March Newsletter

[Stan]

Final version, for the historical record.
As mailed to 756 recipients days and days ago.

http://invictus-innovations.com/s/News-Letter-06-March-2014-tlyr.pdf

Hi Stan,

May be I overlooked. I cannot find the previous newsletters any more on the new site bitshares.org
The newsletter page seems only for subscription purpose (future newsletters, not past).

Do we still have an online archive of all newsletters? It should be useful for people like me who may overlook or miss some newsletters.

Thanks.

They seem to have gotten lost in the shuffle. 
I'll see what I can do.

[ffwong]

Final version, for the historical record.
As mailed to 756 recipients days and days ago.

http://invictus-innovations.com/s/News-Letter-06-March-2014-tlyr.pdf

Hi Stan,

May be I overlooked. I cannot find the previous newsletters any more on the new site bitshares.org
The newsletter page seems only for subscription purpose (future newsletters, not past).

Do we still have an online archive of all newsletters? It should be useful for people like me who may overlook or miss some newsletters.

Thanks.

[mint chocolate chip]

Final version, for the historical record.
As mailed to 756 recipients days and days ago.

http://invictus-innovations.com/s/News-Letter-06-March-2014-tlyr.pdf

http://bitshares.org/news/newsletter/ --> For those wanting to sign-up to receive future newsletters.

Suggestions:
Include links to current/past newsletters on the newsletter page. I do not think you can get to the current newsletter via the website at the moment.

Include a link to the newsletter in your original post.

Consider having the linked to version of the newsletter have a noticeable spot where newcomers who follow a link to it can have an easy way to subscribe.

That is great content, host the newsletters on the new site bitshares.org instead of the old site. That is the site we want to get more search traffic.

[Stan]

Final version, for the historical record.
As mailed to 756 recipients days and days ago.

http://invictus-innovations.com/s/News-Letter-06-March-2014-tlyr.pdf

[doxymoron]

Also, you may not want to refer to Dan as Bytemaster.  Many people probably have no idea who you are talking about, and a forum screen name really shouldn't be used in an official newsletter.

[donkeypong]

"Spring"

[mint chocolate chip]

At this point, can't you just change it to "April Newsletter" and forget about March?

[CWEvans]

hehe

"Don’t give your shares away to the miners and pump and dump geniuses" ?

General public has a positive connotation to me... What made it sound bad to me was the slightly greedy subtext:  Don't give anything to the public give it all to us! Doesn't make you trust that "us"....

Would a riff on OverkillCoin to make this point be over the top?

[donkeypong]

i understand the appeal of crowdsourcing the edits, but once something like a newsletter is posted in any official capacity it is liable to be reposted, quoted, etc... anyone could have easily taken the initial draft and circulated the unfinished work for the web at large. could this scenario undermine/dilute the value of the final draft of the monthly newsletter?

my worry is this:
if i knew nothing of bitshares/invictus and i saw the newsletter posted on reddit or tweeted in its unfinished form, my gut instinct after seeing the third or fourth error would be "wow, what a bunch of amateurs, they cant even be bothered to proofread their publications." my next move? click the back button on my browser and forget about bitshares

i suppose my biggest fear is that other people are just as short-sighted, irrational, judgmental, and nitpicky over grammatical stuff as i am 

please tell me im crazy

You're not crazy. But if that stops someone from taking a closer look or being drawn in by Stan's amazing enthusiasm and the promise of these DAC products, then maybe that person wouldn't be such a good prospect anyway.

[solaaire]

i understand the appeal of crowdsourcing the edits, but once something like a newsletter is posted in any official capacity it is liable to be reposted, quoted, etc... anyone could have easily taken the initial draft and circulated the unfinished work for the web at large. could this scenario undermine/dilute the value of the final draft of the monthly newsletter?

my worry is this:
if i knew nothing of bitshares/invictus and i saw the newsletter posted on reddit or tweeted in its unfinished form, my gut instinct after seeing the third or fourth error would be "wow, what a bunch of amateurs, they cant even be bothered to proofread their publications." my next move? click the back button on my browser and forget about bitshares

i suppose my biggest fear is that other people are just as short-sighted, irrational, judgmental, and nitpicky over grammatical stuff as i am 

please tell me im crazy

[amatoB]

Well done! I like all parts I didnt quote here   That said I think that there are a few red flags that require some work.   

The relation between BTS prototype and BTS family is not that super clear to me. Maybe it would help to name examples for each. I understood it this way: BTS Prototype is any Proto share that give you a stake in a new DAC released. A BTS family is a parent DAC that is already technologically specific for a certain type of DAC function and can be forked/tweaked to make more complex/more specific applications.   

