I like a steady increase on price per share during the pre-sale, like Pn=Pn-1r , where each subsequent share price Pn is a fractional (or percentage) increase over the previous share price Pn-1. I'd prefer that shares may be resold at any time on the open market.
There should be a board of elected directors to disburse funds to pay for development, marketing, and other costs. Voting should be PoS with stakeholder designated proxy as a default if not overridden on a particular vote by the stakeholder. Proxies may be chained or forwarded to other proxies. The presale may be terminated with advance public notice by a majority vote of the stakeholders, or run for a set time or to a set limit of total investment.
Before the pre-sale launches, there should be a short pre-launch sale where everyone can invest and be awarded shares proportional to investment, maybe one week. The share price is equal to what it would be if the same amount of total investment were made to reach that point according to the power law used for pre-sale.
A matching pool of development shares should be created to fund development in some proportion of the pre-sale shares sold, to be used later as the initial funding is used.
I would leave it to the community to agree on the actual numbers used in the fractional price per share increase, the proportion of development shares, the amount to be raised, the length of the pre-launch sale, and length of the pre-sale. Here, launch means start of pre-sale.
This is similar to conventional start-up funding except that there is a continuous ramp in share price as value increases and risk decreases instead of discrete jumps in share price at different funding rounds. Also, the opportunity for the general public to enter at the seed stage is new.
The term IPO is not really accurate since these pre-sales are actually seed funding.
Looks extremely complicated to set up. Particularly the one that involves proxy voting and boards of elected governors. I would start manually with spreadsheets, implement in code as resources allow. |
|
|
|
Most start-ups don't take place in an atmosphere of coin fever, where psychological threshold for investing is very low and everybody is allowed to buy. Also developers usually aren't anonymous. What's happening here seems like a perfect opportunity for scammers.
I'm not for regulating anything, nobody should decide for you. What I wrote was meant more as advice for investors and should probably begin with "I suggest you invest in projects that do the following"
I suppose that in near future, with introduction of additional features/layers in bitcoin or contracts in ethereum (or similar protocols), distribution proof of burn will be replaced by tools that allow to secure and utilize funds in a trustless manner.
Yes, it was another poster who suggested adding restrictions on pre-sales. It is good to look for best practices in an offering. Implementing a platform for creating and funding start-ups as you suggest is a pet project of mine. Some of it is outlined in the funding model I posted above. |
|
|
|
The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.
Develop first, show proof of concept, distribute thru proof of burn.
Then, if necessary, gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover) additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.
I could not agree more, very well said Sound like a good approach. Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages. I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap. We are trying to figure out the best way to fund our NEX project. We are wondering if you had any insights on this. I like a steady increase on price per share during the pre-sale, like P n=P n-1r , where each subsequent share price P n is a fractional (or percentage) increase over the previous share price P n-1. I'd prefer that shares may be resold at any time on the open market. There should be a board of elected directors to disburse funds to pay for development, marketing, and other costs. Voting should be PoS with stakeholder designated proxy as a default if not overridden on a particular vote by the stakeholder. Proxies may be chained or forwarded to other proxies. The presale may be terminated with advance public notice by a majority vote of the stakeholders, or run for a set time or to a set limit of total investment. Before the pre-sale launches, there should be a short pre-launch sale where everyone can invest and be awarded shares proportional to investment, maybe one week. The share price is equal to what it would be if the same amount of total investment were made to reach that point according to the power law used for pre-sale. A matching pool of development shares should be created to fund development in some proportion of the pre-sale shares sold, to be used later as the initial funding is used. I would leave it to the community to agree on the actual numbers used in the fractional price per share increase, the proportion of development shares, the amount to be raised, the length of the pre-launch sale, and length of the pre-sale. Here, launch means start of pre-sale. This is similar to conventional start-up funding except that there is a continuous ramp in share price as value increases and risk decreases instead of discrete jumps in share price at different funding rounds. Also, the opportunity for the general public to enter at the seed stage is new. The term IPO is not really accurate since these pre-sales are actually seed funding. |
|
|
|
These IPO scams are definitely bad, but crypto as a whole has not been widely adopted worldwide, and as long as there are new members joining the forums daily, you can expect new scams, each time more clever than the last, to continue showing up. Levelcoin received scam accusation immediately upon being posted and yet still managed to garner a sizable amount of bitcoins before running with the cash. This will not be the end, expect more in the coming days and unfortunately there is nothing anyone can do about them, we can shout scam all day long and people will still take the plunge. The only solution is for the administrators of this forum to implement a rule where NO IPO's or pre-launch fundraiser are allowed without a full public source code. That will settle it once and for all, and is it really that difficult for everyone involved? The legit devs won't have a problem uploading the source and the admins would simple need to make a sticky post detailing how this is rule will be enforced. If someone asked for an IPO and doesn't provide source, lock their thread and slap them with a warning, if they do it again, ban them.
