Author Topic: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC  (Read 10341 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #45 on: March 06, 2014, 05:21:42 pm »
Am I to go and beg Invictus to invest in my vision? I mean I could but ultimately they will hold the power and my vision would be very limited by their choices and decisions.

Or do I do 20% for AGS/PTS holders and then another 20% of funding the same way? Will people not be sick of these funding rounds?

I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on these matters. I think it's really important. Let me give you my take on it by putting myself in your shoes, and then tell me what I'm missing.

You allocate 20% to the community here and you would get people's attention and judgement. If everyone here loves your idea then Invictus will necessarily follow up on it, as Daniel Larimer has numerously declared that Invictus works for the PTS/AGS shareholders.

Once you have the favor of this community, you'll be placed centrally on the new website they are building, which will fast-track you ahead of everyone else in terms of publicity. You'll have all infrastructure necessary, and everyone will look to Invictus to see how they are treating you, so Invictus has to overcompensate you on all points for your allocation. First child will be spoiled!

And you'd still have 80-whatever-% left to do a fundraiser on your own.

I can't see how it's not a good deal atm. It just seems that nobody realizes it because Invictus has been lagging in their promotional efforts. If I had been an apt developer I'd go for it no question; like it or not, Invictus are first-movers in the realm of fundraising, and the funds will show their power in the next months. You just have to convince regular joe PTS/AGS shareholder that you have a decent product and you're set for the moon.

Make it coincide with their new website launch and you'll moon^2. If you really have something and aren't just puffing air, then I can't imagine why you wouldn't take this opportunity that lies right in front of you. You'll be set for life if you just do it good enough, and first.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 05:34:56 pm by CLains »

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #46 on: March 06, 2014, 05:36:41 pm »
Okay so you don't undertand the bounty idea.

It was "Invictus defines the metrics by which a successful DAC should be judged"

then you say "The most profitable DAC that honors the social contract after 12 months gets 20,000 PTS - The Most profitable DAC that honors the social contract after 18 months gets 15,000PTS, after 2 years 10,000PTS etc.

You do not define what a successful dac looks like, only how you judge it when a bunch of DACs are competing for the prize.  You ASSUME you will be successful and allow the market enough time to deliver what you're asking for because the prize is big.

You start with high amounts because you believe PTS will succeed, and so after 18 months 15,000PTS will be worth more than 20,000PTS was six months before that.  BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL WITH BUILDING THE ECOSYSTEM.

We have never done bounties like this, Invictus only has tasks and chores they want someone to do for them.  That is not a good bounty campaign, that is overpaying for specific tasks because your pool of people who even see it's available is too small.

If we're expecting Invictus to pick all "winning" DACs that can be funded, it sounds like we're in for a bad time.  Invictus has been terrible at important decisions so far, I don't see why adding public spectacle would change that.

You're totally right, I re-read the OP and now agree with you even more.

In case you missed it I'm collecting things to talk about with I3 in person, you've been writing a lot and I don't want good stuff you say to be missed:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3420.0

I did not miss it.  Invictus reads the forums, and it's how they've asked their investors to interact with them.  They should respond in the way they requested we interact with them.
Email me at [email protected]

Offline rysgc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
    • DACZine.com
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #47 on: March 06, 2014, 06:13:29 pm »
What happened to the people who start up their own next big thing whether it be an app, game, website or DAC in their spare time? If you have a great idea and the skill-set to do it, just go for it and pick up some funding along the way or when it's ready for launch to pay lawyers or a marketing team. You'll be your own investor, paying with time.

Here, every time you wonder "Why wouldn't someone just do it for free, when they're not working at their paying job, and then give away 20% of the money supply for nothing" just think of this

WHY WOULD THEY?

For the community kickstarting your project?

[edit]
Listen I do understand the issue here but me as a person would not be held back by not getting funding if I believe in something and have no problem giving back to the community , without it no-one would be even dreaming about these things in the first place so 20% is a small price to pay in my opinion.
[/edit]
« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 06:17:58 pm by GodsCreation »
DACZine.com - Receive all the latest DAC and BitShares community news straight to your inbox. Signup here or Submit news

Offline bytemaster

Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #48 on: March 06, 2014, 07:21:47 pm »
The bounty system does not work and we will not continue to use it for the development of large scale projects.   Developers do not like it and we end up having to pay more than we would otherwise AND having to judge it AND having to deal with hurt feelings of the losers.

