how to mine steem

[mint chocolate chip]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

Interesting... so I have narrow minded view of facts because:
-My similar size investment in BTS never got an offer to be refunded/bought back.... so I should take your take on facts not mine correct? Or I will be labeled short-sighted/narrow minded, right?

-----
Let's assume the facts are as you state them... so you provide 45K for the development of BTS.... you did not care if other more important features are skipped because of it (let's call it a difference in judgments and your stealth was the best could happen to BTS as far as you are concerned)....But after 3+ month nothing comes out of it...all the rest is stopped...even more...a new competing chain is developed in total secrecy by the leader of BTS....
and you still support BM's vision? Vision where he promises and not deliveres, and instead launches a new 'personally owned chain'
-----------
You getting back 6mil bts for 45K USD and 20% of not finish (mostly useless) feature might speak for your generosity and or desire to sponsor BM... but what is the reason you included that info above anyway? Paying 15K for non existing and never paying for itself feature is not a sign of a great vision you self claim (inferred by accusing other of short sightedness)?...
What I am coming to is...NOW you gonna take you efforts of providing liquidity? Now after 3 months in which you virtually delayed this feature by forcing another feature (that ultimately failed) in front of that?
-----
You can like STEEM all you want, but do not forget that your 'sponsorship' provided the best ground for it to be developed in private.... and STEEM is nothing more than a centralized entity trying to take advantage of 2 established cultural phenomenon (blockchain and social midia sites) in an effort to not do much more but grab money for 'select few'... maybe that is your intersection of yours and BM ideals...idk.

The purpose of your post?

To gather/understand "what is the good that came out of you sponsorship of stealth"...per your perspective.

Well, we won't know that until the Fat Lady sings, now will we?

She isn't already?...Stealth is DOA, Bytemaster has moved onto something else, we have little if any blockchain feature development being done, community is perturbed, price is in a downward spiral, arguably more exciting projects are coming online, etc.

[onceuponatime]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

Interesting... so I have narrow minded view of facts because:
-My similar size investment in BTS never got an offer to be refunded/bought back.... so I should take your take on facts not mine correct? Or I will be labeled short-sighted/narrow minded, right?

-----
Let's assume the facts are as you state them... so you provide 45K for the development of BTS.... you did not care if other more important features are skipped because of it (let's call it a difference in judgments and your stealth was the best could happen to BTS as far as you are concerned)....But after 3+ month nothing comes out of it...all the rest is stopped...even more...a new competing chain is developed in total secrecy by the leader of BTS....
and you still support BM's vision? Vision where he promises and not deliveres, and instead launches a new 'personally owned chain'
-----------
You getting back 6mil bts for 45K USD and 20% of not finish (mostly useless) feature might speak for your generosity and or desire to sponsor BM... but what is the reason you included that info above anyway? Paying 15K for non existing and never paying for itself feature is not a sign of a great vision you self claim (inferred by accusing other of short sightedness)?...
What I am coming to is...NOW you gonna take you efforts of providing liquidity? Now after 3 months in which you virtually delayed this feature by forcing another feature (that ultimately failed) in front of that?
-----
You can like STEEM all you want, but do not forget that your 'sponsorship' provided the best ground for it to be developed in private.... and STEEM is nothing more than a centralized entity trying to take advantage of 2 established cultural phenomenon (blockchain and social midia sites) in an effort to not do much more but grab money for 'select few'... maybe that is your intersection of yours and BM ideals...idk.

The purpose of your post?

To gather/understand "what is the good that came out of you sponsorship of stealth"...per your perspective.

Well, we won't know that until the Fat Lady sings, now will we?

[ag]

And just why would I not be thrilled about a new DAC which I consider to have a long term possibility of getting BitShares out of the temporary impasse it has come to?

I believe this too. Some of you should read the white paper if you haven't. If STEEM is successful in acquiring users, then bitshares could follow that success.

[tonyk]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

Interesting... so I have narrow minded view of facts because:
-My similar size investment in BTS never got an offer to be refunded/bought back.... so I should take your take on facts not mine correct? Or I will be labeled short-sighted/narrow minded, right?

-----
Let's assume the facts are as you state them... so you provide 45K for the development of BTS.... you did not care if other more important features are skipped because of it (let's call it a difference in judgments and your stealth was the best could happen to BTS as far as you are concerned)....But after 3+ month nothing comes out of it...all the rest is stopped...even more...a new competing chain is developed in total secrecy by the leader of BTS....
and you still support BM's vision? Vision where he promises and not deliveres, and instead launches a new 'personally owned chain'
-----------
You getting back 6mil bts for 45K USD and 20% of not finish (mostly useless) feature might speak for your generosity and or desire to sponsor BM... but what is the reason you included that info above anyway? Paying 15K for non existing and never paying for itself feature is not a sign of a great vision you self claim (inferred by accusing other of short sightedness)?...
What I am coming to is...NOW you gonna take you efforts of providing liquidity? Now after 3 months in which you virtually delayed this feature by forcing another feature (that ultimately failed) in front of that?
-----
You can like STEEM all you want, but do not forget that your 'sponsorship' provided the best ground for it to be developed in private.... and STEEM is nothing more than a centralized entity trying to take advantage of 2 established cultural phenomenon (blockchain and social midia sites) in an effort to not do much more but grab money for 'select few'... maybe that is your intersection of yours and BM ideals...idk.

