We are not giving them NXT, they are agreeing to do what the committees tell them to do.
Who will enforce this agreement? social contract |
|
|
|
three different accounts, one for each treasurer.
Marketing = 3 million
infrastructure = 1 million or cost to deploy hubs needed for 1000TPS
tech = ~6 million - infrastructure
deploying the hubs - is a way to centralization. I think it is unacceptable. We need tech solution (in the core of Nxt), that makes profitable for hub owners to install these hubs. So we dо not need infrastructure committee at all. Please make a specific proposal on how exactly we can get hub owners profitable by April. That is when we want to be able to handle 1000TPS. This is mission critical NXT component and I do not want to leave it to chance, plus there is no defined way for hub owners to make money yet. In any case, the important point is the proposed process. The actual allocation to infrastructure has not been determined yet. Currently we have many nodes that are subsidized and until we have a infrastructure that is self sufficient, I think it makes sense to subsidize it with the available NXT. After all without the hubs, we won't get 1000TPS and without that we won't have the giant advantage over the other second gens |
|
|
|
you want to kill the best chance we have to actually start making use of the unclaimed NXT
Not at all. I just want 3 independent people, not original stakeholders, we have plenty of them. What's the difference? We can select either 3 stakeholders or 3 independent trusted members. No big deal. The BIG deal is that any treasurer cannot be in any of the committees. THAT is a big deal as we need to get people who are not the founders to put their stamp on NXT. The founders already did. Now it is the turn for the rest of us. Do not worry about FUD. I would much rather have Anon helping in the committees than waiting to be told where to send the NXT to. Do you understand that the treasurers function is to just hold the funds until told where to send it to. It will be held in a separate account for full transparency, |
|
|
|
And what if one day they decide they don't feel like doing it anymore?
Also, how do you think it's gonna look to outsiders?
I think it will look good to outsiders. Millionaire founders agree to obey the decisions of committees selected by the community. Committee members are chosen based on merit and not by how much NXT they have. Just what part of that looks bad? That "agree to obey" part. Let me ask again, what if one day they decide not to? To outsiders it looks like this: "there were 73 super rich original stakeholders and when some of them didn't claim their funds, those funds were divided between the rest of the original rich guys". And the outsiders won't get into any details that it's not true and that trustees have to "agree to obey"... So because you are worried about baseless FUD that you admit will be baseless, you want to kill the best chance we have to actually start making use of the unclaimed NXT If they decide not to obey, that will then make the FUD have some basis and it will hurt the value of NXT. Who does that hurt the most? Keep in mind the alternative to getting a process like this in place is the likely destruction of the funds, not to mention delay in marketing plans and rolling out of hubs. Those are big risks to take based on fear of FUD |
|
|
|
I highly doubt anybody is going to object to klee, neer.g, bybitcoin, Pouncer as treasurers. I will! Not because of their personalities, but because it doesn't seem like a good idea to give a very few people, who are already original stakeholders, more money. Talk about decentralization...  Anon136 + 2 of (klee, neer.g, bybitcoin, Pouncer) I thought you didn't get involved in politics. The problem with having Anon136 being a treasurer is that he will then be ineligible to be on any of the committees. We need him on the tech committee! |
|
|
|
I highly doubt anybody is going to object to klee, neer.g, bybitcoin, Pouncer as treasurers. I will! Not because of their personalities, but because it doesn't seem like a good idea to give a very few people, who are already original stakeholders, more money. Talk about decentralization... We are not giving them NXT, they are agreeing to do what the committees tell them to do. The committees decide how to spend the money, then the treasurers have to obey Also, the NXT will not go to their accounts. They have no say in how it is spent since they cannot be on any of the committees. |
|
|
|
The treasurers will NOT be getting any funds. They are just there to send the NXT as directed by the respective committees.
And what if one day they decide they don't feel like doing it anymore? Also, how do you think it's gonna look to outsiders? I think it will look good to outsiders. Millionaire founders agree to obey the decisions of committees selected by the community. Committee members are chosen based on merit and not by how much NXT they have. Just what part of that looks bad? James |
|
|
|
The treasurers will NOT be getting any funds. They are just there to send the NXT as directed by the respective committees.