We will be using bounties only for very small tasks going forward.    I took the bounty approach following Adam's advice and quite frankly it was a disaster for most things.   There were some successful efforts.   We are going to move to a tip system for people who take initiative and find things that need done and make a positive contribution.   

We already have a bounty out for a straightforward DAC to modify Bitcoin with TaPOS and dividends. 
We are funding the development of BitShares Music with a 3rd party
We are actively recruiting people who what to take a lead on several different DAC ideas.   
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #49 on: March 06, 2014, 07:22:51 pm »
What happened to the people who start up their own next big thing whether it be an app, game, website or DAC in their spare time? If you have a great idea and the skill-set to do it, just go for it and pick up some funding along the way or when it's ready for launch to pay lawyers or a marketing team. You'll be your own investor, paying with time.

Here, every time you wonder "Why wouldn't someone just do it for free, when they're not working at their paying job, and then give away 20% of the money supply for nothing" just think of this

WHY WOULD THEY?

For the community kickstarting your project?

[edit]
Listen I do understand the issue here but me as a person would not be held back by not getting funding if I believe in something and have no problem giving back to the community , without it no-one would be even dreaming about these things in the first place so 20% is a small price to pay in my opinion.
[/edit]

Dude, you're missing the point.  If Invictus was the only game in town you could concievably be right but you're saying "well they're only giving away 20% and then can fundraise with the other 80%" but you still aren't explaining what value they are getting from the 20% they give up?   The reason you aren't addressing this is because there is no good reason, the community is small and already at capacity on projects they can help with.  So you're giving people coins so they'll be more interested in buying more coins from you?  That makes zero sense.  If the idea is good and I think the team can execute, I'm going to invest whether they honor PTS or not.  In fact, it's better if they don't honor PTS since I don't see the value in honoring PTS besides the fact that I hold some personally and so benefit.

I see why *I* would want people to honor the thing and give me free money, but I don't see what advantage they have and I don't see why that would be better than just doing what they want with 100%. 

You say it's a small price to pay, I think that depends on what you're buying and as a guy who is helping develop five new token based systems I can tell you 20% is an ENORMOUS amount even when you're trading it for something valuable.  We are only giving away 30% of LTBCoins to the audience over a five year period of time because even though they're a huge part of what we're building, there are more important uses for the initial token distribution.  I am allocating 10% for infrastructure development and will be laying out a long term bounty system as I have suggested invictus do.

The whole point of systems like this is they are more efficient.  When you insert arbitrary value-sucking bullshit, you remove the advantage and you lead to people preparing to fork IMMEDIATELy as we've already seen just because they percieve this community as weak and vulnerable.  They're not wrong. 
Email me at [email protected]

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2906
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #50 on: March 06, 2014, 07:24:16 pm »
Am I to go and beg Invictus to invest in my vision? I mean I could but ultimately they will hold the power and my vision would be very limited by their choices and decisions.

Or do I do 20% for AGS/PTS holders and then another 20% of funding the same way? Will people not be sick of these funding rounds?

I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on these matters. I think it's really important. Let me give you my take on it by putting myself in your shoes, and then tell me what I'm missing.

You allocate 20% to the community here and you would get people's attention and judgement. If everyone here loves your idea then Invictus will necessarily follow up on it, as Daniel Larimer has numerously declared that Invictus works for the PTS/AGS shareholders.

Once you have the favor of this community, you'll be placed centrally on the new website they are building, which will fast-track you ahead of everyone else in terms of publicity. You'll have all infrastructure necessary, and everyone will look to Invictus to see how they are treating you, so Invictus has to overcompensate you on all points for your allocation. First child will be spoiled!

And you'd still have 80-whatever-% left to do a fundraiser on your own.

I can't see how it's not a good deal atm. It just seems that nobody realizes it because Invictus has been lagging in their promotional efforts. If I had been an apt developer I'd go for it no question; like it or not, Invictus are first-movers in the realm of fundraising, and the funds will show their power in the next months. You just have to convince regular joe PTS/AGS shareholder that you have a decent product and you're set for the moon.

