Bitcoin Forum

Hi my name is George, I’m developing a decentralized fund on Ethereum called Vega Fund. We are new and are looking for people that may be interested in early involvement. We are looking for community feedback and would like this to be an area for people to ask questions. If your interested in talking directly or joining our conversation on slack, please just give me a message and we can talk.

Do you not think it is a bit risky to run a fund on Etherum when there are known issues with it?
Are you going to back it up with off chain assets in case of a DAO situation?

You mean about the decentralized fund project based on the ethereum network? I think you must make your own announcement thread and try to start your discussion in there. this is not the correct place for you to promote your ico.
But there is once already similar with you.
Too many the decentralized shit in this day.  ::)

So the dao is the ether's fault?
too many the project already run a fund on the ether and it looks like there is no specific problem was appearing at least after the Casper PoS announcement has released.
You mean fork?

You can create a pre ann for your new soon to be launch coin,but I prefer it not on Ethereum because of the bugs I read that are popping up,might be better if you are not going to make it an ico coin,fund it yourself or get big whales to help you but not hold an ico,ico are total mess now.

There are good points about Ethereum that were said in the thread. But you still chose to start your fund in the platform. Is it because it is where you think you can organize a more successful funding round? Or do you think Ethereum has a technological edge over the other platforms like NXT or XEM for your use case? Please explain why.

Like someone else in this thread has already mentioned, the Ethereum fund blowup in July wasn’t Ethereum’s fault as a platform, it was the fund itself that had major security issues.
That being said, yes it’s risky in the sense that there will always be security issues, but ideally we can take advantage of the failure of those before us and learn + build from their experience.

This thread was not intended to be a promotion for any token, coin, ICO, or anything of the sort. We’re purely looking for feedback on our concept and are seeking to get the communities opinion on our planned solutions to what we see as the causes of failure of similar projects in the past.

Since you say there’s too much decentralized shit in this day, can you elaborate on why you don’t like decentralization in this context?

Like stated above, this post wasn’t meant to be a coin/ICO promotion.

As far as Ethereum as a platform for this sort of thing goes - what bugs are you concerned about that are inherent to the platform? Also, why do you think ICO’s are a mess right now?
Part of the reason we’ve chosen to use the Ethereum platform because of its relatively widespread adoption and user base, but we certainly don’t think it’s perfect on a technical level. 

You are perfectly aware that Etherum has it's technicall flaws, and you are still going to ask people to entrust their money to you on this platform???

We acknowledge that there are certain vulnerabilities in the platform, however many of those risks can be minimized, we are focused on making a platform that individuals could opt to change as a part of a plan to minimize risk.

How do you plan to minimize those risks? Are you open to let the experts do a peer review on your code before releasing it? Because if you want to start a fund that operates outside of any governmental audit and inspection you should let the community itself be the one responsible in making sure your fund is not a scam.

It would also help to tell us who you are and what your qualifications are in running a fund and why you think we should invest in it.

You also have not my answer from the previous post. I will quote it below.

The biggest risk we see is security, which, in this context, obviously has historical precedence as an issue. We plan on minimizing security risks by providing a funding base for individual developers through our main platform that operates in the same fashion as our larger project-funding platform. The DAO was warned long before it was exploited of the vulnerability, but the team failed to act. With this system, which is crowd-directed like the rest of the fund, users can propose and fund a solution to security problems as they’re identified. This will allow solutions to be implemented as soon as possible.

We are absolutely open to having experts peer review our code before we release it. We are willing to take any steps necessary to ensure potential users of the legitimacy of the project.

As for your previous post, we’ve chosen Ethereum because of the higher level of adoption and familiarity among a much larger group of people than NXT and XEM. Also, we believe that because of the way the fund as well as the token will operate, Ethereum is the most logical platform. Like stated previously in this thread, the historical issue with this idea on the Ethereum platform wasn’t inherently an Ethereum issue, but an issue in the execution of the idea itself.

All these Newbie account popping up and creating one fund or the other looking for people to give them money to invest for them.

