if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.
Yet Byteball has a market cap of about $450 Million USD. Perhaps this is prima facie evidence that decentralization is not necessarily the be-all, end-all in crypto value?
IOTA and XRB sky rocketed ...
Yes...
... because of the unit price.
This assertion is made, bereft of any evidence to support it. Why do you claim A is the cause of B?
Perhaps those so insistent they know better than tony how to 'make this coin a success' should fork the code and create a new coin. Here ya go:
https://github.com/byteball/byteball450M is still small next to 11BN so perhaps with the adjustments suggested it could do a lot better.
Having said that MC value is not firm ground for any real argument imho. This metric is one of the most easily manipulated.
I am simply stating that whilst other projects move toward decentralised governance BB is one of the most proven centralised projects in many ways out there. The developer does what he wants when he want with no consideration nor consultation of the entire community. He actually takes many actions that are directly the opposite of what the community wants, retains a huge bulk of the coins and alters the distribution rules as and when he sees fit.
This is not in the spirit of crypto. 450 M is nothing for the design and implementation here. Tonys actions outside of his coding are actually damaging to the project. He should be left to code the core product and decentralised governance structure should be the first thing he gets to work on.
If giving huge amounts knowingly to other ico managers whilst having to cut promised full moon distributions to investors many of which invested on that premise is not enough indication of terrible mismanagement of this project then i am not sure what it will take for you to recognise tony is best kept to the coding and design whilst others who understand market psychology and marketing are best to work in those areas.
Investing in BB right now with so much central control is actually very high risk and if you want to cut out the non savvy investors and treat their investment as invalid and then cut out the savvy investors who see the high risk of the entire project in the hands on one person who does what he wants when he wants and often makes terrible choices only to 180 turn on them ....then you have far less investors left that you could have.
I mean just saying we dont want to appeal to stupid people who dont understand per unit value is crazy talk. Their investment funding is as valid as the smart investors. More so because sadly there are probably more of what some would class as stupid investment money than smart money.
It's like movies... what makes more shrek or some high brow indy movie? you can say I don't care about appealing to fools or even children but you will lose every time in market share sadly. There are simply more foolish than smart.
Give people what they want. People right now want cheap per unit tokens look at the market it is telling you this even if you ignore the fact every other thread in the main board is titles...what coins under $1 OR which cheapest coins are going to go x100. Then you look and there are projects being suggested that are in the top 10 or 20 cmc that just have huge mintings and low per unit price.
Also let's get some polls for BB so we can tell really how many people want things and dont want it.
I wonder how many people would vote for a nulling of the other ICO managers BB wallets. I mean if trustless immutable decentralised are no longer important then lets get changing everything that will benefit the vast majority of BB holders.
Show Posts
- hell you could retire on it!
