Forcing people to lose their shares if they don't vote.

[Stan]

A reminder:  just our first chain, XT, is 50/50.
toast hijack: to be clear, stan is assuming "XT" will be upgraded to be fully-featured. What we mean is, "our first X chain that is fully-featured is 50/50". We haven't fully committed to whether we will upgrade XT or snapshot to another chain for the first "real" X chain - it's probably a good idea though.

No commitments beyond 10/10/80 have been made (by us) for anything else.

In reality, it is up to each derivative developer/operator to define the fiendishly clever mix they think will beat their competitors.

We will support all developers/operators who meet the 10/10 threshold without violating our stated principles.  We reserve the right to endorse the "best" product from among those who meet this minimum threshold.

[luckybit]

1) I3 official DACs - Unlikely to be airdropped to a random altcoin.  (Actually not sure how these allocations will work.)

This is true, The I3 DACs aren't going to be sharedropped. The problem is they'll take so long to release each one that the XT will probably be forked a few times before Bitshares X is even released and then Bitshares X will probably get forked too. Basically they are the leaders and everyone will have to upgrade their forks to follow what I3 invents until other people know enough to innovate.

2) DACs that are basically forks of altcoins to show off DPOS

This I don't agree with. The proper word is a merger. A fork of the altcoin would be basically taking all the features and technology they have and changing the logo. No one is suggesting that or at least I wasn't suggesting it. So you've left out mergers where two communities combine.

What advantage is there for example to fork the Bitshares technology and then call it Litecoin 2.0? I never could make sense of that. The people advocating that aren't advocating any custom BitAssets from the standard chain or any new features so it's just not interesting.

3) Independent DACs.

Independent DACs we do not really control.

#2 is where I agree with airdrops because it is basically the definition of a forked coin.  The debate should be around finding it acceptable to honor PTS/AGS at a lower % than 10%/10%.

I think you've got some things wrong. 2) shouldn't exist because it would be pointless for us and them to "clone" a coin except pump and dump scenarios. What you'd do is make a custom DAC but it would be Bitshares underneath rather than their coin. So it's an entirely new thing for us and them. It would need to have custom BitAssets and the only reason to do this is to test out new BitAssets and invite new users into the Bitshares ecosystem.

As a result they don't deserve more than 50% of it. Of course if you just are lazy and fork it without any custom changes then why not make a fork of the fork, and then a fork of the fork of the fork?

The debate should be around finding it acceptable to honor at less than 50/50. Not the 10%. 10% is the minimum but considering how new the technology is why would you accept 10% now when you're dealing with brand new technology and our community is the biggest and earliest adopters of it?

#3 is going to be up to the developer.  If someone writes a DAC then it will be up to them what mixture of allotment they wish to use.  I am interesting in discussing this because of all the possible variations to align incentives.   This is partially why I started this thread.

As long as they add new features, custom BitAssets, actual innovations, then an independent DAC is a great way to test things out without risking the main chain. Independent DACs can fail and are for bleeding edge but we need a bleeding edge.

#1 I3 DACs.  Kinda pointless to even debate it here either, because I think Dan & others have changed their mind on the value of airdrops.

They never suggested that I3 DACs would support sharedrops. They specifically announced it would be 50/50 between PTS and AGS. They are stuck in that.

This is why I suggest non-I3 forks so that the community can create custom chains for Blackcoin, or just any Proof of Stake community which doesn't have the capability. Whichever fork has the most volume and network effect will win and 50/50 guarantees success.

[gamey]

Airdrops are bad. 

We need to realize there are 3 different types of DACs and form this discussion around those distinct categories.

1) I3 official DACs - Unlikely to be airdropped to a random altcoin.  (Actually not sure how these allocations will work.)
2) DACs that are basically forks of altcoins to show off DPOS
3) Independent DACs.

#2 is where I agree with airdrops because it is basically the definition of a forked coin.  The debate should be around finding it acceptable to honor PTS/AGS at a lower % than 10%/10%.

#3 is going to be up to the developer.  If someone writes a DAC then it will be up to them what mixture of allotment they wish to use.  I am interesting in discussing this because of all the possible variations to align incentives.   This is partially why I started this thread.

#1 I3 DACs.  Kinda pointless to even debate it here either, because I think Dan & others have changed their mind on the value of airdrops.

So if anyone wants to have the bad/good discussion on airdrops, it would be nice to see your thoughts qualified.

[bitbro]

Airdrops are bad. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gamey]

The moral justification for doing this I think would depend on a squatter's rights based foundation of the right to property, and the idea that claiming ownership of property requires providing some way for interested parties to determine that the property in question is actively owned.  Any wallet software should automatically prevent the "inactivity fee" from coming into action as long as the wallet is brought online from time to time.

 

[Troglodactyl]

The original purpose of the inactivity fee as I see it was to prevent blockchain bloat and allow us to keep only one year's records.  This is advantageous both to cut storage and overhead requirements and to make the real "total supply" numbers more transparent by filtering out any holdings belonging to lost or destroyed wallets after a year.

The moral justification for doing this I think would depend on a squatter's rights based foundation of the right to property, and the idea that claiming ownership of property requires providing some way for interested parties to determine that the property in question is actively owned.  Any wallet software should automatically prevent the "inactivity fee" from coming into action as long as the wallet is brought online from time to time. 

[gamey]

Does anyone think this hurts their property rights?

