There is still widespread confusion about BitShares PTS and Protoshares

[sidhujag]

DE has arrived to ruin another thread. Meanwhile bts leaves nxt to dust like I predicted

[runpaint]

Well it does say the blocks are synced

[NASdaq]

HELP!!!

I bought some original PTS (like over a year ago) and some angel shares in the IPO. What do I have to do to claim the sharedrops? Assume I was in a coma and know nothing since mid 2014 (which is basically true).

[testz]

HELP!!!

I bought some original PTS (like over a year ago) and some angel shares in the IPO. What do I have to do to claim the sharedrops? Assume I was in a coma and know nothing since mid 2014 (which is basically true).

Import wallet.dat with original PTS and wallet.dat (or private key) from where you donated to AGS into BitShares client and you get your shares at balance.
But I suggest you to wait few weeks for BitShares 2.0 release and import your keys into new 2.0 wallet.
More info and place where you get help for all your BitShares questions: https://bitsharestalk.org
Wiki: http://wiki.bitshares.org

[runpaint]

Protoshares which became PTS where sharedropped on.

Protoshares were never sharedropped on.  The name changed to BitShares PTS before the first sharedrop.

You have to understand, the developers (Dan) did not control PTS, it was a POW coin. After the share drop some ppl decided they wanted to keep it running. How do you stop a decentralize POW coin if people continue to mine it? That's why its confusing because there was no way to shutdown PTS after the drop.

So it's a decentralized coin?  Nobody owns it, nobody controls it, nobody can stop it from running?

And that's what Dan and Stan promised to use for all future drops, knowing that it wouldn't be under their control?

Then how can you say they decided to merge it, decided to end it, or that the coin "changed hands" and is being run by different people? 

If it was decentralized from the start, and they never had control of it in the first place, then they knew that when they promised to distribute all future DACs to PTS holders.

[Bisha]

Protoshares which became PTS where sharedropped on.

Protoshares were never sharedropped on.  The name changed to BitShares PTS before the first sharedrop.

You have to understand, the developers (Dan) did not control PTS, it was a POW coin. After the share drop some ppl decided they wanted to keep it running. How do you stop a decentralize POW coin if people continue to mine it? That's why its confusing because there was no way to shutdown PTS after the drop.

So it's a decentralized coin?  Nobody owns it, nobody controls it, nobody can stop it from running?

And that's what Dan and Stan promised to use for all future drops, knowing that it wouldn't be under their control?

Then how can you say they decided to merge it, decided to end it, or that the coin "changed hands" and is being run by different people? 

If it was decentralized from the start, and they never had control of it in the first place, then they knew that when they promised to distribute all future DACs to PTS holders.

ProtoShares were never sharedropped on? Then why did I get more BTS from Vote, DNS,etc and have NOTES on my wallet?

[runpaint]

ProtoShares were never sharedropped on?

That's right.  You're an excellent example of the widespread confusion that persists about BitShares PTS and Protoshares.

Protoshares was changed to BitShares PTS, before any sharedrops ever happened.  All sharedrops through November 2014 went to BitShares PTS, as promised;  but after that, the promise was not kept.

[StanLarimer]

Poor runpaint.  

He has to go back to 18 months (a lifetime in this industry) to make up some controversy. No matter how many times this is explained by all sorts of informed people, he keeps posting the same misleading story.

As Warf the Klingon would say, "He has no honor!"

Last year BitShares PTS and AGS were merged into BitShares where the promises continue to be kept.  

Why exactly is this news now?
(Yes, that's what I think too.)

Nobody else at the bitsharestalk.org forum is confused about this at all,
but he hopes he can confuse those who are just now starting to pay attention
to our rising market cap and trading volume
and all the buzz that goes with it.

We are all focused on the countdown to BitShares 2.0 -- now entering its final exciting weeks.

Every post we've ever made on poor runpaint's obsession is available here and at bitsharestalk.org for those who care to do their own forensic analysis.  You might find my epic series on The Origin of BitShares helpful - it was originally written for this forum.  This summary has stood the test of time since January.

  Or you could trust people from both sides to cherry pick their own quotes for you.  Perhaps you can read them all in time to make an informed decision before the big launch on October 13.

But poor runpaint is hoping you won't get your own research done before you miss the opportunity.  

So, as a practical matter, you might just ask yourself whether BitShares would have any kind of a following at all, much less be among the Top Five on coinmarketcap, if any of his conclusions were actually true.

Doesn't even pass a cursory sanity check, does it?

[Bisha]

So first you say PTS wasn't sharedropped on and then admit I got my shares but I'm part of the confusion? You don't even know how to argue about this. You lost all the credibility just now. This is intentional from your part.

What you're saying it's different. PTS got sharedropped on, however that doesn't happen anymore. Those are 2 different things. Plus, vote, dns, ags and pts all got a stake on the new BTS. So now we have this new thing called BTS, that is shadropped on. Now you're free not to agree with that decision for whatever reasons you may have. But PTS got sharedropped on, a compensation was worked out to migrate everything to BTS, which is now the new shadrop target.

I can understand you might not agree with the merger but that's a different thing. I'm not confused. I knew what was going to happen as an informed holder who cared enough to check out for news. I'm not part of that widespread confusion. Don't include me. You are though, you're someone who seems not to agree with the merger and messing things up now, mixing facts and saying PTS was never sharedropped on when in fact it was. But you will just continue arguing about something that was already explained a thousand times so.. Good luck on your journey.

The only thing I don't like about this thread is, you could be a potentially confused holder with lots of questions. However, everything was clarified with you, this was repeated a thousand times and you're just insisting on this on purpose. It's like beating sense into a wall. It isn't worth keep up this discussion because you will continue, intentionally to spread those baseless arguments of yours.