The purpose of your post?

To gather/understand "what is the good that came out of you sponsorship of stealth"...per your perspective.

[onceuponatime]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

Interesting... so I have narrow minded view of facts because:
-My similar size investment in BTS never got an offer to be refunded/bought back.... so I should take your take on facts not mine correct? Or I will be labeled short-sighted/narrow minded, right?

-----
Let's assume the facts are as you state them... so you provide 45K for the development of BTS.... you did not care if other more important features are skipped because of it (let's call it a difference in judgments and your stealth was the best could happen to BTS as far as you are concerned)....But after 3+ month nothing comes out of it...all the rest is stopped...even more...a new competing chain is developed in total secrecy by the leader of BTS....
and you still support BM's vision? Vision where he promises and not deliveres, and instead launches a new 'personally owned chain'
-----------
You getting back 6mil bts for 45K USD and 20% of not finish (mostly useless) feature might speak for your generosity and or desire to sponsor BM... but what is the reason you included that info above anyway? Paying 15K for non existing and never paying for itself feature is not a sign of a great vision you self claim (inferred by accusing other of short sightedness)?...
What I am coming to is...NOW you gonna take you efforts of providing liquidity? Now after 3 months in which you virtually delayed this feature by forcing another feature (that ultimately failed) in front of that?
-----
You can like STEEM all you want, but do not forget that your 'sponsorship' provided the best ground for it to be developed in private.... and STEEM is nothing more than a centralized entity trying to take advantage of 2 established cultural phenomenon (blockchain and social midia sites) in an effort to not do much more but grab money for 'select few'... maybe that is your intersection of yours and BM ideals...idk.

The purpose of your post?

[tonyk]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

Interesting... so I have narrow minded view of facts because:
-My similar size investment in BTS never got an offer to be refunded/bought back.... so I should take your take on facts not mine correct? Or I will be labeled short-sighted/narrow minded, right?

-----
Let's assume the facts are as you state them... so you provide 45K for the development of BTS.... you did not care if other more important features are skipped because of it (let's call it a difference in judgments and your stealth was the best could happen to BTS as far as you are concerned)....But after 3+ month nothing comes out of it...all the rest is stopped...even more...a new competing chain is developed in total secrecy by the leader of BTS....
and you still support BM's vision? Vision where he promises and not deliveres, and instead launches a new 'personally owned chain'
-----------
You getting back 6mil bts for 45K USD and 20% of not finish (mostly useless) feature might speak for your generosity and or desire to sponsor BM... but what is the reason you included that info above anyway? Paying 15K for non existing and never paying for itself feature is not a sign of a great vision you self claim (inferred by accusing other of short sightedness)?...
What I am coming to is...NOW you gonna take you efforts of providing liquidity? Now after 3 months in which you virtually delayed this feature by forcing another feature (that ultimately failed) in front of that?
-----
You can like STEEM all you want, but do not forget that your 'sponsorship' provided the best ground for it to be developed in private.... and STEEM is nothing more than a centralized entity trying to take advantage of 2 established cultural phenomenon (blockchain and social midia sites) in an effort to not do much more but grab money for 'select few'... maybe that is your intersection of yours and BM ideals...idk.

[julian1]

That's a sweet distribution.

According to the vesting rich list, steemit hold 260k, with the next highest stakeholder (the steemit ceo) coming in at 9k.

Supposedly 90% of all Steem is held or convertible to vests, and the total vesting amount is 400k making it a 65% share.

steemit : 261585.400566
ned : 9364.0
dan : 9364.0
ben : 8171.0
jamesc : 7173.0
blocktrades : 6841.099536
val-a : 6243.0
berniesanders : 5876.768662
smooth : 4956.846869
mottler : 4605.501952
dantheman : 3742.0
rainman : 3170.302826

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1410943.260

[Vizzini]

STEEM sounds like elitist bullshit. If you're not going to let this community acquire any, either through a sharedrop, egalitarian mining, or the DEX, then don't expect us to follow you.

See the Whitepaper, page 15. They are going to let anybody acquire it, whether they can fit into your preconceptions or not. To acquire it you don't have to be a miner or have any funds to purchase it.

So who's the elitist bullshitter?

Ha ha. It's obviously very easy to acquire using any number of strategies, at least in small quantities. I was merely being facetious. In fact, acquisition by the masses seems to be the main purpose of this coin (that and allowing BM to fund his experiments by pumping and dumping). I'm all in favor of bringing in more eager users. You could just call it fuzzycoin, for that matter. And hopefully, the masses will have more wisdom than the whales.

