "antidilution" argument is, as I see it, that we should concentrate on minimizing project funding from reserve pool. That is of course a one way to help growing the reserve pool – less we take from it, faster it grows. At least in theory. Obviously this leads to a problem: if we don't pay for developers, who is going to develop the products and services that customers can use? If we don't have products and services, we don't have customers, and if we don't have customers, there is nobody paying fees to the reserve pool.

The "dilution" argument is that we should fund as much development as possible, because it is the only viable way of getting paying customers.

So let's simplify this. We can grow the reserve pool by:
- Minimizing any kind of project funding (taking less from it). This requires that projects are funded by other means.
- Collecting more fees (putting more into it). This requires lots of paying customers. Maybe also higher fees, at least as high as customers are willing to pay.

Third option might be some kind of fund locking. Funds might be out of reserve pool, but if they are somehow locked, it's effectively same thing as having them in the reserve pool. They can't be sold in the market.

I have a feeling that most of the "antidilution" people haven't really understood how a DAC is supposed to work.

[Akado]

Diluting with a low price is bad, I think that's the point? Sure. But the important question is, what do we do then? We can't just wait for people to come and start trading out of nowhere because they won't. If we want to compete, we need to create incentives.

I'm not arguing about why we shouldn't dilute. I just want to know what should we do then. Wait for the price to go up? If that happens it will be because of a pump and no real demand, which is pretty useless.

[abit]

Please check @sudo's recent posts.

[Akado]

I'm not exactly pro dilution, I just think we only need to manage our funds carefully and support what we need and not just do random stuff.

I just want to understand the members who vote no for all worker proposal; Assume we have zero dilution. No worker is available. We don't have dilution any more.

Now what? What do we do? What does BitShares do? What do you expect to happen? Users and adopters will come? What do you think we should focus now? What do you want to do? Nothing? How do we improve, how do we bring new users? We wait or do you have a plan? Will it just get traded? What should we focus on? What can we do with no funds? Will liquidity increase by itself? Can we increase volume and liquidity? Can we do something positive for BitShares with no dilution? If so, how? Of course we, as a community, shouldn't rely solely on dilution, I agree with that, but then, what would you suggest?


I'm not judging you, I just want to understand your point of view, because currently, I don't. If we have no dilution, what do we do then? What would you suggest BitShares should focus on if we had no dilution?

I want to hear your opinions and plans so I can understand your point of view on this, please.