Make it coincide with their new website launch and you'll moon^2. If you really have something and aren't just puffing air, then I can't imagine why you wouldn't take this opportunity that lies right in front of you. You'll be set for life if you just do it good enough, and first.

It's not just Invictus.  Yes, we have a responsibility to vet anything that uses AGS funds, but as we said in the Shark Tank newsletter article:

Quote
Bring us your business plan, win the hearts and minds of our community, and get past the industry leaders on our Panel of Judges at our Las Vegas Beyond Bitcoin Summit and you could win our support in incubating your new company.

You view it as "begging" but I spent my whole career writing proposals to funding sources of all kinds.  Such sources don't just throw money in the street.  They all have a process to make sure the money is used effectively.

We have defined a good-faith process that involves everybody as described in that article.  It offers to put funding in the hands of those who need help to get started based upon a public merit-based competition.

Nothing stops people from pursuing other models.  This is the one we have developed so far and we will keep refining it.

We don't believe people with the resources to develop and deploy a DAC need any more incentive to do so.  A successful DAC is its own reward.

We choose to help those who don't have the resources by removing obstacles in their paths.

« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 07:37:08 pm by Stan »
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #51 on: March 06, 2014, 07:45:35 pm »
Am I to go and beg Invictus to invest in my vision? I mean I could but ultimately they will hold the power and my vision would be very limited by their choices and decisions.

Or do I do 20% for AGS/PTS holders and then another 20% of funding the same way? Will people not be sick of these funding rounds?

I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on these matters. I think it's really important. Let me give you my take on it by putting myself in your shoes, and then tell me what I'm missing.

You allocate 20% to the community here and you would get people's attention and judgement. If everyone here loves your idea then Invictus will necessarily follow up on it, as Daniel Larimer has numerously declared that Invictus works for the PTS/AGS shareholders.

Once you have the favor of this community, you'll be placed centrally on the new website they are building, which will fast-track you ahead of everyone else in terms of publicity. You'll have all infrastructure necessary, and everyone will look to Invictus to see how they are treating you, so Invictus has to overcompensate you on all points for your allocation. First child will be spoiled!

And you'd still have 80-whatever-% left to do a fundraiser on your own.

I can't see how it's not a good deal atm. It just seems that nobody realizes it because Invictus has been lagging in their promotional efforts. If I had been an apt developer I'd go for it no question; like it or not, Invictus are first-movers in the realm of fundraising, and the funds will show their power in the next months. You just have to convince regular joe PTS/AGS shareholder that you have a decent product and you're set for the moon.

Make it coincide with their new website launch and you'll moon^2. If you really have something and aren't just puffing air, then I can't imagine why you wouldn't take this opportunity that lies right in front of you. You'll be set for life if you just do it good enough, and first.

It's not just Invictus.  Yes, we have a responsibility to vet anything that uses AGS funds, but as we said in the Shark Tank newsletter article:

Quote
Bring us your business plan, win the hearts and minds of our community, and get past the industry leaders on our Panel of Judges at our Las Vegas Beyond Bitcoin Summit and you could win our support in incubating your new company.

You view it as "begging" but I spent my whole career writing proposals to funding sources of all kinds.  Such sources don't just throw money in the street.  They all have a process to make sure the money is used effectively.

We have defined a good-faith process that involves everybody as described in that article.  It offers to put funding in the hands of those who need help to get started based upon a public merit-based competition.

Nothing stops people from pursuing other models.  This is the one we have developed so far and we will keep refining it.

We don't believe people with the resources to develop and deploy a DAC need any more incentive to do so.  A successful DAC is its own reward.

We choose to help those who don't have the resources by removing obstacles in their paths.

You spent your whole career writing proposals, and you want to bring the legacy, bottlenecked system into Invictus?  Way to build the new paradigm
Email me at [email protected]

Offline rysgc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
    • DACZine.com
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #52 on: March 06, 2014, 08:05:40 pm »
Adam , I told you my point of view, it's not a regular business kind of view or the 'best' view but if I know some people in the community can make my project skyrocket why not? I don't care about the others who do 'nothing' , they're in luck and so am I on a grander scale so for me it's no problem and luckily I'm still in control of my own life and actions.
DACZine.com - Receive all the latest DAC and BitShares community news straight to your inbox. Signup here or Submit news

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2906
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #53 on: March 06, 2014, 09:00:11 pm »
Quote
Quote
It's not just Invictus.  Yes, we have a responsibility to vet anything that uses AGS funds, but as we said in the Shark Tank newsletter article:

Quote
Bring us your business plan, win the hearts and minds of our community, and get past the industry leaders on our Panel of Judges at our Las Vegas Beyond Bitcoin Summit and you could win our support in incubating your new company.

