Agreed. Whole crypto is in a downturn but this fall relative to all the others is very telling. Ranking was about 54th in market cap before ending airdrops to byte holders. Now 86th as I write.

It is easy to understand why. The incentive to hold was removed. I see two possible reasons; either premeditated deliberate sabotage of exchange value of bytes for reasons unknown or else a worryingly inept understanding of market forces. I think latter is slightly better and what I would hope it is. But still is not good. Especially when you consider how many are still left to distribute.,


I think there is one or (maybe two) that you can opt into if you research how to change your witness list, but default list is all Tonych. I'm guessing very few change the default list.

It is unproven that even one large entity might ever consider doing this (being a witness). However even if all 12 witnesses were different and represented by large companies with reputations to protect. To get them to collude in secret is not a huge stretch of the imagination. They might even be ordered to by governments or intel agencies. Like the way backdoors are put into PC firmware or whatever. I am sure for example banks collude routinely. And when caught only get their wrist slapped. eg look at LIBOR.

"Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked" Starting to wonder if Byteball is one of those, which makes me the unfortunate bag holder  

Woah Monero !

Airdrops cancelled for byte holders. Existing holders won't benefit from airdrops meanwhile the supply still gets diluted by another 40% when the last coins are distributed elsewhere. This means incentive to dump rather than hold.

The worst thing about it is it demonstrates how the dev has too much power to influence the market.

You are quite right my risk, my bad decision. Stupid me. I took the roadmap of distributions at face value. Regardless of that I am allowed an opinion on the matter. It is only because I care that I am taking the time to have my say.

   

OK thanks I wouldn't have known that. 

   

I don't really follow your argument about investors but I'll say this. The bytes that are given away for 'free', were also received by Tony for free. He didn't buy them. At the moment when they were generated they had no value. None. Not to take away from Tony's hard work and inspiration but that is the fact of it. Value came later in large part from the roadmap and peoples beliefs about what byteball might grow into. This is still the case and I subscribe that the value is decreasing now in large part because of the vision changing to a more centralised reality is being priced in and it has a lower value.

Imagine if some powerful dictator of bitcoin (which thankfully doesn't exist) deciding to add another 40% to the total number of bitcoins and instead of mining just pay them to hmself and decide how to spend them to increase the number of users? It doesn't sound good does it? The airdrops are a necessary evil to get out of the way so we can all get on with no longer giving a flying fuck about how they will be distributed because that will be history. He is not 'spending' them wisely he is giving every appearance of a dictator making bad decisions and not understanding why the network has value.

Call this girly whining if you want. Personally I think I deserve to have a seat on the board for telling it how it is.

So called investors? What is wrong with investors? Have you invested in any bytes?


Again! What is wrong with holding a currency for long term? Holding (or saving) is as legimate a 'use' as spending (if you can find anywhere to spend it), exchanging, or gambling on a bot or whatever else one wants to do


At this point you are just dreaming. I imagine not one of these even knows byteball exists nevermind planning to stake their reputation to it. Meanwhile all default witnesses still controlled by Tony. (And all witnesses fees collected by Tony). While we're making stuff up lets add JP Morgan, The IMF and the ECB to the witness list.

See you next month. Who are you again?? the new PR guy?

Yes we do clearly disagree. If you want to increase the user base one of the first things you do is try to keep your existing users not lose them.

It would have harmed the long term success to do another airdrop?? Really? By that logic Tony should have done no airdrops and HODL'd 100% of the coins to avoid harming the long term success. Your argument has no logic. Have you seen the price of byteball lately? That extra value of distributing small amounts isn't working so far.

Then you call my argument false and in the same paragraph you say my logic is correct!

Central bankers think this way too. We can be better than the market IF we tweak the markets, we can avoid a market crash if we print billions of dollars. Maybe Tony should make himself a print bytes button? Then he can have as many bytes as he sees fit.

The coins should be distributed not HODL'd. The coins were not designed to be a treasury they were designed to be circulating. The roadmap clearly showed that 98% would circulate. Free market should decide the value of the coins. Tony should stick to the roadmap and stick to developing.

Which is the trend bull or bear?

Thanks for your reply. I guess my last couple of posts were quite a daunting block of text. So I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

I disagree about the March airdrop though, I consider it a PR disaster.  Also I don't see anything wrong with short term gains if thats what one wants to do with their bytes. Not what I was planning to do, I'd have HODL'D  but still I see nothing wrong with it. The whole point they would have been in circulation which is the entire point. Free market. I can speculate that many who sold might have kept byteball on their radar, and one day might have bought back in at higher prices. Whos to say?

