BitShares PTS2 - Community Input Thread

[donkeypong]

Regarding the name - Please do not name it PTS 2, or PTS anything or Bitshares anything.  Please create a new brand because the naming scheme is incredibly confusing even for people who pay close attention.

Can't wait for BTSX

A few ideas...

FounderShares
FoundShares
FoundationShares
AlphaShares
RootShares
ForgeShares
CastShares
SourceShares
SpringShares
SproutShares
SeedShares
MetaShares
DPOS Shares
BuildShares
ProjectShares
EverythingShares
DACshares
MillShares
ParentShares
GrandShares
MantleShares
GenerShares
CobbleShares
PostShares
OpenShares

[toast]

What a refreshingly nice post! I think Adam sees an opportunity here, I think these extra pts2 are a good chance to give some of his ideas a try. Having 100% controlled by i3 would be a disaster, even though I agree with the decision for i3 to have 100% control of AGS.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[AdamBLevine]

I'm not sure why this is better than Proof of Burn to an address, but I don't explicitly have a problem with it.  Anyone who has used the protoshares network for a transaction in the last few month knows this upgrade was inevitable, so no surprise there.

One question: Will INVICTUS be honoring PTS 1 or PTS 2 or both?  I think if Invictus does this with the announcement that the social contract is shifting from the PTS 1 vehicle to the 2 vehicle, PTS1 will die pretty quick.  If you're wishy-washy on this it'll hang around because it has potential value.

I'd support the burning of the unmined PTS and lacking that think they should be used for the long term bounty roadmap I've proposed before. 

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3363.0

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3448.msg43334#msg43334

I don't think Invictus should be in charge of how the funds are spent, they're a clear bottleneck towards the further development of the ecosystem since all roads must pass through Daniel's brain, it would be better if Invictus worked with the community to define this roadmap and its various components, then seeded it with this as the initial funding to get people working on even the far out stuff.

Regarding the name - Please do not name it PTS 2, or PTS anything or Bitshares anything.  Please create a new brand because the naming scheme is incredibly confusing even for people who pay close attention.

Can't wait for BTSX

[donkeypong]

I like the idea of spending some of this on marketing. We'll need to spread the word with these DACs.

I would allocate the 15% to a community fund, create a simple "voting DAC", and let the community members decide how to spend the money. Or at least define the expenses and bounties, etc. that you have in mind and then use some Surveymonkey or Limesurvey kind of thing to rank the choices.

We seriously need to drive the buzz of these DACs as they get close and this is a great way to use this 15% to increase the overall value of Bitshares.

[bitcoinba]

I strongly oppose keeping the unmined pts for "marketing" and suggest scaling existing pts holding up to 2 million as was the original plan.

Past marketing spending does not give me great confidence =[

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[toast]

I strongly oppose keeping the unmined pts for "marketing" and suggest scaling existing pts holding up to 2 million as was the original plan.

Past marketing spending does not give me great confidence =[

Do you mean distributing the new coins to current PTS-holders? If so, then you can't do that, because you will be screwing over the AGS-donators big time. Especially the ones who donated PTS to the AGS-funds. And to be brutally honest, ags-funds paid for the DPoS-technology directly not the PTS-holders, who are mostly betting amongst themselves how much of a free ride they'll be getting .

After all the discussion I still see only 2 options:
1) distribute evenly between AGS (both pts and btc ones) and current PTS-holders
2) Use the 15% coins to increase the value for all parties involved, such as a marketing campaign, although the dollar-value is peanuts by today standards. Maybe a faucet, air-drop, charity, marketing doesn't mean it should be purely greed driven and if possible should be done by community vote (but that probably won't be feasible).

Number 2 sounds more impressive to me (pun intended) and could help things get off the ground, but as Toast pointed out, it should not be done in the way marketing has been done up till now by Invictus/bitshares. Nothing personal, but PR, marketing and community involvement needs some major attention after launching the first DPoS-chains at the very latest.

Good point about AGS. I suppose anything that looks like "mining++" would be ok. Just not anything that looks like pure discretionary spending.

We will need a long honest conversation about the weak points you mentioned very soon.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[JoeyD]

Hmmm, after long and careful deliberation and contemplation, I think it would be best for everyone if the remaining PTS2 is just sent to me and I promise I will most definitely try to spend it well.

[gyhy]

I suggest pts2 total set 1,000,000,000
1pts=500pts2

[JoeyD]

I strongly oppose keeping the unmined pts for "marketing" and suggest scaling existing pts holding up to 2 million as was the original plan.

Past marketing spending does not give me great confidence =[

Do you mean distributing the new coins to current PTS-holders? If so, then you can't do that, because you will be screwing over the AGS-donators big time. Especially the ones who donated PTS to the AGS-funds. And to be brutally honest, ags-funds paid for the DPoS-technology directly not the PTS-holders, who are mostly betting amongst themselves how much of a free ride they'll be getting .

After all the discussion I still see only 2 options:
1) distribute evenly between AGS (both pts and btc ones) and current PTS-holders
2) Use the 15% coins to increase the value for all parties involved, such as a marketing campaign, although the dollar-value is peanuts by today standards. Maybe a faucet, air-drop, charity, marketing doesn't mean it should be purely greed driven and if possible should be done by community vote (but that probably won't be feasible).

Number 2 sounds more impressive to me (pun intended) and could help things get off the ground, but as Toast pointed out, it should not be done in the way marketing has been done up till now by Invictus/bitshares. Nothing personal, but PR, marketing and community involvement needs some major attention after launching the first DPoS-chains at the very latest.

[NewMine]

I strongly oppose keeping the unmined pts for "marketing" and suggest scaling existing pts holding up to 2 million as was the original plan.

Past marketing spending does not give me great confidence =[

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Yes!!!

Either leave PTS to chug along, fork it with an every block re-target, or cap PTS at its current mined total at the time DPOS is enacted.

[toast]

I strongly oppose keeping the unmined pts for "marketing" and suggest scaling existing pts holding up to 2 million as was the original plan.

Past marketing spending does not give me great confidence =[

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[liondani]

Stan would it be a good idea to give a part of the pts (let's say 20%) to AGS holders after the end of fundraising/donation AGS period, so the demand for AGS would increase more the last 60 days and some of the frustrated early investors would calm down and find their lost confidence again... ?

PS I know some early investors (AGS holders) they would love to buy bitshare-pts (because of the DPOS thing) now but they are out of funds... It would be nice/great to give to all of your AGS investors/donators a symbolic quantity of DPOS bitshares-PTS 2.0 to "play" around 

What about to give all of the "remaining PTS2" to the AGS investors immediately after the fundraising AGS period? DEMAND for AGS would increase and the most PTS(1) would go for donations and the result would be to die more... peacefull...

[Stan]

At work all day, check the forum and a s-storm is forming. 9 pages is too much to sift through this second, but did I read this correctly: Invictus wants to create a new chain were they honor all current PTS with equal amount of PTS2, then honor the remaining un mined 355,000+ PTS for  355,000 PTS2 to themselves in a so called reverse Angel?

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4648.0

[NewMine]

At work all day, check the forum and a s-storm is forming. 9 pages is too much to sift through this second, but did I read this correctly: Invictus wants to create a new chain were they honor all current PTS with equal amount of PTS2, then honor the remaining un mined 355,000+ PTS for  355,000 PTS2 to themselves in a so called reverse Angel?

[liondani]