[runpaint]

As Warf the Klingon would say, "He has no honor!"

No honor?  Am I the one who just issued myself 50% of a new asset and arranged to have it used for sharedrops?  Or was that Dan?

Last year BitShares PTS and AGS were merged into BitShares

Merged in what way?  The way in which you get to sell your PTS but still receive all the sharedrops that were supposed to go to PTS holders?

Nobody else at the bitsharestalk.org forum is confused about this at all

Actually there does seem to be confusion.

But Dan has made a new "social contract" in which people who ask questions about the new sharedrop target don't get any.  Maybe that's why there isn't much talk about it?  

our rising market cap

lol

"It's rising!  It's slightly above the all-time low!"

Every post we've ever made on poor runpaint's obsession is available here

I've supplied plenty of your own posts.  What you call my "obsession" is actually my interest in my investment.  

I bought BitShares PTS, but now you have sharedrops to Brownie PTS instead because you own the majority of it.

You might find my epic series on The Origin of BitShares helpful - it was originally written for this forum.  This summary has stood the test of time since January.

  Or you could trust people from both sides to cherry pick their own quotes for you.

We could trust people from both sides...or just you?  Is that seriously the choice you're giving us?

So, as a practical matter, you might just ask yourself whether BitShares would have any kind of a following at all, much less be among the Top Five on coinmarketcap, if any of his conclusions were actually true.

Doesn't even pass a cursory sanity check, does it?

[runpaint]

You lost all the credibility just now.

How does someone get credibility?  By issuing themselves a lot of free money?

What you're saying it's different. PTS got sharedropped on

Yes, but you were just asking about Protoshares getting drops.  Protoshares never got any drops, Bitshares PTS did.  You're still confused.

Maybe you should read this thread again and see all the varying opinions about the difference between Protoshares and BitShares PTS.  And it's people from Bitsharestalk who have all these different ideas about what happened.  They're confused too.

[runpaint]

Everyone else here understands the results of the merger

The result is that Stan and Dan were able to sell their PTS while still giving themselves shares that were promised to PTS holders. 

And then they gave themselves Brownie PTS so they could get more shares of Identibit. 

Are those the results you're talking about?

[runpaint]

When they make a contract they honor it and when they renegotiate a contract, they give you more than you were promised. 

They gave more than the original agreement?

And they themselves are shareholders?

So they gave themselves more than what was in the original agreement.

Most of us are into crypto because we don't want to depend on people who control the money to "give us more than we deserve". 

[StanLarimer]

For the record, I have never sold any of my PTS.  Ever.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

For the record, I have never sold any of my PTS.  Ever.

Is this the same kind of "never" as when you claimed that you "never" put "Safer than a Swiss Bank" on the official Bitshares(TM) website, where you claimed you were the "Head of Operations", and when provided evidence that "Safer than a Swiss Bank" was on your website, you stated that it was a volunteer that put it there?

BitShares.  
Safer than a Swiss Bank.  
(Ask me why!)

My guess is that any PTS Stan and Dan had and then sold was held in a non-personal account.  Thus, he claims he never personally sold any of his PTS because his "personal", non-corporate holdings were/are minuscule.

[favdesu]

Poor runpaint.  

He has to go back to 18 months (a lifetime in this industry) to make up some controversy. No matter how many times this is explained by all sorts of informed people, he keeps posting the same misleading story.

As Warf the Klingon would say, "He has no honor!"

Last year BitShares PTS and AGS were merged into BitShares where the promises continue to be kept.  

Why exactly is this news now?
(Yes, that's what I think too.)

Nobody else at the bitsharestalk.org forum is confused about this at all,
but he hopes he can confuse those who are just now starting to pay attention
to our rising market cap and trading volume
and all the buzz that goes with it.

We are all focused on the countdown to BitShares 2.0 -- now entering its final exciting weeks.

Every post we've ever made on poor runpaint's obsession is available here and at bitsharestalk.org for those who care to do their own forensic analysis.  You might find my epic series on The Origin of BitShares helpful - it was originally written for this forum.  This summary has stood the test of time since January.

  Or you could trust people from both sides to cherry pick their own quotes for you.  Perhaps you can read them all in time to make an informed decision before the big launch on October 13.

But poor runpaint is hoping you won't get your own research done before you miss the opportunity.  

So, as a practical matter, you might just ask yourself whether BitShares would have any kind of a following at all, much less be among the Top Five on coinmarketcap, if any of his conclusions were actually true.

Doesn't even pass a cursory sanity check, does it?

I fully agree, there's not much confusion going on. I wasn't able to follow BTS for almost a year, but that's my problem. As an investor, it's your duty to follow up, and if you don't like what you see: sell.

I thought runpaint was a smart guy, judging from his Banx thread, but I start to think he's just a troll with too much time.

[EvilDave]

As Warf the Klingon would say, "He has no honor!"

Last year BitShares PTS and AGS were merged into BitShares where the promises continue to be kept.  

Warf ? Come on, Stan, you just lost a million geeks with that one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worf

[StanLarimer]

I was wrong about my spelling of Worf.

It takes a big man to admit such an extremely unlikely event.

(I was worried that my Warf engines were about to blow at Warf Factor 9 and it just slipped out.)

[MarkLyford]

I thought runpaint was a smart guy, judging from his Banx thread, but I start to think he's just a troll with too much time.

^^ I second that. I offered him a chance to speak on skype or face to face and after a lot of games was refused and just shown pictures of a gun and a CPU miner. So I allow everyone in the Banx thread to make up their own minds about his intentions.

[runpaint]

I thought runpaint was a smart guy, judging from his Banx thread, but I start to think he's just a troll with too much time.

^^ I second that.

But you're a proven liar.

I offered you a chance to answer honest questions about your "business", and you refused like a true scammer.