Author Topic: [Worker Proposal] Chronos Crypto videos  (Read 34188 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fav

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
OP: do you know the referral program which is built inside BitShares and how to use it? It can probably bring you more income if used in the videos.

The referral program sounds good on paper, but after the fees were adjusted it has become pretty much worthless. The top two leading referrers have ~1,600 referred accounts between them and less than a few thousand bts vesting (referral income) each.

have to agree. referral program is worthless as it is now.

but anyways to OP:

> Well known

I wouldn't call 400 subs an 77 daily average views well known. do you have any insight stats other than I got from social blade?

Offline CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains

Offline Chris4210

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
  • Keep Building!
    • View Profile
    • www.payger.com
  • BitShares: chris4210
Vote Chris4210 for Committee Member http://bit.ly/1WKC03B! | www.Payger.com - Payments + Messenger | www.BitShareshub.io - Community based fanpage for the BitShares Blockchain

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
@xeroc, do you?
I totally do!

Though I have some critiques on it:

* If you focus on OpenLedger, then Openledger should pay you.
* I would love to see (already in the very beginning) an explanation video that distinguishes BitShares from OpenLedger/FreedomLedger/MakerX(and whatever comes next). This is where we TOTALLY failed. People believe BitShares is owned bit OpenLedger.
* Then I would like to see more walk-throughs and don't think we need all the tech lectures just yet. Tell people how to do things, then tell people how it works later on. There is documentation (in text form) for this already, so I don't think we needs this just yet.

Go for it!

@Chronos now has the votes of everyone at BitShares Munich too :)
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline dannotestein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
    • BlockTrades International
  • BitShares: btsnow
What can we do to bring some sense into LTM?
Restrict more ops to require LTM ... like `create_asset`, `create_withdraw_permission` and stuff

Tweaking the fees is certainly a good way forward. However any fee that we increase would have consequences.  Those who wishes to create asset may no longer find it worth while to do so or that they may find a competitor chain cheaper and make more $ense.  IMHO, we do not want to go a similar path as  the 20-US-cent-transfer-fee.

We need to find a price point where we can bring in good revenue and attractive to LTM-buyers, and yet comfortable to our target market. ie the consumers are willing to pay.
We should certainly be careful about raising fees, but if prices for creating assets are too small, I think it's actually a weakness for our chain because of the extra  mess it creates in the assets view and is more likely to lead to asset name squatting. I think requiring a minimum investment of an LTM is a cheap requirement to create assets, and I doubt that anyone not willing to spend that amount (or basing their decision on what chain to use based on such a small amount) is likely to bring interesting assets to our market.

Also, I think we're hijacking Chrono's thread, so going to repost my last post:

@xeroc interesting idea. I think since the worker proposal can be voted out at any time, and the payment will vest for 30 days, shareholders are already well protected.

I've produced a video to introduce this worker proposal! Check it out: https://youtu.be/RYFmBVTJodY
I agree, Chronos, and the videos you've produced so far speak for the quality of your work. I wish I had seen a video like the one above the first time I voted: I was ready to file a bug report before I figured out the need to press the publish changes button.

For anyone who's not voted before and would like to vote for this proposal, I recommend watching the above video clip.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2016, 02:44:07 am by dannotestein »
http://blocktrades.us Fast/Safe/High-Liquidity Crypto Coin Converter

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
What can we do to bring some sense into LTM?
Restrict more ops to require LTM ... like `create_asset`, `create_withdraw_permission` and stuff

Tweaking the fees is certainly a good way forward. However any fee that we increase would have consequences.  Those who wishes to create asset may no longer find it worth while to do so or that they may find a competitor chain cheaper and make more $ense.  IMHO, we do not want to go a similar path as  the 20-US-cent-transfer-fee.

We need to find a price point where we can bring in good revenue and attractive to LTM-buyers, and yet comfortable to our target market. ie the consumers are willing to pay.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2016, 02:26:22 am by cube »
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.