Developers! Don’t give your shares away to the general public who will mostly just dump them for
pizza — and suppress your price. Give them instead to BTS prototype share holders who have proven
they will buy and hold them,
and buy more of them
— boosting your price!

The Larimer folks are the most trustworthy I can think of.
But if I would know nothing about bitshares/invictus and the newsletter would be the first thing I read I would find the above paragraph very suspicious!!
Maybe something more subtle like: "PTS/AGS holders have proven to be long term investors in innovative projects. Appealing to a shareholder group of trend and value seekers, avoiding pump and dump cycles, can be a benefit in itself for your venture."
<-- Style: Let the reader make the final conclusion himself!

In general I would avoid exaggerations like

quadruple

....and many more. Invictus tends to promise a lot always. Such exaggerations come across as suspiciousin itself ("to good to be true") and bring the potential of disappointment. I am not saying that they are suspicous if you know all the context but it cames across as such to someone new to all this! Maybe that is just my over critical attitude.

Most alt coins have value for speculative reasons only.

90% + of Bitcoin's value is a speculation on its future use for ecomerce and remittance as well. It would also be wrong to claim that the valuation of all Invictus DACs and ProtoXXX are not speculation. Nothing works yet. No blame there but we should be accurate and fair. Everything else comes accross as arrogant ans suspicious!! Please take that serious. Offtopic: BM's and Toast's video about BTS DNS was nice but reveived some reasonable criticism for it's disrespect towards Namecoin. Dont make yourself enemies if you don't have to. That all comes back!!! Let's be polite and fact based.

Like penny stocks, they start out so cheap they
simply have to go up! (And if they don’t, you haven’t lost much.)

Not true. If you want to gain much from a penny stock you also have to invest much, so you can lose lots.
And they dont have to go up. With this claim you say that the (penny) stock market's effeciency is zero. If it is not zero it is not clear what the penny stock will do and the penny stock price is not so far away from a fair value price.
Don't make false statements in your own field of expertise!

But it’s rational hype based on something tangible.

I would say: "But it’s a rational hype based on the ability of the digital company to make profits." (name what you want to say if you can)

You can even keep them all for your own greedy personal gain (if you really think that will make your DAC successful)

Leave out "greedy". Suspicion / an attack towards developers that read it rigth from the start is not good.

Eddie has worked for the major label system

"a" or "the" label system?

Overall: Keep the explanations simple (whenever possible) and avoid exaggerations that look scamy.

Excellent post, in my opinion. I would add that focusing blatantly on the "how much can I make?" aspect or "get a cut of every new company, plus x% interest," etc. may excite some people for a while, but catering to baser instincts like greed undermines the professionalism to some degree. Almost everyone in AGS and PTS already knows (or believes) that bitshares has tremendous potential. No need to push so hard. If the products are good, pts and bitshares prices will rise over time, drawing lots more traders, investors, and creative people into this industry.

Overall, though, nice job on the newsletter. I hope that future installments can focus less on why AGS and PTS are such great investments and more on recent events, new hires, new DACs, upcoming events, and what BitShares can do for people and society that ordinary crypto-currencies can't.

[werneo]

Please get a high-school English teacher or some other really nitpicky type to review the newsletter for things like its/it's. You guys have been pretty consistently bad about those kinds of basic spelling/grammar things. A huge portion of the population really cares, and will immediately write you off for making these kinds of mistakes. In official Invictus communications, it's just completely inexcusable to be making these kinds of errors. Please please please have someone who knows all the rules proofread it!

++this

Software developers are notorious for willfully mixing up it's and its

It's very simple:

"It's" is a contraction.  "it's" = "it is"

examples of improper use of it's:

2. It’s “shares” go up in value as it earns more profits - not just because of transient “hype”.
3. It’s shares represent a chance to receive promotional shares in all future clones derived from it

It's just a little thing, but it makes a difference to people who know the difference.

Other than that, please keep up the good work. I am an investor and expect to be insanely wealthy someday quite soon.

[santaclause102]

Well done! I like all parts I didnt quote here   That said I think that there are a few red flags that require some work.   

The relation between BTS prototype and BTS family is not that super clear to me. Maybe it would help to name examples for each. I understood it this way: BTS Prototype is any Proto share that give you a stake in a new DAC released. A BTS family is a parent DAC that is already technologically specific for a certain type of DAC function and can be forked/tweaked to make more complex/more specific applications.   

Developers! Don’t give your shares away to the general public who will mostly just dump them for
pizza — and suppress your price. Give them instead to BTS prototype share holders who have proven
they will buy and hold them,
and buy more of them
— boosting your price!