Communism has many forms….
-----------------------------------------------------

Full ownership rights agreement ( and Deed)

[/b]


1. You have full ownership rights on this piece of land. ( description____)

2. To continue having this right you must:

-plow it no earlier or later than 1st of May
-grow only corn (put exact brand here______)
- Use only combines provided by (put company name here______)
- Sell your entire crop @ 4.00 BTS/cryptomarketvolume to ((put company name here______)

3.Failiour to comply with any of 2. Will result in you losing 5% to 100% of your property…
--------------------------------------------------




So, is  this   infragments one’s property rights:
YES

Are you willing to accept it, personally:
In the form suggested probably yes, BUT not without keep an eye where it progresses from this semi-acceptable level!

I was mainly just stirring the pot.  There are so many different things that can be done with this stuff.  I know some people are very pro-airdrop.  I like airdrops too, if we need methods to weed out the people who will either dump or do nothing.   These 2 categories of people would need different approaches.  I mainly brought this as a way to mitigate the "contribute nothing" people when given free shares.  If they show no interest in the shares within the first year, then remove them.

So one does an airdrop and the shares are locked into the addresses for a year.  So they can not be sold or dumped.  Possibly a year + random time.  Then you also make it so that if they don't vote then their shares are removed. (voting in that it shows they've "claimed" their shares .. it could be some other mechanism)  This prevents people who got something for free, had no interest in it, then showed up 3 years later claiming their stake.  If I implemented a DAC and sharedropped, this is what I would want.

I don't think I'd ever suggest this type of rule for people who paid for their shares.  Either via Protoshares or buying the DAC shares directly.  However if only done for those who received the shares for free, one could consider the shares to not be their property until they actually claim it.  They've put forth nothing to attain the property so it is questionable when it actually becomes their property.

[BldSwtTrs]

I'm going to post a comment here that is perhaps not entirely OT.

According to Bytemaster the act of moving funds around is beneficial to the network.

The "silent long term holders, who might not have the technical knowledge, time, or interest to continually remember to shuffle around shares in various DACs" are exactly the people that should be negatively incentived to actively care for the network, rather than sit on their money and passively watch it grow.

Keyhotee (afaik) is a possible solution for the myriad of online holdings one will acquire over the years.

Up the inactivity fee to 50% for all I care.

Thomas Piketty anyone?

Talking about Thomas Piketty is certainly the worst way to advocate that fee.

[pgbit]

Well, 5% fee for not doing anything, or confiscating 5% of your account, comes out at the same.

Can anyone post a link or explanation on how this will operate?

This doesn't affect PTS. This is for future DACs only, and should be made clear by each individual DAC developer.

Obviously up to the DAC creators, but I think this would put people off, having any additional inactivity fee. Especially if it wasnt *entirely* clear i.e. in your face reminder about the fact.

[gamey]

After I read this topic here, I sold all my PTS. This is insider moaning - without vision.
Besides: What are Votes? Where? For what? I dont want to study to understand Bitshares.

I have no clue what you mean "This is insider moaning - without vision."  I assume you are referring to yourself ?

This is a forum, publicly open to anyone.  I am no more of an insider than most people who actively post on this forum.  It is for the exchange of ideas. 

Oh well, one day it'll be a more mainstream concept.  As it is, ideas are being vetted at a high rate.  Once 'best practices' are determined maybe you'll find it more acceptable and come back as an investor. 

BTW, right now is probably the worst time to sell PTS given the price and the imminent releases which will undoubtedly increase the price.  Personally I'd like to say thank you for selling as I am still in buy mode.

[tonyk]

Worth hashing over it for an hour sometime?  Some conversations that started out small have taking literally almost our entire hour...so it is very possible.

Non-native speakers both better understand are easier understood in writing. And while I get why you pump up the stuff you work on, I am really annoyed when somebody posts here –'we discussed that in the mumble session’ like if it is discussed there no point exists in putting, at least the same basic ideas,  in writing.

2c

[Empirical1]

After I read this topic here, I sold all my PTS. This is insider moaning - without vision.
Besides: What are Votes? Where? For what? I dont want to study to understand Bitshares.

Translation: You don't want to investigate before investing?! blame themselves

Guy looks like a particularly lazy investor/speculator. But it also points to the need to focus on marketing and explaining core Bitshares concepts clearly and succintly to the casual investor at an easy to find destination.

[fuzzy]

After I read this topic here, I sold all my PTS. This is insider moaning - without vision.
Besides: What are Votes? Where? For what? I dont want to study to understand Bitshares.

Translation: You don't want to investigate before investing?! blame themselves

These are very difficult questions and this is precisely the reason we have weekly hangouts with Bytemaster.  He is there so we can learn, question and teach each other with one of the leading minds in crypto.  He takes into consideration the points that are made surprisingly well from my standpoint...so why not show up and talk about this with us so we can come to a conclusion on better options--MUCH of this is a shot in the dark with regard to the economics and sociological perspectives...not even getting into the political!

Worth hashing over it for an hour sometime?  Some conversations that started out small have taking literally almost our entire hour...so it is very possible. 

[xeroc]

After I read this topic here, I sold all my PTS. This is insider moaning - without vision.
Besides: What are Votes? Where? For what? I dont want to study to understand Bitshares.

Translation: You don't want to investigate before investing?! blame themselves

[Reiner]

After I read this topic here, I sold all my PTS. This is insider moaning - without vision.
Besides: What are Votes? Where? For what? I dont want to study to understand Bitshares.