I will like you to answer this question

What experience do you have to manage investor's fund
How would you proof you can be trusted since you are a Newbie here

The Decentralized Fund is UNO.
Base pair.  trade direct for XMR, WAVES, KOMODO, ETC, LTC, DOGE, BBR, EXP, STRAT, and +100 more.
Inflation rate of less than 1 coin per day, pulling 500TH/s for $1.43 ;)

1.What is the purpose of the fund?
2.What will it contain?
3.What will be done with it's contents?

When you say 'Newbie account' or say that I'm a 'Newbie' here, I assume you mean on this forum. Neither myself or my team working on this project are new to this space. We've been interested and involved in these markets for a long time. As for trust, we understand that trust is something that needs to be built over time. Reputation takes years to create and a second to destroy, and we will take all necessary steps to ensure trust. What we've done on this front so far is give people as wide open of access to our personal identities as founders that we feel necessary to create a solid relationship with the community.

When it comes to experience managing investor's money, because the fund's investment decisions will be client-directed, the product we're trying to create and sell isn't so much our reputation as money managers as it is a platform for people to make their own decisions with.

That being said, to ensure that the way we set up the fund and its general trading/investment operations are solid we've brought on a former equity derivatives trader as an official advisor, and we also have the help of some unofficial advisors who come from similar backgrounds such as Mortgage Backed Security, currency, and commodity trading. These advisors provide invaluable insights into the way business and investing should be conducted in this space.

Don't be biased and judge him because of his rank. I've met many bitcointalk newbies who were brilliant and intelligent individuals with great ideas.
Would it be more reassuring that he had a hero account? Definitely not for me. Just read what he is talking about and judge that information by yourself.

The only things that matter:

- What this project is all about, what is the innovation here?
- Do we see competent, experienced people working on it?
- What is the purpose of the fund, what it will bring for us, possible investors?
- Do we have clear and honest relation with the community?

1. There are two main purposes for the fund:
          a) To allow individual investors the opportunity to have an impact in the ICO market without having to sacrifice diversity of risk. To expand on this, often times investors in this market don't have enough money to both make a significant impact on the project they're trying to help fund and also diversify their holdings, forcing a choice between impact and diversification.
          b) To provide a single large funding base for projects and individual developers in this space.
2. The holdings of the fund, initially, will be wholly comprised of tokens issued through pre-ICO sale or ICO of Ethereum-based products. In the future, the fund may expand to provide funding for things in the broader cryptocurrency/blockchain markets.
3. This will be up to the clients of the fund, but ideally clients would vote to fund projects at an early stage with the intention of either realizing a return at some point down the road or creating a sustained funding relationship with a certain project.

Ethereum was a flop. Have you heard of RChain? It's said to be the holy grail.

I think that I've answered most of your questions thus far, but let me elaborate on a few points:

The project is all about providing a consistent funding base for projects and individual developers on the Ethereum platform. Eventually, we may go beyond the Ethereum platform, but we think it's a good place to begin because of the relatively widespread adoption of it. The innovation is the ability for many people to come together and provide a venture capital-esque service without being hammered by fees or (for now) burdensome regulations.

As for a competent and experienced team, I've already touched on our advisors, who are all above and beyond in terms of competence and experience. For the main team, the founders (of which I myself am one) are solid in their respective roles. The founders themselves (of which I am one, so I may be biased) are competent in their respective roles, i.e. development/programming/business. It helps that we not only have experience in doing these types of projects before, but we've mostly done them together, creating a great team dynamic through shared experience.

The purpose of the fund has already been described, but as for what it will bring possible investors I'll reiterate: the biggest value it adds for possible investors is that it eliminates the unnecessary forced choice between impact investing and diversification of risk. We've done surveys of the Ethereum and broad cryptocurrency/[Suspicious link removed]munity and found that while people are certainly out to make money, they also genuinely desire to help the growth of these technologies.

While at this point our project is not very big, matured, or well-known, our current standing with those we are in contact with is good and
we view solid community relations as paramount to our success.
 