The Larimer folks are the most trustworthy I can think of.
But if I would know nothing about bitshares/invictus and the newsletter would be the first thing I read I would find the above paragraph very suspicious!!
Maybe something more subtle like: "PTS/AGS holders have proven to be long term investors in innovative projects. Appealing to a shareholder group of trend and value seekers, avoiding pump and dump cycles, can be a benefit in itself for your venture."
<-- Style: Let the reader make the final conclusion himself!

In general I would avoid exaggerations like

quadruple

....and many more. Invictus tends to promise a lot always. Such exaggerations come across as suspiciousin itself ("to good to be true") and bring the potential of disappointment. I am not saying that they are suspicous if you know all the context but it cames across as such to someone new to all this! Maybe that is just my over critical attitude.

Most alt coins have value for speculative reasons only.

90% + of Bitcoin's value is a speculation on its future use for ecomerce and remittance as well. It would also be wrong to claim that the valuation of all Invictus DACs and ProtoXXX are not speculation. Nothing works yet. No blame there but we should be accurate and fair. Everything else comes accross as arrogant ans suspicious!! Please take that serious. Offtopic: BM's and Toast's video about BTS DNS was nice but reveived some reasonable criticism for it's disrespect towards Namecoin. Dont make yourself enemies if you don't have to. That all comes back!!! Let's be polite and fact based.

Like penny stocks, they start out so cheap they
simply have to go up! (And if they don’t, you haven’t lost much.)

Not true. If you want to gain much from a penny stock you also have to invest much, so you can lose lots.
And they dont have to go up. With this claim you say that the (penny) stock market's effeciency is zero. If it is not zero it is not clear what the penny stock will do and the penny stock price is not so far away from a fair value price.
Don't make false statements in your own field of expertise!

But it’s rational hype based on something tangible.

I would say: "But it’s a rational hype based on the ability of the digital company to make profits." (name what you want to say if you can)

You can even keep them all for your own greedy personal gain (if you really think that will make your DAC successful)

Leave out "greedy". Suspicion / an attack towards developers that read it rigth from the start is not good.

Eddie has worked for the major label system

"a" or "the" label system?

Overall: Keep the explanations simple (whenever possible) and avoid exaggerations that look scamy.

Whew!  Great input!  I have attempted to tone down my statements as you suggested wherever I could.  However, sometimes I say things deliberately in a way that I hope will cause a reader to stop and read the idea a second time.  If I'm too diplomatic, I may get through the letter without offending anybody, but I might also fail to make the Most Important Point.  So in one case I added your suggested text without removing what was there just so readers might pause and think about that Most Important Point a little longer.  It now reads like this: 

Developers! Don’t give your shares away to the general public who will mostly just dump them for pizza — and suppress your price.  Give them instead to BTS prototype shareholders who have arguably proven they will buy and hold them — and buy more of them — boosting your price! 

One proof-reader found the above paragraph a bit shocking, preferring something a bit more subtle, like ”PTS/AGS holders have proven to be long term investors in innovative projects. Appealing to a shareholder group of trend and value seekers, avoiding pump and dump cycles, can be a benefit in itself for your venture.”  — If this made you read it twice, we succeeded.

hehe

"Don’t give your shares away to the miners and pump and dump geniuses" ?

General public has a positive connotation to me... What made it sound bad to me was the slightly greedy subtext:  Don't give anything to the public give it all to us! Doesn't make you trust that "us"....

[Stan]

Well done! I like all parts I didnt quote here   That said I think that there are a few red flags that require some work.   

The relation between BTS prototype and BTS family is not that super clear to me. Maybe it would help to name examples for each. I understood it this way: BTS Prototype is any Proto share that give you a stake in a new DAC released. A BTS family is a parent DAC that is already technologically specific for a certain type of DAC function and can be forked/tweaked to make more complex/more specific applications.   

Developers! Don’t give your shares away to the general public who will mostly just dump them for
pizza — and suppress your price. Give them instead to BTS prototype share holders who have proven
they will buy and hold them,
and buy more of them
— boosting your price!

The Larimer folks are the most trustworthy I can think of.
But if I would know nothing about bitshares/invictus and the newsletter would be the first thing I read I would find the above paragraph very suspicious!!
Maybe something more subtle like: "PTS/AGS holders have proven to be long term investors in innovative projects. Appealing to a shareholder group of trend and value seekers, avoiding pump and dump cycles, can be a benefit in itself for your venture."
<-- Style: Let the reader make the final conclusion himself!