You view it as "begging" but I spent my whole career writing proposals to funding sources of all kinds.  Such sources don't just throw money in the street.  They all have a process to make sure the money is used effectively.

We have defined a good-faith process that involves everybody as described in that article.  It offers to put funding in the hands of those who need help to get started based upon a public merit-based competition.

Nothing stops people from pursuing other models.  This is the one we have developed so far and we will keep refining it.

We don't believe people with the resources to develop and deploy a DAC need any more incentive to do so.  A successful DAC is its own reward.

We choose to help those who don't have the resources by removing obstacles in their paths.

You spent your whole career writing proposals, and you want to bring the legacy, bottlenecked system into Invictus?  Way to build the new paradigm

Adam,

We obviously disagree on what constitutes responsible management of resources.  We have promised to use our best judgement to build the industry for the long term.  I outlined all the factors that drive our decision making process here:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3394.msg42988#msg42988

You consistently ignore most of these factors while you lobby to gain control over funds that were donated as a vote of confidence in our offer to manage them responsibly. 

I would encourage you (or someone you nominate) to offer your services as an alternative Industry Developer with a different vision.  Tell everyone how you will manage their contributions and solicit their donations.

I think it would be healthy to give people the option of several developers
each with a different vision and management style.

I would happily support you or your like-minded nominee in the role of Industry Developer. We might even post your angel address right beside ours and give you your own page to explain how you would use other people's funds differently. This would let everyone vote with their donations - the sincerest form of expressing a preferred approach.

I think two or more cooperating Industry Developers each pursuing alternative approaches would be healthier for the community than the current insurgent process of sewing dissatisfaction and discord within the community.  That only hurts all the stakeholders here and drives away newcomers before they even get a chance to understand the potential.

What do you say?  Truce?



Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline rysgc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
    • DACZine.com
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #54 on: March 06, 2014, 09:07:17 pm »
That only hurts all the stakeholders here and drives away newcomers before they even get a chance to understand the potential.

Word on!
DACZine.com - Receive all the latest DAC and BitShares community news straight to your inbox. Signup here or Submit news

Offline TsonicTsunami

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #55 on: March 06, 2014, 09:17:44 pm »


Adam,

We obviously disagree on what constitutes responsible management of resources.  We have promised to use our best judgement to build the industry for the long term.  I outlined all the factors that drive our decision making process here:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3394.msg42988#msg42988

You consistently ignore most of these factors while you lobby to gain control over funds that were donated as a vote of confidence in our offer to manage them responsibly. 

I would encourage you (or someone you nominate) to offer your services as an alternative Industry Developer with a different vision.  Tell everyone how you will manage their contributions and solicit their donations.

I think it would be healthy to give people the option of several developers
each with a different vision and management style.

I would happily support you or your like-minded nominee in the role of Industry Developer. We might even post your angel address right beside ours and give you your own page to explain how you would use other people's funds differently. This would let everyone vote with their donations - the sincerest form of expressing a preferred approach.

I think two or more cooperating Industry Developers each pursuing alternative approaches would be healthier for the community than the current insurgent process of sewing dissatisfaction and discord within the community.  That only hurts all the stakeholders here and drives away newcomers before they even get a chance to understand the potential.

What do you say?  Truce?


This sounds reasonable.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 09:19:23 pm by TsonicTsunami »

Offline barwizi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 764
  • Noirbits, NoirShares, NoirEx.....lol, noir anyone?
    • View Profile
    • Noirbitstalk.org
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #56 on: March 06, 2014, 09:49:02 pm »
Quote
Quote
It's not just Invictus.  Yes, we have a responsibility to vet anything that uses AGS funds, but as we said in the Shark Tank newsletter article:

Quote
Bring us your business plan, win the hearts and minds of our community, and get past the industry leaders on our Panel of Judges at our Las Vegas Beyond Bitcoin Summit and you could win our support in incubating your new company.

