How much is a new user worth?

[GaltReport]

Perhaps if we had not done the inflation and marketing (or just did less marketing), we could have grown to a market cap larger than BTC anyway but just 1 year later than with the excessive marketing. Would getting to the same point 1 year earlier be worth the additional dilution of shares? I don't know, it depends on what the shareholders want (and a large fraction of the shareholders, preferably at least 50% share approval).

1 year in the crypto world is comparable with 10 years or more in other sectors... Don't you have the same feeling?

...
I think it all hinges on competition and speed to market.   ...

At this point, I think this is correct.  Competition and Speed to market.  I've been thinking and worrying about this (the competition) so I would say I'm convinced even with inflation (restricted/limited)...(fast convincer ).  I don't think we can wait.  Speed kills!!

Edit: Damn NuBits got me nervous....People know the power of these ideas and know that most regular people won't see all the technical/economic details that make BitSharesX superior.

[bytemaster]

It's true that in the early stages of bitcoin there was a benefit of POW which is initial coin/software distribution to create a group of early adopters.  After 5 years the bitcoin mining no longer helps bring in new users due to the ASIC cost.  But we don't have that early benefit which bitcoin did, of creating thousands of early users via mining, so we do need something to compensate for that.

I was staunchly against inflation to pay for extra marketing at first, but byemaster makes a good point about it being analogous to share dilution/capital infusion.  However, with pre-IPO share dilution (as far as I know) there is an investor(s) ready to buy a percentage of the company, so that capital infusion is guaranteed.  BTSX is already "ipo'd" so any investors wanting to invest can buy in already.  There's no capital infusion with inflation, but rather a capital movement from stakeholders to the marketing team (or wherever the newly created BTSX were allocated, how is that decided btw?).

I can't really know whether to be pro-inflation or not without knowing what the current size of the marketing budget is and what the plans are.

Capital infusion is what you *buy* with the shares created.   If you had a large investor that brought in $10 million USD for dilution worth a 16% increase in shares... and that $10 million was paid for the marketing referral program... then you are just as guaranteed of the infusion as you would be with buying it directly. 

To good thing about the system is it create BitUSD demand which amplifies BTSX valuation...   

[matt608]

It's true that in the early stages of bitcoin there was a benefit of POW which is initial coin/software distribution to create a group of early adopters.  After 5 years the bitcoin mining no longer helps bring in new users due to the ASIC cost.  But we don't have that early benefit which bitcoin did, of creating thousands of early users via mining, so we do need something to compensate for that.

I was staunchly against inflation to pay for extra marketing at first, but byemaster makes a good point about it being analogous to share dilution/capital infusion.  However, with pre-IPO share dilution (as far as I know) there is an investor(s) ready to buy a percentage of the company, so that capital infusion is guaranteed.  BTSX is already "ipo'd" so any investors wanting to invest can buy in already.  There's no capital infusion with inflation, but rather a capital movement from stakeholders to the marketing team (or wherever the newly created BTSX were allocated, how is that decided btw?).

I can't really know whether to be pro-inflation or not without knowing what the current size of the marketing budget is and what the plans are, but a referral program does sound like it could be worth it if its very well thought out.

[xfund]

one hand burn ,
one hand  inflation,
keep equilibrium.

another way is :delegate tax

[bytemaster]

Reload-able prepaid card with KYC validation...
Not prepaid anonymous cards...

[GaltReport]

I'm not sure what I think about this yet, but my immediate thoughts are not good. We need to think about all the possible implications, be 99% sure it will work, and go over all of the dynamics and economics of it. I think a lot of things could possibly go wrong, it will hurt our image in the cryptocurrency community, and as someone else already mentioned it will give the detractors more ammo to unload on us with.

It could make the rest of the Cryptocoin community look poorly on us as if we will print money at will on a whim. If we do it this once, what's to stop it from happening multiple times?

I have been using the fact BTSX is pretty much the only deflationary Cryptocoin in existence as a selling point. If we are printing money that selling point disappears and anyone that has been saying this looks foolish or like a liar.