In general I would avoid exaggerations like

quadruple

....and many more. Invictus tends to promise a lot always. Such exaggerations come across as suspiciousin itself ("to good to be true") and bring the potential of disappointment. I am not saying that they are suspicous if you know all the context but it cames across as such to someone new to all this! Maybe that is just my over critical attitude.

Most alt coins have value for speculative reasons only.

90% + of Bitcoin's value is a speculation on its future use for ecomerce and remittance as well. It would also be wrong to claim that the valuation of all Invictus DACs and ProtoXXX are not speculation. Nothing works yet. No blame there but we should be accurate and fair. Everything else comes accross as arrogant ans suspicious!! Please take that serious. Offtopic: BM's and Toast's video about BTS DNS was nice but reveived some reasonable criticism for it's disrespect towards Namecoin. Dont make yourself enemies if you don't have to. That all comes back!!! Let's be polite and fact based.

Like penny stocks, they start out so cheap they
simply have to go up! (And if they don’t, you haven’t lost much.)

Not true. If you want to gain much from a penny stock you also have to invest much, so you can lose lots.
And they dont have to go up. With this claim you say that the (penny) stock market's effeciency is zero. If it is not zero it is not clear what the penny stock will do and the penny stock price is not so far away from a fair value price.
Don't make false statements in your own field of expertise!

But it’s rational hype based on something tangible.

I would say: "But it’s a rational hype based on the ability of the digital company to make profits." (name what you want to say if you can)

You can even keep them all for your own greedy personal gain (if you really think that will make your DAC successful)

Leave out "greedy". Suspicion / an attack towards developers that read it rigth from the start is not good.

Eddie has worked for the major label system

"a" or "the" label system?

Overall: Keep the explanations simple (whenever possible) and avoid exaggerations that look scamy.

Whew!  Great input!  I have attempted to tone down my statements as you suggested wherever I could.  However, sometimes I say things deliberately in a way that I hope will cause a reader to stop and read the idea a second time.  If I'm too diplomatic, I may get through the letter without offending anybody, but I might also fail to make the Most Important Point.  So in one case I added your suggested text without removing what was there just so readers might pause and think about that Most Important Point a little longer.  It now reads like this: 

Developers! Don’t give your shares away to the general public who will mostly just dump them for pizza — and suppress your price.  Give them instead to BTS prototype shareholders who have arguably proven they will buy and hold them — and buy more of them — boosting your price! 

One proof-reader found the above paragraph a bit shocking, preferring something a bit more subtle, like ”PTS/AGS holders have proven to be long term investors in innovative projects. Appealing to a shareholder group of trend and value seekers, avoiding pump and dump cycles, can be a benefit in itself for your venture.”  — If this made you read it twice, we succeeded.

[onceuponatime]

Please get a high-school English teacher or some other really nitpicky type to review the newsletter for things like its/it's. You guys have been pretty consistently bad about those kinds of basic spelling/grammar things. A huge portion of the population really cares, and will immediately write you off for making these kinds of mistakes. In official Invictus communications, it's just completely inexcusable to be making these kinds of errors. Please please please have someone who knows all the rules proofread it!

Really? What really matters is the transmission of ideas from their brains to our brains. I already read the newsletter think it is great and am very happy to have read an entertaining informative piece. We have better things to do than bicker over every grammatical mistake.

I agree that from a professional perspective, having things reviewed for grammar errors would be better.   It just means the cost of producing the news letter would go up and additional delays on it being published.

I'm quite good (and quick) at finding grammatical errors and rephrasing sentences to better convey an idea.  I would be happy to proofread these before going out.  I always think it's best to have someone review it who had no part it writing it. 

I will have Stan submit it to review of one or two people skilled in the art prior to publishing future content.  If you would like to fix his mistakes in this version we can update it for the website.

Thanks.

Actually, my fiendishly-clever plan was to use the forum for what everybody agrees its good for - peer review!
I released the *draft* here so I could quickly find all the bugs, errors, typos, contractions, uses of the word "but", and actual serious technical errors that no mortal English teacher could catch.

It would be a shame if I had to hire a proof-reader before submitting the draft to my proofreaders!

This means that those who can tolerate draft-quality get to find out the news a little early and those that are willing to wait for polish and perfection can do so with sublime confidence that it is being proof-read by an army of the best!

 

Thanks Stan. I really appreciate efforts that are mindful of the need to be parsimonious with the Angelshares fund. It would have been wasteful to hire a high school English teacher for something that the forum can, and is happy to, do at no cost (ie. for early access to much appreciated updates).

I'm aure that you realize that sometimes the stylistic criticisms are evident of someone's personal taste - and I often/usually prefer your treatment.