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

[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 .