Offline dannotestein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
    • BlockTrades International
  • BitShares: btsnow
@xeroc interesting idea. I think since the worker proposal can be voted out at any time, and the payment will vest for 30 days, shareholders are already well protected.

I've produced a video to introduce this worker proposal! Check it out: https://youtu.be/RYFmBVTJodY
I agree, Chronos, and the videos you've produced so far speak for the quality of your work. I wish I had seen a video like the one above the first time I voted: I was ready to file a bug report before I figured out the need to press the publish changes button.

For anyone who's not voted before and would like to vote for this proposal, I recommend watching the above video clip.
http://blocktrades.us Fast/Safe/High-Liquidity Crypto Coin Converter

Offline Chronos

@xeroc interesting idea. I think since the worker proposal can be voted out at any time, and the payment will vest for 30 days, shareholders are already well protected.

I've produced a video to introduce this worker proposal! Check it out: https://youtu.be/RYFmBVTJodY
« Last Edit: May 21, 2016, 11:33:18 pm by Chronos »

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
@chronos .. you can probably convince more people to approve your worker if you added the committee-account to your worker account such that you need the commutees approval to claim your funds ..
that givea shareholders more confidence and influence but leaves you at the a NEED to produce good content that also satisfies the committee account ..

Just a thought though ..

Offline Chronos

Alright, thank you everyone for your feedback! Due to the strong community support, we are moving forward with the worker. I am also putting forward a witness node for your consideration, to help me understand the network from the inside out.

The worker will run for three months, from June 1 to Aug 31. This gives us about 10 days to get those votes in before the work begins.  I have integrated a 30-day vesting period to the worker funds.

Please support the chronos-youtube worker. http://cryptofresh.com/workers

Thank you!
« Last Edit: May 21, 2016, 12:09:47 am by Chronos »

Offline Chronos

What can we do to bring some sense into LTM?
Restrict more ops to require LTM ... like `create_asset`, `create_withdraw_permission` and stuff
That's pretty brilliant. I was thinking that either fees had to rise (not such a good idea) or LTM cost had to fall (not such a good idea). "Create Asset" is a good candidate for an operation to require LTM.

Offline dannotestein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
    • BlockTrades International
  • BitShares: btsnow
What can we do to bring some sense into LTM?
Restrict more ops to require LTM ... like `create_asset`, `create_withdraw_permission` and stuff
Sounds like a good idea. Asset creation shouldn't be totally casual anyways.
http://blocktrades.us Fast/Safe/High-Liquidity Crypto Coin Converter

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
What can we do to bring some sense into LTM?
Restrict more ops to require LTM ... like `create_asset`, `create_withdraw_permission` and stuff

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube

With the drastically reduced fees, there is really no point to upgrade!!! The way I look at it, saving 80% on what is almost a free trade amounts to minimal savings. Spending a bunch of your capital to upgrade to LTM just doesn't make a lot of sense anymore.
That is the point.... now
"All it takes it so convince people to upgrade to LTM." ..when it makes no sense to do so!

Let's look at the future then.

What can we do to bring some sense into LTM?
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
The referral program sounds good on paper, but after the fees were adjusted it has become pretty much worthless. The top two leading referrers have ~1,600 referred accounts between them and less than a few thousand bts vesting (referral income) each.
I disagree. All it takes it so convince people to upgrade to LTM. Once people see the value in LTM the referral program will be worth it.
All it takes it so convince people to upgrade to LTM.
In other words, all it takes is to convince people of something that is currently unlikely: that being an LTM will be long-term profitable because of fee savings and referral fees. I'd agree that the referral system probably isn't compelling for most people right now, if they understand the fee structure.

With the drastically reduced fees, there is really no point to upgrade!!! The way I look at it, saving 80% on what is almost a free trade amounts to minimal savings. Spending a bunch of your capital to upgrade to LTM just doesn't make a lot of sense anymore.
That is the point.... now
"All it takes it so convince people to upgrade to LTM." ..when it makes no sense to do so!
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.