Last thing we need are people dictating how new projects are to be launched or funded. What you are suggesting would lock everyone but developers or people with money to hires developers out from starting a project. I don't need you or anyone else to protect me from myself. I don't need other people making decisions for me. I'm also paranoid enough to think these scams may be deliberate attempts to discredit the IPO model. LeoC started off viciously attacking a planned IPO, eMunie, and tried to extort another one, Ethereum. Given the disruptive nature of Bitcoin technology, we can expect people to show up with agendas to sabotage development of new ways of doing things which eliminate the need for parasitic intermediaries. There is also the opposition philosophical and political viewpoints, which believe that stealing from people is acceptable. It is quite possible that victimizing people by scamming them is considered a valid strategy to prove their points. Also, there are even factions within the Bitcoin community. We have certainly seen a major outcry against the IPO pre-sale model from the start, and against any alternatives to the PoW mining model. |
|
|
|
The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.
Develop first, show proof of concept, distribute thru proof of burn.
Then, if necessary, gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover) additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.
I could not agree more, very well said Sound like a good approach. Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages. I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap. |
|
|
|
We are not raising money right now. Keep up with the news man.
There's too much pollution on this thread to be worth reading or bothering with, much of it redundant crap from one individual. Ursium's has much better signal to noise ratio. Better to lock it and start a new, self moderated one. |
|
|
|
Well I am a marketing/PR/comm guy who has knowledge in Javascript/Java/CSS/HTML/and IT knowledge so I'd like to help out any ways I can. Also, the name shouldn't be levelcoin anymore since it brings a bad vibe now. Floorcoin or Stagecoin would be nice.
Excellent - quite a group forming! Agreed on re-branding. |
|
|
|
@GreXX
I will be happy to have you on my team if you are interested in getting this project launched . We are currently looking for developers and development fund is not a problem. Developer will be paid monthly salary and % of the coin and Founders will get % shares according to their development fund contributions.
Note: I'm not looking for investors so don't ask for my BTC address. If you are a developer contact me.
Thanks
Several of us are discussing continuing this project, but we want do do it in a manner which is as inclusive as possible for a variety of types of stakeholders - web and code developers, media and communications specialists, economists and financial analysts, investors, software testers, and anyone else who might be interested in participating in designing a coin driven by open community participation. Again, we are allowing time for Level Coin to follow through since it is already the weekend in some parts of the world before proceeding. |
|
|
|
To the two people attacking me for being proactive, feel free to calm down. I'm not asking for anything now except for a group of interested people to talk to about trying to find a way to actually produce this idea. I'm fully willing to divulge my identity to whatever team we work with, including responding to whatever requests will make those involved comfortable. I see a legitimate business opportunity here as well as the unique ability to create and produce something genuinely new and exciting. I have some ideas and would like to brainstorm with interested parties, which if that's not you, I don't blame you. A lot of scams go on here it seems like and I would be weary as well.
I'm not even saying we would get to production or even get to a point where we could start talking about funds, but shooting around some ideas seems like a good start. I do only have 11 activity on here. I made an account for the first time to ask questions of Levelcoin because I was truly interested in this. I still am. If no one else is then there is our answer. IF they are, lets talk about it. That's all i'm saying.
There are a couple of us who have been discussing this as well, but we are waiting a little to allow Level Coin to follow through. I also didn't want to encourage last minute investment of recycled contributions by a scammer by indicating interest in continuing the project until after the deadline to invest was over. |
|
|
|
do not assume the authorities aren't watching.. and do not put your greed for money above your legal and moral duty to obey they law.
