Rest in Peace, DA

[Agent86]

Giving 15% to grow the community is good, very good indeed!

Dilution with 15% all current PTS holder is not good BUT PTS holders must be aware of this already, so it is OK!

But the arrogance it takes for Invictus to treat those 15% of PTS  as theirs, as something that belongs to them...

I can somewhat see why you would like PTS to just stop before the originally planned 2million is reached, however...

Stan is not treating them as his own for his personal profit (huge difference).  Stan and bytemaster had to invest their own money to buy personal PTS & AGS to personally profit from the bitshares project.

Yes, certain decision making for the community is somewhat centralized at the moment.  I think most people invest because they trust Invictus to make good decisions on behalf of the community, and understand that they may not agree with everything.

A lot of communities really suffer because they don't have any communal funds that are spent for everyone's benefit... They are left to beg for donations from the community, and those that don't donate kinda get a free ride from the work and donations of others.

Also, my recommendation if you are worried about 15% is to head over to: http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
Make the commitment, stop sitting on the fence!

I don't mean to make light of your concern but try to think of the biggest picture.

[bytemaster]

But the arrogance it takes for Invictus to treat those 15% of PTS  as theirs, as something that belongs to them...

I suppose everything is a matter of perspective, but currently those funds are earmarked for paying miners to burn electricity.   So the PTS community / shareholders are the ones who should vote on what to do with the remaining PTS.   I3 Ltd (AGS fund) controls something like 20% of PTS and so would benefit greatly (far more than any other single actor) by stopping the dilution of PTS and not giving anything away.   

So it is a question of what the remaining PTS shareholders wish to do.   In the interest of separating development from marketing I have left Stan, Brian, Gregory, and Arlen to work with the community to develop the best plans.    I am not a dictator in these things.

Personally I suggested to them that PTS holders should get some benefit as well: ie give x% to PTS holders.  However, I can also see that we intended there to be equal shares in PTS/AGS long-term. 

In my opinion the arrogance is in assuming we are arrogant.  In reality we are just people trying to do the best by everyone and improve the value of what everyone is holding.

We also would not be changing the deal for PTS holders:  we said that there would be 2M + 1% inflation and reserved the right to fork the chain at any point to upgrade it.  In this particular instance the PTS holders go from having 1% inflation to steady deflation from trx fees.   Still a win for them.

[onceuponatime]

Giving 15% to grow the community is good, very good indeed!

Dilution with 15% all current PTS holder is not good BUT PTS holders must be aware of this already, so it is OK!

But the arrogance it takes for Invictus to treat those 15% of PTS  as theirs, as something that belongs to them by some unknown right is, unbelievable!
The arrogance of Stan does not stop there! He goes on to claim that because of their treatment of funds that are not theirs, this whole scheme will actually be very beneficial for the holders of PTS!

‘A lousy 15% plus-up for PTS holders only is not the best we can do! 
We are aiming for 2x, 3x, ... 10x... growth in value’


How about a noble idea – if this promo will be so great, why doesn’t Invictus add  15 % of their own PTS and 15 % of the AGS fund, so the PTS holders benefit  even more???

And the calm, approving response of the community to that outrageous suggestion is sheepish. We deserve our fate if we accept such despicable statements with such calm and notes of happiness.

Simeon II
Date Registered: May 16, 2014, 07:37:53 PMLocal Time:May 20, 2014, 07:44:24 PMLast Active: Today at 07:38:21 PM

Sock puppet?

[donkeypong]

But the arrogance it takes for Invictus to treat those 15% of PTS  as theirs, as something that belongs to them...

I suppose everything is a matter of perspective, but currently those funds are earmarked for paying miners to burn electricity.   So the PTS community / shareholders are the ones who should vote on what to do with the remaining PTS.   I3 Ltd (AGS fund) controls something like 20% of PTS and so would benefit greatly (far more than any other single actor) by stopping the dilution of PTS and not giving anything away.   

So it is a question of what the remaining PTS shareholders wish to do.   In the interest of separating development from marketing I have left Stan, Brian, Gregory, and Arlen to work with the community to develop the best plans.    I am not a dictator in these things.

Personally I suggested to them that PTS holders should get some benefit as well: ie give x% to PTS holders.  However, I can also see that we intended there to be equal shares in PTS/AGS long-term. 

In my opinion the arrogance is in assuming we are arrogant.  In reality we are just people trying to do the best by everyone and improve the value of what everyone is holding.

We also would not be changing the deal for PTS holders:  we said that there would be 2M + 1% inflation and reserved the right to fork the chain at any point to upgrade it.  In this particular instance the PTS holders go from having 1% inflation to steady deflation from trx fees.   Still a win for them.

Humble and smart, not arrogant.

[liondani]

Sock puppet?

obvious!
but which of the 3 suspects?

[Simeon II]

PS What about the Idea to give the remaining PTS to AGS investors and the percentage that will take I3 because they are heavily  invested on AGS would used for that reason Stan mentioned.After all it would be near $1.000.000 after PTS price raise because of the buzz and I hope the release of BitsharesX...

[Simeon II]

Or anounce when you will BURN THEM (the remaining PTS) ...
The PTS with DPOS technology and the BURNING METHOD would surely boost the value of PTS...and make the holders twice happy!

 

[Simeon II]

Also, my recommendation if you are worried about 15% is to head over to: http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
Make the commitment, stop sitting on the fence!

I don't mean to make light of your concern but try to think of the biggest picture.

I have see my 2 prev. + 5's

[liondani]

PS What about the Idea to give the remaining PTS to AGS investors and the percentage that will take I3 because they are heavily  invested on AGS would used for that reason Stan mentioned.After all it would be near $1.000.000 after PTS price raise because of the buzz and I hope the release of BitsharesX...