I would prefer to be biased and cynical than to be scammed by a fraud scammer. I am not saying the vegafund idea is a scam but judging from what we have always witnessed in the cryptoshere, the vegafund could maybe be over 99% a scam. The community has had enough of this and it is time to know who these people are. So the vegafund people should give us proof of their identity if they really want to be trusted.

Let me get this straight
In order to save fees, you suggest that I should risk my money on a fund run by anonymous people on a tech with known issues? No thank you. I prefer fees

I agree that the community has had enough of scammers, but I take issue with your post.

I didn't come here to try and pitch my product or raise money - as you already know, I'm new to this forum, but I thought this was a place where knowledgable people could discuss certain concepts (both technical and broader business). I made this thread with the sole intention of getting insight on a concept, so I didn't even link my project's website, since I thought my intentions might be viewed as disingenuous if I did.

So I didn't post my project's website - where you would find all of the team's identities, which we've put out to the public to the full extent of what we deem to be relevant, and as we try to grow only more will come out.

I understand your hesitation when dealing with a new account on this forum because you have no idea who's behind it, but your post makes it seem like myself and my team are deliberately trying to hide our identities which is both not true and (originally) not relevant to this thread. 

Nowhere in my post did I mention fees.

You seem to be mistaking diversification of risk with fees. The point of the fund is to eliminate the situation that potential Ethereum-based-project investors face when they don't have large amounts of capital to work with - that is, having to choose between making a meaningful contribution to a project seeking funds and taking responsible amounts of risk, i.e. diversification of risk.

Also, like my post above states, we're not anonymous. It would be unethical, in my view, to run any business without disclosing your personal identity and having exposure to the downside of the project yourself.

Using the word ïmpact"here is a little bit vague. What sort of impact are you meaning?
          How is the centralisation of this a positive? Surely a distributed funding base is better

ok

An interesting experiment, but I don't think it is better. It is easier to turn around a surfboard that an ocean liner.

There are some projects in life where I would see  banding together as advantageous, but, for myself, I can't see much of an advantage this time, though I might be missing something certainly.

Mind you I'd be very interested to see how the voting goes in such things if you do get funds. Will it be transparent enough for anyone to see how voting is going on proposals?


The benefit seems to be this impact, but how is this impact, going to be advantageous?

When I say 'impact', I mean something like this:
A project is trying to raise $10,000,000. They have no minimum contribution limit, as is typically the case with an Ethereum crowd-sale. So, in the grand scheme of things, any contribution <$10,000 or so will be next to meaningless for the project. The issue here is that most people don't have $10,000+ that they can just put into some project - but even with this limited capital, people still genuinely desire to help the project succeed. A fix to this on a single scenario basis would be for people with limited capital to band together and invest in the project with their pooled funds, on a continuous basis the solution would be something like a decentralized fund.

The centralization of the market's funding base is a good thing because it helps unify the standards of the community. As it stands now, everyone has their own individual standards and does their own due diligence on projects. A consequence of this is a higher prevalence of scams, because there is no agreed upon minimum standards for a project to meet before people invest.

Traditional markets largely solve this problem by setting a super high bar for companies to meet before they can go public. And, as a result, being listed on something like the S&P 500 provides a big stamp of legitimacy. Ideally, a large funding entity in this space, i.e. Vega Fund, could do the same thing by having some unified standards that, once the fund is big enough, projects in the market genuinely desire to meet because they want to be held by Vega, both for the money and the stamp of legitimacy.

As someone who is deeply interested by both new fintech on blockchain and traditional finance, I can understand why you don't see it as advantageous to band together in this scenario. I had the same feeling at first, but after coming to interact with the community both in person and on forums, I think people really like the idea of pooling their money and funding projects as a community.

As for the voting, yes, it will be able to be seen as it's happening.

If you are really new to this forum where you think there are knowledgeable people who could discuss your idea with you then it might be better for you to go somewhere else. You will be trolled here because this community has seen a lot of scams and almost all of them pretend to be new here.

If we do not know who you are and where you live then only the most foolish newbies will invest in your fund.

No I am not discrediting you. But do you know how much money the community have lost to scams and will lose to future scams?