BitShares PTS2 - Community Input Thread

[Agent86]

Having 100% controlled by i3 would be a disaster

This seems really harsh.  I'm not sure where you are coming from here.  People seem to think the marketing hasn't done much but we haven't really had anything to market yet.  It's not like I3 has blown through a lot of money.  I think there may be a shift as the first products are released and AGS wraps up.

There are also risks to handing out a ton of money to "the community" because there's not really a fair way to do that.
My take:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4648.msg59090#msg59090

Agent86 -- sometimes I think you talk like I3's mom.

I think the balance of 350k PTS should be burned. If not, the market may finally lose faith in everything I3 has been doing.  If PTS drops another 40%,  the crash in value will scare off new investment and your best developers could walk away.

I just get frustrated with people who can't understand what's going on and accuse I3 of acting like scammers when they are not.

Maybe you are right that the market won't like us to use the PTS as a community fund for marketing, give aways, or promotion.  But maybe they will love it and we can find a way to spend it to drive lots of new people to bitshares.

Stan has already said if there is conflict and the forum is split, the PTS will most likely be burned/mapped out of PTS2.  They were treating these as community funds; they solicited the community for input on how to spend them to drive value for everyone.  Instead people called them scammers and people are acting like Stan wants to sell them and get a Bentley.

If we burn them we burn them, and if you think this gives you the best ROI than make that case and tell us why.  But if you think I3 is dishonest why are you even invested at all?

Perhaps burning them gives you the best ROI, perhaps it's a missed opportunity and it will cost you.  That is the decision here.  And we are all in the same boat!  We sink or soar as a community.

Ok, maybe there is a small difference between those who are primarily in AGS vs PTS but for the most part we are all in the same boat and I3 is in the boat with us, and they built the boat, we all want this to be huge.

Full disclosure, I don't have much sympathy for people in PTS freaking out about not getting a 15% bump in stake when they can go get a much larger return by donating to AGS.

I agree that if we don't use them carefully they would be better off burned.  But I also have an open mind to the possibilities

[Stan]

I'm not comfortable with suddenly inflating the PTS circulation by 15%, but if this is the plan, and that 15% is to be distributed for marketing purposes, I recommend the Google Fiber approach.  I think the we should start a competition between communities and honor the communities with the highest demand with snapshots granting their chains the new PTS, much as Google selected cities and neighborhoods for Fiber internet service rollout.  This solution is (relatively) low effort on our part compared to running numerous competitions for scraps, could generate massive publicity, and ends up with stake distribution to active communities who actually want it.  It's also more transparent and easy to follow, and thus hard to accuse III of just grabbing the funds.  I would expect the top 3 communities at the most to be honored, possibly with 8%, 5%, and 2% of the 15% total.

Thanks for the input.  That's the kind of creative thinking we expected from the forward thinkers among us.

You hit on one of the key criteria:  recipients should have to prove they actually want to participate.  General air drops don't do that. 

Ideally though, the activity should include something that results in the participant actually learning about the value of what they are claiming and why its a better idea to hold onto your winnings while there are so many DACs in the pipeline. 

Proper "value training" would address your concern about inflation, since most of the distribution would remain off the market.

[Troglodactyl]

I'm not comfortable with suddenly inflating the PTS circulation by 15%, but if this is the plan, and that 15% is to be distributed for marketing purposes, I recommend the Google Fiber approach.  I think the we should start a competition between communities and honor the communities with the highest demand with snapshots granting their chains the new PTS, much as Google selected cities and neighborhoods for Fiber internet service rollout.  This solution is (relatively) low effort on our part compared to running numerous competitions for scraps, could generate massive publicity, and ends up with stake distribution to active communities who actually want it.  It's also more transparent and easy to follow, and thus hard to accuse III of just grabbing the funds.  I would expect the top 3 communities at the most to be honored, possibly with 8%, 5%, and 2% of the 15% total.

EDIT: I should add that I fully support upgrading to DPOS and forgetting about mining and the original PTS.  Taking that opportunity to add a new distribution system for PTS is the only part about which I'm doubtful.

[Stan]

Good post there by Stan. I added one also, under my "letsseewhatsupthere" handle. True believers, please chime in on Reddit. Every time there's a change or addition to the Bitshares ecosystem, there are some ugly posts on Reddit, and it's important for us to get on there and explain the truth.

Much appreciated.  It's nice to have somebody who can explain things better than my often convoluted attempts!   

[mess]

@Stan, are you ignoring me?
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4658.msg59291#msg59291

Please address your investors' concern. Don't be dodgy.

[mess]

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

 .
@Stan, please don't blow Adam off this time.