You view it as "begging" but I spent my whole career writing proposals to funding sources of all kinds.  Such sources don't just throw money in the street.  They all have a process to make sure the money is used effectively.

We have defined a good-faith process that involves everybody as described in that article.  It offers to put funding in the hands of those who need help to get started based upon a public merit-based competition.

Nothing stops people from pursuing other models.  This is the one we have developed so far and we will keep refining it.

We don't believe people with the resources to develop and deploy a DAC need any more incentive to do so.  A successful DAC is its own reward.

We choose to help those who don't have the resources by removing obstacles in their paths.

You spent your whole career writing proposals, and you want to bring the legacy, bottlenecked system into Invictus?  Way to build the new paradigm

Adam,

We obviously disagree on what constitutes responsible management of resources.  We have promised to use our best judgement to build the industry for the long term.  I outlined all the factors that drive our decision making process here:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3394.msg42988#msg42988

You consistently ignore most of these factors while you lobby to gain control over funds that were donated as a vote of confidence in our offer to manage them responsibly. 

I would encourage you (or someone you nominate) to offer your services as an alternative Industry Developer with a different vision.  Tell everyone how you will manage their contributions and solicit their donations.

I think it would be healthy to give people the option of several developers
each with a different vision and management style.

I would happily support you or your like-minded nominee in the role of Industry Developer. We might even post your angel address right beside ours and give you your own page to explain how you would use other people's funds differently. This would let everyone vote with their donations - the sincerest form of expressing a preferred approach.

I think two or more cooperating Industry Developers each pursuing alternative approaches would be healthier for the community than the current insurgent process of sewing dissatisfaction and discord within the community.  That only hurts all the stakeholders here and drives away newcomers before they even get a chance to understand the potential.

What do you say?  Truce?

Quote
I think two or more cooperating Industry Developers each pursuing alternative approaches would be healthier for the community than the current

those who choose to cooperate are moved "off topic".

Quote
I would encourage you (or someone you nominate) to offer your services as an alternative Industry Developer with a different vision.  Tell everyone how you will manage their contributions and solicit their donations.

Invictus has already cornered the available funding.


My solution is simple, I have begun creating clean templates with guides for the software side of things, now all people have to do is apply their business models. Rather than shunning these people like you did to me, let them be, you do not own the industry and should not dictate policy, let the community decide by way of interest , not you trying to hide us away "off topic".
--Bar--  PiNEJGUv4AZVZkLuF6hV4xwbYTRp5etWWJ

The magical land of crypto, no freebies people.

Offline bitcoinba

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #57 on: March 06, 2014, 10:04:00 pm »
Quote
Quote
It's not just Invictus.  Yes, we have a responsibility to vet anything that uses AGS funds, but as we said in the Shark Tank newsletter article:

Quote
Bring us your business plan, win the hearts and minds of our community, and get past the industry leaders on our Panel of Judges at our Las Vegas Beyond Bitcoin Summit and you could win our support in incubating your new company.

You view it as "begging" but I spent my whole career writing proposals to funding sources of all kinds.  Such sources don't just throw money in the street.  They all have a process to make sure the money is used effectively.

We have defined a good-faith process that involves everybody as described in that article.  It offers to put funding in the hands of those who need help to get started based upon a public merit-based competition.

Nothing stops people from pursuing other models.  This is the one we have developed so far and we will keep refining it.

We don't believe people with the resources to develop and deploy a DAC need any more incentive to do so.  A successful DAC is its own reward.

We choose to help those who don't have the resources by removing obstacles in their paths.

You spent your whole career writing proposals, and you want to bring the legacy, bottlenecked system into Invictus?  Way to build the new paradigm

Adam,

We obviously disagree on what constitutes responsible management of resources.  We have promised to use our best judgement to build the industry for the long term.  I outlined all the factors that drive our decision making process here:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3394.msg42988#msg42988

You consistently ignore most of these factors while you lobby to gain control over funds that were donated as a vote of confidence in our offer to manage them responsibly. 

I would encourage you (or someone you nominate) to offer your services as an alternative Industry Developer with a different vision.  Tell everyone how you will manage their contributions and solicit their donations.