And what if one day they decide they don't feel like doing it anymore? Then we would need to find a new treasurer. Not a big problem is it? In any case we already have one alternate, so this only becomes an issue if two people decide not to. However, these guys have the most to gain by spending to improve NXT, so they are the least likely to bail. |
|
|
|
Marketing = 3 million
infrastructure = 1 million or cost to deploy hubs needed for 1000TPS
tech = ~6 million - infrastructure
What the hell is "infrastructure fund"? Why money is being juggled so easily? That 1 million will appreciate significantly if we do things right, so why such arbitrary decisions are taken so lightly?  That should be a part of tech and tech will decide how much is needed to support the network, not some arbitrary round number. And I want a fiscal conservative, like rickyjames to have at least a veto power, so we won't burn through all this money in a month! This radio deal we've got into so quickly doesn't look particularly bright. Also, giving the rich more money in addition to their original stakes doesn't seem right. At least for outsiders it won't look good, we already have the distribution accusations... I would rather see an independent trustees, who are not the original stakeholders. The treasurers will NOT be getting any funds. They are just there to send the NXT as directed by the respective committees. There are no arbitrary decisions being made. The infrastructure cost will be estimated by probably both tech and infrastructure committees and then the 6 million will be allocated accordingly. nxtchg, please understand that we have to decide on a Process to deal with unclaimed funds. The treasurers will have no say in how the money is spent. Separation of decision making from access to funds. If you want to participate in the marketing committee then you can. But it is not appropriate for you to derail the entire process because you don't agree with one of the decisions made. We are talking about Process now. Not any specific spending decision. I know you are the worlds best programmer, but are you also the worlds best marketer? Please do not tangle up specific spending decisions of an area outside your sphere with the process. Do you have any objections with klee or neer.g or bybitcoin or Pouncer being the ones who are responsible to disburse the NXT when directed by the respective committee? James |
|
|
|
Damelon
Rickyjames
jl777
Anon136
Klee
The nominations should include which committee, plus Klee is ineligible as he will be one of the treasurers |
|
|
|
I would like to thank neer.g a lot for paying 1/3 - 90.000 for the Lets Talk Bicoin spot. 141.000 has been paid by donators, so it leaves us with 150.000 that were borrowed from the NxtMarketing If there was still any donator willing to help with this important spot, acc is: 2037401990853753795 thanks I will authorize 75,000 from NXTcommunityfund, rickyjames will need to send it James |
|
|
|
Hi NXTers
I'm still trying to runs NRS on android TV stick. I'm at 99% of work done. Ubuntu is running, Java installed. OK:
1. Started start.jar without any .nxt. Everything went smooth until block 22001, then java aborted.
2. Copied .nxt files from my other PC to the stick, started java.jar and after "Scanning blockchain..." BUMP, error is something like this:
A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime environment:
Internal error (os_linux_zero.cpp:285). pid=10388, tid=1090630768
fatal error: caught unhandled signal 11
JRE version: 7.0_25-b30
Java VM: OpenJDK Zero VM (23.7-b01 mixed mode linux-arm)
Core dump written. Default location :/home/ubuntu/Desktop/nxt/core or core.18388
Any thoughts from dev how to get rid of this problem?
block 22000 sounds familiar. Was it aliases that kicked in? Maybe buffer overflow from a long alias string? |
|
|
|
Will there be one account for 3 guys or 3 guys with respectively 1/3 funds in their accounts?
If distribution (ratio) of the unclaimed funds has already been decided, then I think it's easier to let each handle one fund (Easier for accountability and record keeping). If distribution of unclaimed funds has not been decided, and it's going to be another long debate over it, I suggest divide it equally and they will reallocate once the ration has been decided. Marketing has been decided at 3 million Tech/Infrastructure the remaining 6 million. Once we know the cost for the 1000TPS hubs, then we will know the right allocation between tech and infrastructure. James....lets increase marketing funds by 50% ...make it cool 4.5 million....1.5 can be used in 2nd year. No. community already decided on 3 million. Plus I have a LOT of new tech ideas that will require funding that will make the marketing money go a lot further |
|
|
|
Will there be one account for 3 guys or 3 guys with respectively 1/3 funds in their accounts?
If distribution (ratio) of the unclaimed funds has already been decided, then I think it's easier to let each handle one fund (Easier for accountability and record keeping). If distribution of unclaimed funds has not been decided, and it's going to be another long debate over it, I suggest divide it equally and they will reallocate once the ration has been decided. Marketing has been decided at 3 million Tech/Infrastructure the remaining 6 million. Once we know the cost for the 1000TPS hubs, then we will know the right allocation between tech and infrastructure. |
|
|
|
|
I highly doubt anybody is going to object to klee, neer.g, bybitcoin, Pouncer as treasurers. What this means is that there is no need to select trusted 7 (or 9 or 20) and I propose this thread go directly to creating the three funding committees:
Marketing: 3 million NXT over 12 months
Infrastructure: beefy hubs to support 1000TPS
Tech: ~6million - infrastructure costs
The treasurers will not be in any of the committees
This is tremendous progress! CfB has agreed to this. So in two days we should have treasurers for each committee with the unclaimed NXT.
James
|
|
|
|
Klee, neer g and Pouncer
Pouncer is first alternate, bybitcoin is the third proposed treasurer |
|
|
|
What the hell is "infrastructure fund"? Did I miss something? I thought it's 6/3, not 5/3/1.
It turns out we need beefy hubs to support 1000TPS, so whatever that costs reduces the amount for Tech. With dynamic TPS throttling, the infrastructure costs can be optimized, so it could be 1 million NXT, maybe 2, not sure yet. |
|
|
|
Will there be one account for 3 guys or 3 guys with respectively 1/3 funds in their accounts?
Pouncer's Proposal was three different accounts, one for each treasurer. Marketing = 3 million infrastructure = 1 million or cost to deploy hubs needed for 1000TPS tech = ~6 million - infrastructure James |
|
|
|
This is not a vote. It is a call for objections to any of the four proposed treasurers. 2 days is plenty of time. Any objection needs to have a good reason. Pouncer agreed to be the alternate, so the slate is bybitcoin, klee and neer.g James |
|
|
|
Ok, we need 3 founders who are trustworthy and we don't want in the 'subcommittees'.
klee, neer.g, bybitcoin with Pouncer as alternate in case one of the first three decline. NXT community, 2 days to object to any of the proposed treasurers. Please provide good reason for any objection. At the end of 2 days, assuming no objections, we will have treasurers for the unclaimed NXT, minus previously committed amounts which CfB will continue to administer. CfB, please confirm this is acceptable James |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