[werneo]

Having 100% controlled by i3 would be a disaster

This seems really harsh.  I'm not sure where you are coming from here.  People seem to think the marketing hasn't done much but we haven't really had anything to market yet.  It's not like I3 has blown through a lot of money.  I think there may be a shift as the first products are released and AGS wraps up.

There are also risks to handing out a ton of money to "the community" because there's not really a fair way to do that.
My take:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4648.msg59090#msg59090

Agent86 -- sometimes I think you talk like I3's mom.

I think the balance of 350k PTS should be burned. If not, the market may finally lose faith in everything I3 has been doing.  If PTS drops another 40%,  the crash in value will scare off new investment and your best developers could walk away. 

[Stan]

I have altered my stance a tad.

If you guys can release BTS-x or one of the other DAC's before updating PTS, I will have no problem if Invictus gets more money.  At that point it will be clearer to gauge the risk involved.  As of now it is very hard to justify a risk of Invictus taking a 14% chunk of PTS-whatever, a secondary offering lets say, with zero results to back it thus far.

I deleted a damning post because I see this as a possible compromise. That is if you are truly looking for community thought and input.

Thanks. 

That is indeed what we are saying - "after XT is released we will turn our attention to PTS upgrade".
My original expectation was that we would get a flood of excited ideas for how to attract new demand and then pick a consensus best of the best and go execute it. 

Hard for me to grasp the concept that there is any risk to Invictus serving as a temporary custodian charged with executing an agreed upon plan as a faithful servant ... but I guess the world is a suspicious place. 

 

[donkeypong]

I have altered my stance a tad.

If you guys can release BTS-x or one of the other DAC's before updating PTS, I will have no problem if Invictus gets more money.  At that point it will be clearer to gauge the risk involved.  As of now it is very hard to justify a risk of Invictus taking a 14% chunk of PTS-whatever, a secondary offering lets say, with zero results to back it thus far.

I deleted a damning post because I see this as a possible compromise. That is if you are truly looking for community thought and input.

I think Stan's original post said they would turn to the PTS upgrade after X is released. I would prefer that also and can't see how they'd spare humanpower to work on this until they have the X product out. Though if they're really shotgunning out the other DACs at that point, it would raise the question of which PTS version would be used in the post-X snapshots.

[NewMine]

I have altered my stance a tad.

If you guys can release BTS-x or one of the other DAC's before updating PTS, I will have no problem if Invictus gets more money.  At that point it will be clearer to gauge the risk involved.  As of now it is very hard to justify a risk of Invictus taking a 14% chunk of PTS-whatever, a secondary offering lets say, with zero results to back it thus far.

I deleted a damning post because I see this as a possible compromise. That is if you are truly looking for community thought and input.

[Agent86]

Having 100% controlled by i3 would be a disaster

This seems really harsh.  I'm not sure where you are coming from here.  People seem to think the marketing hasn't done much but we haven't really had anything to market yet.  It's not like I3 has blown through a lot of money.  I think there may be a shift as the first products are released and AGS wraps up.

There are also risks to handing out a ton of money to "the community" because there's not really a fair way to do that.
My take:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4648.msg59090#msg59090

[donkeypong]

Good post there by Stan. I added one also, under my "letsseewhatsupthere" handle. True believers, please chime in on Reddit. Every time there's a change or addition to the Bitshares ecosystem, there are some ugly posts on Reddit, and it's important for us to get on there and explain the truth.

[Stan]

This deserves some attention: http://www.reddit.com/r/BitShares/comments/2664wp/bitshares_attempting_to_pocket_more_money_and/

Thanks for the heads-up.  I have posted the following response:

You can read what we actually asked the forum to discuss here:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4648.msg58921#msg58921
The question we asked everyone was: Since the new DPOS upgrade won't need to pay miners any more, what should we do with the rest of the shares we had planned to use to pay miners? We discussed several possibilities, one of which was to give them all away in various campaigns to attract new supporters and thus increase public awareness of all the new products currently in development. The default is that the remaining shares will simply never be mined. We are currently listening for the input from the community about what everybody thinks will grow the value of everyone's investments the most.

[Stan]

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

I agree, since we have said we will be honoring the new chain and working with the exchanges to make sure that the old chain is removed, the old one should die very quickly and we get a clean upgrade.

In the absence of a forum consensus on what to do with the savings from unneeded mining, the probable default is that they will never come into existence since the new chain will not do any mining.

[bitcoinba]

This deserves some attention: http://www.reddit.com/r/BitShares/comments/2664wp/bitshares_attempting_to_pocket_more_money_and/