For those with a longer term interest they now have to factor that holding for long term now means you can't count on benefiting from any of the new methods of airdrop but you can count on the supply being increased by 40%. You can't know the timeline for this though. The reasons to hold longer term appear to have diminished, that is surely hard to deny.




Yes its pretty dead or at least hasn't been a roaring success. Although there is nothing sinister about it (that I can tell), it is far too easy to think that there might be. Especially to an audience of crypto nerds.  Its an edge case feature which may one day be useful but currently has no use cases (that I know of).

I think its been another PR mistake incentivising the ID verification. Its too easy to create the wrong impression and I guess that its glitchy and sometimes fails isn't good PR either.

I thought byteball had a new PR guy?

I think you are wrong   Regular users don't lead they follow (or do what they are told by authority) The adoption curve always shows regular users coming in late to the party like always with new technology. There is no shortcut straight to mainstream unless forced by government. I don't forsee any governments forcing regular users to use byteball in the shortterm. As I said in my previous post, the expected demographic of users in these early days would be crytpo enthusiasts for whom centralisation is a big No and who know the difference between a blockchain and a DAG and who are willing to figure out adding a bot from the bot store or a conditional payment.

Ripple is nothing to aspire to. The mere fact that 60% of XRP is still undistributed after years puts the centralised reality of the token blatently out there in plain view. It stretches credibility a lot to even call it a crypto currency. It has a centralised ledger not a blockchain. Or I'm wrong again? If you hadn't guessed I am not a fan of ripple and have no intention of ever investing in it.


Thanks for that. Actually I share those concerns about witnesses but wanted to stick to coin distribution as the focus of my post. And yes I agree that the coins will always be distributed that way. It is the way of things. But I don't think you can really truthfully call 40% of undistributed coins as actually distributed afterall, but to the creator and without ever having circulated first.

Just to add a few additional thoughts. The example of Dash in my view is one to look at with great interest. Similar to Tony, Evan Duffield started out as THE dictator / dev in full control of Dash (then Darkcoin) like Tony is with Byteball. What Evan went on to do was genius in my view. He implemented Dash with a self funded treasury and voting mechanisms how to spend it. Nodes are incentivised with rewards which are a portion or mining rewards and thereby incentivised to scale up as network usage increases or lose those rewards.  Dash uses this treasury funding to pay its developers and in fact Evan has relinquished control completely from the development side of it. Dash also funds marketing and other things too through the same mechanism. The decision whether to fund or not decided by vote amongst the masternode holders. The number of masternodes is at all time highs just now showing long term faith by the big investors. The technology for all of this was quite simple it was the economics of it that provided the genius. If you haven't spotted it, this is a virtuous circle. Dash funds itself to improve and the value increases which means the funds available in the treasury for the next round go further which increase the value further and so on.

It seems that Tony wishes to use the un-distributed bytes as a treasury of sorts to spend enticing new users and to fund projects to promote and improve byteball. But the differences in how Dash has done it are vastly better with Dash. Tony appears to be looking at the pot of undistributed funds dwindling away through airdrops and panicked, halting the airdrops to stop the outflow and conserve the treasury he has at his disposal. Though he is not being explicit in this. Unlike Dash in which the treasury is replenished,  byteball's 'treasury' isn't, and once spent won't be available again. In Dash the treasury  is explicitly a treasury to be spent improving Dash, with byteball these undistributed bytes are supposed to be currency circulating through the network and because that has changed is causing uncertainty and angst among investors who are being sold a different thing. In Dash thousands of masternodes vote which proposals to fund, in byteball Tony decides, then sometimes changes his mind.

If the Dash model was to be followed could a portion of the fees collected by byteball witnesses be used to fund a treasury? Just a thought.

I feel a bit mean saying all this. I'd like to emphasise that I recognise Tony is a genius developer and has created an amazing coin. I hope that is understood. I wouldn't have invested or even be here commenting if I wasn't impressed with what Tony is doing and has already done.  

Yes....

The great plan is this...

• 12 bucks worth to anyone who verifies their ID.  
• Merchants who sign up can give cashback to customers denoted in byteball.
  
• Apply to Tony for funds if you have a good plan to develop something in the byteball ecosystem.
• Textcoin giveaways.
• Other great things still to be announced...

If anyone can provide information about the above distribution methods, especially how many are being distributed by each method I'd be very interested to see it. So far I have the perception that very few are being distributed by these methods at this time.