Or anounce when you will BURN THEM (the remaining PTS) ...
The PTS with DPOS technology and the BURNING METHOD would surely boost the value of PTS...and make the holders twice happy!

 

The difference is that I don't made a new account to make that comments Simeon II*...  I am spreading only different Ideas to give food to think about them and discuss them here.
I am not sure which of them (if any) are really good ones or better than others... The community responses will decide it and of course with more respect to the most  experienced and "proved" trustfull member's...


* but if you really are a newbie it is a reason more not to comment like this...  "But the arrogance it takes ..." because it looks like you are one of the competitors with not pure/kind incentives...

[fuzzy]

Why would it not be better to give some of the pts strategically to form partnerships with a solid footprint in alternative media and//or companies with philosophical characteristics that would help to further bootstrap the industry?

My take is that if the community really expects to get DAC creators to honor them with a % of their initial stake in theirmDACs over time...it might be a good idea to show the community is not afraid to recognize opportunity and uplift those with a common cause as opposed to defaulting to the easy path of taking the extra pts for themselves.  Just a thought....but what if something like Khanacademy were to get some of these pts to issue to kids who reach certain milestones in their free online school...or codeacademy....
Overstock.com, mike maloney (giveaways with $ minimum gold and silver purchases)....there are many potential opportunities.  Just 2 cents

[JoeyD]

As one of the miners providing 1.2 - 2.5% of the current PTS-hashing power at way higher electricity cost than what I'm getting in return, I would not mind being able to cut down on my bills. I'm currently too tired to come up with any brilliant plans for the tokens that have not yet been distributed. In my current addled mind burning doesn't sound fair, but a mining like lottery distribution might not be feasible, so I'll add this to my always increasing todo list for when my brain is closer to it's usual rickety performance.

[Simeon II]

Why would it not be better to give some of the pts strategically to form partnerships with a solid footprint in alternative media and//or companies with philosophical characteristics that would help to further bootstrap the industry?

Are all readers, except bytemaster and Agent86, on this forum dyslexic?
 Everybody responding to my words –READ MY POST before answering.
*donkeypong* – you do not have to put this effort. For you registration time on this forum is all that matters, so no need for you to try reading. It will not change my registration date!

[smiley35]

Why would it not be better to give some of the pts strategically to form partnerships with a solid footprint in alternative media and//or companies with philosophical characteristics that would help to further bootstrap the industry?

Are all readers, except bytemaster and Agent86, on this forum dyslexic?
 Everybody responding to my words –READ MY POST before answering.
*donkeypong* – you do not have to put this effort. For you registration time on this forum is all that matters, so no need for you to try reading. It will not change my registration date!

I would like to address your previous post in a non confrontational way. It seems that there is a lot of heated posts on this forum and I think we could all be happier if we were more polite. It is clear that dan has made updates and changes at multiple times since last november. Each time there has been a mix of reactions ranging from ecstatic to livid. The important part that seems to get lost in the noise is that every change/update made is done in a way that increases the value proposition for those invested. AGS was a phenomenal deal for PTS holders if one could see through the curtain of technical and economic development. Similarly whats happening here is that instead of spending the remaining PTS on security, it will now be used to get people excited and incentivized to use bitshares. From where I stand we have just allocated costs away from security to marketing. When viewed in that light this development is a great thing for the strength of the community....... which is currently being tested due to delays in product development. I think this is a great idea, but I would also caution invictus that the worst thing they could do would be to use this to pump bitshares without a viable product. You have lost the attention of a large portion of the target market because of "broken promises". For this great marketing idea to mean anything your gonna need to put some software out first. The team knows this and so does the community. I'm excited to play a role in the future of BTS.

[Simeon II]

The important part that seems to get lost in the noise is that every change/update made is done in a way that increases the value proposition for those invested. AGS was a phenomenal deal for PTS holders if one could see through the curtain of technical and economic development. Similarly whats happening here is that instead of spending the remaining PTS on security, it will now be used to get people excited and incentivized to use bitshares.

I will try to adhere to your polite tone!
 I do not argue with the need for marketing! (read my post, please.)
My post is regarding Stan's stance (bytemaster kind of distanced himself from this proposition in his earlier post) - ‘You fools out here, we have the best marketing Idea. Instead of giving you 15% (i.e. not diluting your shares as promised), we will take those money and PROMISE to give you 2X….10X return.’
My point is ‘If we have 15% of the  PTS, let’s put our collective brain and decide what is the best way to spend them’

[smiley35]

The important part that seems to get lost in the noise is that every change/update made is done in a way that increases the value proposition for those invested. AGS was a phenomenal deal for PTS holders if one could see through the curtain of technical and economic development. Similarly whats happening here is that instead of spending the remaining PTS on security, it will now be used to get people excited and incentivized to use bitshares.

I will try to adhere to your polite tone!
 I do not argue with the need for marketing! (read my post, please.)
My post is regarding Stan's stance (bytemaster kind of distanced himself from this proposition in his earlier post) - ‘You fools out here, we have the best marketing Idea. Instead of giving you 15% (i.e. not diluting your shares as promised), we will take those money and PROMISE to give you 2X….10X return.’
My point is ‘If we have 15% of the  PTS, let’s put our collective brain and decide what is the best way to spend them’

I have read and considered all of your posts in this thread. You bring up a good point, If PTS is bigger than invictus why don't we get to decide. Fair. The other thing to consider is that the main value prop right now are the DACS that invictus is building. This might not be the case in the future, but it is right now. If we all decide to honor PTS as it is now instead of PTS with DPOS then we would probably win that fight. To me it seems that DPOS+marketing is the way to go so I will be supporting that chain. But thats the point right, invictus can't do much without a community. We need each other to create value. Technically invictus can't do anything but share idea's and suggest that we all choose to use them in the same way.