[Erlich Bachman]

Sweet, thank you onceuponatime for creating liquidity!

[Empirical1.2]

Also, did anyone else notice how the initial Steem git commit was a dump of the all files, rather than a fork the graphene repo?

Nice way to keep the work hidden from the Github history/fork browser and the project secret during its initial stages.

Should also make it more difficult to cherry-pick and back-port changes to the Bitshares code-base.

Very sneaky!

.
Grow up.
 
"You just need thick skin and the ability to ignore the Bitcoin pharisees and the angry mob they incite to nail you to a cross for failing to sacrifice your creation to the prevailing mining gods."
Bytemaster, How to Launch a Crypto Curency Legally while Raising Funds
http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/03/27/How-to-Launch-a-Crypto-Currency-Legally-while-Raising-Funds/

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

@Empirical1.2

You were offered a paid position with signatory power on the STEALTH Board of Advisors. Had you accepted, you would realize that I have not made any decisions without extensive  consultations with the members of that Board who are all long term and trusted members of the BitShares Community.

But you turned down the offer.

So for you to now make "wild speculation" about my actions and motivations out of ignorance when you could have had full knowledge is just a wee bit disingenuous, don't you think?

"support for a DAC that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position"

And just why would I not be thrilled about a new DAC which I consider to have a long term possibility of getting BitShares out of the temporary impasse it has come to?

Just because some directions taken by Bytemaster may appear, in the myopic short term,  detrimental to my narrowly defined financial interest, does not mean that I have ever wavered from my full support of his vision and mission to secure life, liberty and property. That is because his mission harmonizes well with my own goal of enabling and cultivating free expressions of the free human spirit.

I appreciated your kind offer to be involved in Stealth as I said at the time. But as you say I turned it down so I don't have any information as to your motivations hence my speculation which I prefaced as such, not an accusation.

The reason you may not otherwise be thrilled with STEEM is clear in my reply,  (BM working on another DAC, unknown to you at the time could have influenced your decision to put a lot of your savings into Stealth and may also have an impact on the success of Stealth (Given BM's obvious talent & value to BTS)

Thanks for the reply though, that's great if your support for STEEM is largely based on your ability to take the long view and also have a vision for the world that transcends your short term financial interest & that you believe STEEM aligns with those principles and vision. Apologies if I've speculated unfairly that it was possibly due to being compensated with STEEM.

[onceuponatime]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

[onceuponatime]

Also, did anyone else notice how the initial Steem git commit was a dump of the all files, rather than a fork the graphene repo?

Nice way to keep the work hidden from the Github history/fork browser and the project secret during its initial stages.

Should also make it more difficult to cherry-pick and back-port changes to the Bitshares code-base.

Very sneaky!

.
Grow up.
 
"You just need thick skin and the ability to ignore the Bitcoin pharisees and the angry mob they incite to nail you to a cross for failing to sacrifice your creation to the prevailing mining gods."
Bytemaster, How to Launch a Crypto Curency Legally while Raising Funds
http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/03/27/How-to-Launch-a-Crypto-Currency-Legally-while-Raising-Funds/

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

@Empirical1.2

You were offered a paid position with signatory power on the STEALTH Board of Advisors. Had you accepted, you would realize that I have not made any decisions without extensive  consultations with the members of that Board who are all long term and trusted members of the BitShares Community.

But you turned down the offer.

So for you to now make "wild speculation" about my actions and motivations out of ignorance when you could have had full knowledge is just a wee bit disingenuous, don't you think?

"support for a DAC that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position"

And just why would I not be thrilled about a new DAC which I consider to have a long term possibility of getting BitShares out of the temporary impasse it has come to?

Just because some directions taken by Bytemaster may appear, in the myopic short term,  detrimental to my narrowly defined financial interest, does not mean that I have ever wavered from my full support of his vision and mission to secure life, liberty and property. That is because his mission harmonizes well with my own goal of enabling and cultivating free expressions of the free human spirit.

[julian1]

In any event, onceuponatime and I have been talking about the project and I believe he is very happy with how we have taken care of him.

[liondani]

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

[Empirical1.2]

Also, did anyone else notice how the initial Steem git commit was a dump of the all files, rather than a fork the graphene repo?

Nice way to keep the work hidden from the Github history/fork browser and the project secret during its initial stages.

Should also make it more difficult to cherry-pick and back-port changes to the Bitshares code-base.

Very sneaky!

.
Grow up.
 
"You just need thick skin and the ability to ignore the Bitcoin pharisees and the angry mob they incite to nail you to a cross for failing to sacrifice your creation to the prevailing mining gods."
Bytemaster, How to Launch a Crypto Curency Legally while Raising Funds
http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/03/27/How-to-Launch-a-Crypto-Currency-Legally-while-Raising-Funds/

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.