The obvious problems here are that none of these methods allow for a date we can plan for when the distribution is complete. Also the uptake seems very disappointing so far. And it does not look good that the original distribution plan has been discarded so whimsically to the detriment of many investors.

Going by what Tony says, he states that he wants to grow the network and cites Metcalfe's law as the reason.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law

No one would argue a bigger user base is bad. However I ascertain that Tony regards adding users to the network as more important than distributing the coins. Otherwise the airdrops would not be cancelled.

This is where I think the plan is failing, I feel that byteball needs credibility before users will join. To get the credibility that it needs it has to be as decentralised as possible. That means all coins distributed as utmost priority (except for the initially agreed amount to be held by Tony). That also means as a matter of priority the witnesses need to be credible.

I believe users are not coming to byteball because it is too centralised for reasons already stated and because of this all the really cool tech and new distribution methods are doomed to fail (until such time as byteball starts to look like a proper decentralised crypto currency at least). Byteball does not exist in a void. It is competing with many other crypto currencies, most of which are already decentralised. Most of the potential users are very savvy about this kind of thing. For a coin to be labelled as centralised is about the worst label that can be applied to a cryptocurrency and it  is being applied to Byteball.

To sum up. The primary intention of Tony is not to distribute the coins. Because airdrops were doing that very well but are cancelled. The intention of Tony is to entice a huge number of people to become lifelong byteball users through small donations. For me it is a matter of priorities being back to front. Byteball has to earn its users by first being a credible decentralised network and then the users will flood in (Because the tech IS really really cool).

_{* I made numerous small edits to this post to try and clarify better my ideas.}

All would be good for a while for the northern collectivists. But eventually a section of the northern collectivists would start to notice that handouts were more profitable than breaking a sweat to do any labour themselves. They would start to demand more handouts as they are entitled to them. The ones who do work hard would be taxed more and more heavily and eventually conclude why bother. The society would collapse only seeing seeds of recovery once the heavy taxation burden had finally gone and people start to work hard and see the fruit of their labour. They would change to become more individualistic.

Those on the south would thrive enjoying the fruits of their labour. Their society would become rich. Trade and commence would flourish. The leaders would share the wealth and create things like national health service they would all congratulate themselves on being so forward thinking and generally great. But slowly people would demand more and more for the common good. They become more collectivist. Taxes rise to pay for it all.

And so on

 

Left Right Left Right. Keep marching on

The powers that be are so desperate to have an excuse to ban guns they will manufacture shooting incidents to provide the excuse. Sandy Hook looked staged I haven't looked into the Florida one so won't judge that. If it wasn't staged I'd be surprised. We live in an age of universal deceit and ever tighter control of every aspect of our lives.

As for bitcoin, I'm waiting/hoping to see an Inverse Head and Shoulders break upwards.


 

He can do this as he has total control of 40% of the supply. That is fact and reality, no escaping it. I'd 'like' to think he's a good guy and won't sucumb to temptations (the very fact he has stopped lunar airdrops is worrying in that regard). However I'd prefer to just get the distribution done and get on with using a decentralised byteball and not worry about what Tony might or might not do.  That goes for decentralising the witnesses too.

How Much of One’s Time Should Be Spent Counter-Trolling?

https://www.dashforcenews.com/much-ones-time-spent-counter-trolling/

Maybe its time to stop feeding the troll

The coins need to be circulating NOT being hodled by the creator. It just is not a good look for a coin. Reminding me in a very uncomfortable way of Ripple. Sending out a couple of hundred bucks as incentive for KYC  ID is not an air drop. The coins will never be 98% distributed if this goes on. Consequence being that it will never be taken seriously as money.

The thing is the excuse of trying to get as many users as possible with meagre handouts is proven not to work. The best example being Iceland's Aurora coin. People have to be attracted to use it not bribed. It is not attractive seeing the Dev change plan and hodl his own premined coin.

Also it is flying under the radar but the witnesses are all but maybe two controlled by Tony.

I invested in this coin because the tech sounded amazing and the roadmap of airdrops was clear.

Shame to see the credibility draining away like this.

For those that call this greed. You need to rethink about the economics of supply and demand.

Haha had a good laugh at that thanks  


I remember after the huge price rise last year predicting Dash would then wallow for a while and probably drop out the top 10 on market cap, maybe I try and find the quote later.. But that was nothing to do with hating on Dash only the realistic fact that bull markets need time to correct and get used to higher levels. I think like you, Dash will surprise everyone coming from nowhere again. When the time is right.

Rule number one. Never trust an exchange as a safe place to store coins.
Rule number two. See rule number one.