If it doesn't work as well as intended it could end up being very expensive advertising, along with Oall of the other negative side effects as mentioned above. The new users getting free money could just dump it all on the market and it backfire on us.

It is possible the community could fork after making controversial decisions such as this.

It sounds like there will be some counter-party risks in this. If the printed money is stolen it could be dumped on the market, create a lot of bad press, or be used to attack the network.

These are all very good points. If we can print money on a whim now, what's stopping us from debasing the currency further in the future? I'm in favor of a referral program but I think it can be done with fees and not inflation as previously outlined in my first post (my proposal is based on traditional referral programs and is much less gimicky). Perhaps since BitShares X wasn't designed from the start to be market mined with inflation, it can't reasonably be done now.

 

Would need some more details too on the utility of the Card and the whole scheme to really determine how attractive it would be. Some of those details are not clear to me.  That is, What is exactly loaded with What and What can you do with it and What else do you get but the general idea is great although I'm not a fan of the inflation part. Slippery slope.

[Method-X]

Correct... at a technical level there is no link.

If I wanted to create a Poker DAC and implement an affiliate program, could the toolkit be modified to "link up" users so commissions on winnings could be paid out? Getting rid of TITAN perhaps...

Yes, absent TITAN each address could link to another address.

Thank you for your answers and your patience Dan, it is much appreciated.

[bytemaster]

Correct... at a technical level there is no link.

If I wanted to create a Poker DAC and implement an affiliate program, could the toolkit be modified to "link up" users so commissions on winnings could be paid out? Getting rid of TITAN perhaps...

Yes, absent TITAN each address could link to another address.   

[Method-X]

Correct... at a technical level there is no link.

If I wanted to create a Poker DAC and implement an affiliate program, could the toolkit be modified to "link up" users so commissions on winnings could be paid out? Getting rid of TITAN perhaps...

[bytemaster]

Right.. what is the DAC selling?

This particular DAC is selling BitAssets and it generates revenue from transaction / market fees incurred by its users.

How does a DAC prove they bought something?

So UserA cannot be linked as having referred UserB because of something to do with TITAN?

The closest way to achieve this is to pay interest on BitAssets via dilution...

For this particular DAC, the best I can think of is to split yield payments with the referrer and the referee. But... if the system doesn't allow for this (on a technical level) my point is moot.

Correct... at a technical level there is no link. 

[Method-X]

Right.. what is the DAC selling?

This particular DAC is selling BitAssets and it generates revenue from transaction / market fees incurred by its users.

How does a DAC prove they bought something?

So UserA cannot be linked as having referred UserB because of something to do with TITAN?

The closest way to achieve this is to pay interest on BitAssets via dilution...

For this particular DAC, the best I can think of is to split yield payments with the referrer and the referee. But... if the system doesn't allow for this (on a technical level) my point is moot.

[bytemaster]

Well that isn't really a PoW vs PoS issue now is it?   It is a community / social issue.  Bitcoin developers could turn of PoW and directing mining rewards to development and use PoS while still saying there will never be more than 21 million BTC.   It is a matter of what the "developers" + "merchants" + "users" are willing to accept.   It is a social issue...

Right, so it's about how the community at large perceives the inflation. Bitcoin is called a deflationary currency because it's inflation is set to a known schedule that (apparently) will never be changed. So, to the Bitcoin community, that makes it ok. They also use "fair distribution of coins" to justify mining as well.

For this type of "market mining" to be justified, it has to be set on a predictable, "set in stone" schedule that will never change. As far as referral programs go, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel. Just base it on what has already proven itself a massively successful model: affiliates.

I mean, there is nothing decentralized or autonomous about this type of referral program. This is basically invictus saying "we're going to opt for a one time inflationary period / loan / whatever in hopes that our bonus attracts users" without asking the question "Is giving a $100 one-time bonus even going to attract the desired demographic?"

Now, if we used 5% inflation per year decreasing by 0.5% over the next 10 years (or whatever formula we think is optimal), to allow any user to refer other people and get paid only if the referee generated revenue, you have a decentralized AND autonomous marketing program that is 1000x more efficient than a debit card bonus because it taps into the collective creativity of our community. It allows for viral, memetic spread.