So... what will "your legal and moral duty" be when they tell you that cryptocurrencies are against the law? +1 The word "greed" is about as objectively defined as the word "fair", and both are used in attempts to manipulate people by inducing feelings of shame and guilt. |
|
|
|
|
I decided to take the plunge and invested. While the circumstances are unusual, I'm relying on my gut instinct that Level Coin is sincere in his efforts, and hoping for the best.
Good luck everyone, especially to Level Coin.
|
|
|
|
Mastercoin is dead. Completely over. WTF?
i would not worry too much. it was a drop with very low volume. The market has absorbed 92K BTC in volume, back to .1 BTC/MSC. I'm curious to know what triggered the sell-off, but equity markets remind me of the ostrich farm I visited, where the flock will just all suddenly stampede for no apparent reason, stop as suddenly as they started, mill around a bit, then suddenly all stampede again, repeating the cycle every 15 minutes or so. One thing I can think of is people preparing to diversify into Ethereum. Overall news from MSC project itself has been good lately. NXT and Protoshares, the other closest competitors to Ethereum have also seen some sell off lately, just not to the extent of MSC. It looks like a lot of money will be finding its way into Ethereum when the pre-sale opens. There's also the global conventional markets sell-off, so maybe there's been an overall flight to safety out of the crypto markets. |
|
|
|
All founder funds were moved into their own separate wallets.
This was to combat a long string of transactions that had failed to confirm.
The user who invested 2 BTC has received a refund of 1 BTC from his personal wallet and I am sure he can vouch.
On release, founders will be receiving a link to their personalized wallet via e-mail.
There will be a period of two weeks in which direct founders will get access to the main net before anyone else.
This is to reward early investors for taking the risk. The Kickstarter page has been completed and submitted for their review.
I have had little time to code these past few days between this project and real life work and family.
I still need help with a GUI, it is likely that I will need to release with the current command line client, but it works just as good.
There are four days left to buy in for anyone that wants to participate in the two week closed "beta", which is what I will be calling it.
I'd like to invest, but I don't understand why you have ignored the requests to verify by posting to your Facebook page and mirroring here, as suggested by SyRenity, or at least explain why you don't want to do it instead of just ignoring the request. |
|
|
|
I don't have opinion yet.
But did any of you see the post by the guy who attended the Miami conference?
He clearly stated that the 30,000 BTC was a self imposed cap on fund raising. It was not the amount they're claiming they need.
He clearly stated that V named 500 BTC as what they actually need. If they have that, they can continue with the project.
Stop saying they're demanding 30,000 BTC from investors. Apparently its not factual. Or its lacking some information.
If this became a 500 BTC IPO .... would that make people happier?
It does not matter because there are a number of people who want to run this project to the ground with complete misinformation. They will stick to their claim of 30,000 BTC and 36 million dollars paying no heed to others. They twist every little piece of information that has been listed with their lies and have completely infected this thread. People who are too lazy to read the original posts or comprehend it correctly buy into their lies. If you like this project you are either a "HUGE" investor, or scum of the earth or a wall street stooge or your are simply getting paid to mislead people. They will bully, intimidate and abuse you until you no longer give a shit about clearing this misinformation. If you want information on this project this is no longer the thread to seek, look for information on their official website and forum, you might be able to decide if you want to invest or not to. I have no problem with the opinion that the founders are asking for too much (BTC and premine share) but the numbers being thrown around has become the theater of absurd. +1 The energy and time some of the detractors have put into repeatedly posting disinformation here makes me suspicious, but at least by announcing the pre-sale publicly here, Ethereum has met its commitment to inform and allow people to participate according to a fixed schedule and investment cap. This will negate future claims that people did not have a chance to invest. |
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I encourage anyone that I did transactions with to post a few words about their experience.
Your reviews are highly appreciated.
Thanks,
TD
|
|
|
|
|
Bought 2 BTC of XCP, transaction went smoothly, highly recommend.
|
|
|
|
Blockscan.com is lagging
It seems we are at block 282832, but blockscan's last block is on 282821.
Still stuck on 282821 |
|
|
|
|
This thread has really deteriorated. Lesson learned - always self moderate when making any proposal on Bitcointalk!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