I think it would be healthy to give people the option of several developers
each with a different vision and management style.

I would happily support you or your like-minded nominee in the role of Industry Developer. We might even post your angel address right beside ours and give you your own page to explain how you would use other people's funds differently. This would let everyone vote with their donations - the sincerest form of expressing a preferred approach.

I think two or more cooperating Industry Developers each pursuing alternative approaches would be healthier for the community than the current insurgent process of sewing dissatisfaction and discord within the community.  That only hurts all the stakeholders here and drives away newcomers before they even get a chance to understand the potential.

What do you say?  Truce?





 +5%

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #58 on: March 06, 2014, 11:00:35 pm »
Stan,
I'm not trying to gain control of funds.  It is insulting you would insinuate I am wasting my breath here on anything other than trying to help you fix the mess you have created.  If you cared about not scaring away investors, invictus would have a blog.  I looked at my post history, I told you that, in my own name, in public on this forum the first week of January.  I told Daniel privately for weeks.  I expressed my concerns to Brian multiple times, and he blew me off. There are basic things you guys have refused to do for reasons that are unfathomable to me, but it's led to the place we are now.  Still not even a blog.

With the long term bounties, I am trying to get Invictus to allocate funds to whomever best fulfills what Invictus defines as a profitable DAC.  I am asking this be done in such a way that is consistent with incentivizing teams who have the ability to make long term strategic plans. instead of only using funds to pay for internal company operations, basic payroll and bounty-chores with the promise to give away more funds to people who convince you their idea is good enough.   Stan, I don't know how you can look at how things have gone so far and say anything other than you guys have been wrong about more important things than you've been right on, and the deal has had to change several times because of that wrongness.

I've laid out my proposal calmly and simply many times both publicly and privately, I even shared a paper with daniel on it weeks ago entitled "The collaborative roadmap - incentivizing R&D with bounties" from my Distributed Minufacturing project that explains the logic behind this.  I have done my best to bring these changes about because I feel like you guys are talking about decentralization and building centralized solutions to control funds which was never the deal. 

You can choose to take this personally or insinuate whatever you want about me but I think it should be pretty clear I have been a personally supporter of your project, want you guys to succeed and I feel strongly enough you're on the wrong path to be spending my time talking at you.  Why would I do that, am I a hater?  No..... Just a long time investor who has watched you set and fail to meet target after target, and who no longer trusts you.   I am not alone in that, it's just that most people just leave.

As mentioned I'll lay out my suggested bounties but I have zero interest in fundraising.  You guys took in millions of dollars already, what the hell are you doing with that money if not incentivizing the long term growth of the ecosystem?  Where in the AGS agreement did it say "and invictus will try one experiment to incentivize participation per annum with these funds, never more than one at a time" because I didn't get that memo.    The point of collecting this much money up front is to have it to guarantee you can spend it at a later point when it is more valuable because you have succeeded.

You are looking at this money and saying "well, we better surivive on this for the next few years!" but again, I didn't realize the point of this was to pay invictus salaries - I thought it was to incentivize the growth of the ecosystem.

You've got to spend money to make money, outcome oriented bounties are the only way you can 100% guarantee you are not spending money on anything other than the solution you're looking for, and while the downside of these is they require larger prizes and more time, that is an advantage talking about a deflationary, ecosystem based cryptocurrency since the prize will be worth more when its awarded than when it is offered.

Tell me what points I'm missing, I hear you complaining about how unfair I am to do so but I'm happy to address whatever you require further elaboration on.
Email me at [email protected]

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Re: [Proposal] Bounty for First Third Party AGS/PTS Honoring DAC
« Reply #59 on: March 06, 2014, 11:26:24 pm »
Stan,
I'm not trying to gain control of funds.  It is insulting you would insinuate I am wasting my breath here on anything other than trying to help you fix the mess you have created.  If you cared about not scaring away investors, invictus would have a blog.  I looked at my post history, I told you that, in my own name, in public on this forum the first week of January.  I told Daniel privately for weeks.  I expressed my concerns to Brian multiple times, and he blew me off. There are basic things you guys have refused to do for reasons that are unfathomable to me, but it's led to the place we are now.  Still not even a blog.
+5%
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.