A decentralized referral program that cannot be gamed!   This requires identity verification to ensure users are unique.    My "decentralized" approach to this is to allow delegates to fund campaigns and allow shareholders to vote on delegates based upon their proposed campaign.   You have to work with partners to prevent massive fraud like Bitcoin is seeing with the "mining referral model".

What is the difference between a DAC based affiliate program and a traditional affiliate program? Aside from less advanced tracking, I'm not seeing any technical differences. Commission Junction and Amazon cannot be gamed because if UserA refers UserB, UserB has to buy something for UserA to get a commission. So basically, UserB has to provably generate X revenue for the DAC before UserA qualifies for a payout. This is how all affiliate programs work.

Right.. what is the DAC selling?  How does a DAC prove they bought something?   The closest way to achieve this is to pay interest on BitAssets via dilution... customer has to buy and hold and thus this represents "proof of work" and is not "forgeable".   Unfortunately it also more closely looks like (but is not) a ponzi and it could be highly concentrated in a few users rather than gaining network effect... and there is no way to account for referrals because the DAC doesn't know how to tie balances to accounts. 

 

[Method-X]

A decentralized referral program that cannot be gamed!   This requires identity verification to ensure users are unique.    My "decentralized" approach to this is to allow delegates to fund campaigns and allow shareholders to vote on delegates based upon their proposed campaign.   You have to work with partners to prevent massive fraud like Bitcoin is seeing with the "mining referral model".

Could keyID help us?

It doesn't require identity verification, it only requires proof of sale (revenue generated). No affiliate program I've ever been aware of has required identify verification and they all work beautifully. You just need to understand how they work.

[liondani]

A decentralized referral program that cannot be gamed!   This requires identity verification to ensure users are unique.    My "decentralized" approach to this is to allow delegates to fund campaigns and allow shareholders to vote on delegates based upon their proposed campaign.   You have to work with partners to prevent massive fraud like Bitcoin is seeing with the "mining referral model".

Could keyID help us?

[Method-X]

Well that isn't really a PoW vs PoS issue now is it?   It is a community / social issue.  Bitcoin developers could turn of PoW and directing mining rewards to development and use PoS while still saying there will never be more than 21 million BTC.   It is a matter of what the "developers" + "merchants" + "users" are willing to accept.   It is a social issue...

Right, so it's about how the community at large perceives the inflation. Bitcoin is called a deflationary currency because it's inflation is set to a known schedule that (apparently) will never be changed. So, to the Bitcoin community, that makes it ok. They also use "fair distribution of coins" to justify mining as well.

For this type of "market mining" to be justified, it has to be set on a predictable, "set in stone" schedule that will never change. As far as referral programs go, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel. Just base it on what has already proven itself a massively successful model: affiliates.

I mean, there is nothing decentralized or autonomous about this type of referral program. This is basically invictus saying "we're going to opt for a one time inflationary period / loan / whatever in hopes that our bonus attracts users" without asking the question "Is giving a $100 one-time bonus even going to attract the desired demographic?"

Now, if we used 5% inflation per year decreasing by 0.5% over the next 10 years (or whatever formula we think is optimal), to allow any user to refer other people and get paid only if the referee generated revenue, you have a decentralized AND autonomous marketing program that is 1000x more efficient than a debit card bonus because it taps into the collective creativity of our community. It allows for viral, memetic spread.

A decentralized referral program that cannot be gamed!   This requires identity verification to ensure users are unique.    My "decentralized" approach to this is to allow delegates to fund campaigns and allow shareholders to vote on delegates based upon their proposed campaign.   You have to work with partners to prevent massive fraud like Bitcoin is seeing with the "mining referral model".

What is the difference between a DAC based affiliate program and a traditional affiliate program? Aside from less advanced tracking, I'm not seeing any technical differences. Commission Junction and Amazon cannot be gamed because if UserA refers UserB, UserB has to buy something for UserA to get a commission. So basically, UserB has to provably generate X revenue for the DAC before UserA qualifies for a payout. This is how all affiliate programs work.