IOTA

[iotatoken]

For me it would a little bit a conflict of interest if the founders will invest a lot. Example, imagine the founders are just CfB and iotatoken. So the Bitcoin-Pott at the very end will get halved. 50% for CfB 50% for iototoken. Imagine now the average joe will invest overall 500 Bitcoin during the sale. And CfB and iototoken just decide to invest 2000 Bitcoin each. So Overall Investment 4’500 Bitcoin. CfB and iotatoken will controll 88% of all iota and the Bitcoin they invested the would get anyway back. Possible. So I think it would help if both are quite open about their own investments, because it’s somehow left pocket – right pocket, they don’t have really costs, if they throw something in the Bitcoinbasket – it’s anyway theirs.

As for how much I will personally buy: not sure yet, still waiting for the last day of pioneer to make the choice. I treat this choice as completley seperate from the project it self.

Doesn't matter how much of their own token founders buy at an IPO, it is cheating anyway. The more the founders cheat, the greater the impact will be. NXT IPO btw probably was free of that, otherwise their IPO would collect more funds.
It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

It's not cheating at all, get real.

[1714309552]

1714309552

[1714309552]

1714309552

[1714309552]

1714309552

[bitcatch]

For me it would a little bit a conflict of interest if the founders will invest a lot. Example, imagine the founders are just CfB and iotatoken. So the Bitcoin-Pott at the very end will get halved. 50% for CfB 50% for iototoken. Imagine now the average joe will invest overall 500 Bitcoin during the sale. And CfB and iototoken just decide to invest 2000 Bitcoin each. So Overall Investment 4’500 Bitcoin. CfB and iotatoken will controll 88% of all iota and the Bitcoin they invested the would get anyway back. Possible. So I think it would help if both are quite open about their own investments, because it’s somehow left pocket – right pocket, they don’t have really costs, if they throw something in the Bitcoinbasket – it’s anyway theirs.

As for how much I will personally buy: not sure yet, still waiting for the last day of pioneer to make the choice. I treat this choice as completley seperate from the project it self.

Doesn't matter how much of their own token founders buy at an IPO, it is cheating anyway. The more the founders cheat, the greater the impact will be. NXT IPO btw probably was free of that, otherwise their IPO would collect more funds.
It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

It's not cheating at all, get real.

Let's quote this for posterity.
IOTA founders are going to buy their own token at their own IPO, paying unknown amount of BTC to themselfs. They explicitly state it. They don't perceive it as cheating.

[iotatoken]

For me it would a little bit a conflict of interest if the founders will invest a lot. Example, imagine the founders are just CfB and iotatoken. So the Bitcoin-Pott at the very end will get halved. 50% for CfB 50% for iototoken. Imagine now the average joe will invest overall 500 Bitcoin during the sale. And CfB and iototoken just decide to invest 2000 Bitcoin each. So Overall Investment 4’500 Bitcoin. CfB and iotatoken will controll 88% of all iota and the Bitcoin they invested the would get anyway back. Possible. So I think it would help if both are quite open about their own investments, because it’s somehow left pocket – right pocket, they don’t have really costs, if they throw something in the Bitcoinbasket – it’s anyway theirs.

As for how much I will personally buy: not sure yet, still waiting for the last day of pioneer to make the choice. I treat this choice as completley seperate from the project it self.

Doesn't matter how much of their own token founders buy at an IPO, it is cheating anyway. The more the founders cheat, the greater the impact will be. NXT IPO btw probably was free of that, otherwise their IPO would collect more funds.
It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

It's not cheating at all, get real.

Let's quote this for posterity.
IOTA founders are going to buy their own token at their own IPO, paying unknown amount of BTC to themselfs. They explicitly state it. They don't perceive it as cheating.

Troll on somewhere else.

[Tobo]

Doesn't matter how much of their own token founders buy at an IPO, it is cheating anyway. The more the founders cheat, the greater the impact will be. NXT IPO btw probably was free of that, otherwise their IPO would collect more funds.
It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

In this crypto world, so far, there are two ways for devs to own the coins from the crowd sale. One is the devs set aside a big chunk of the coins for themselves for the future development and awards. Another is to participate the crowd sale by themselves.

Ethereum did both. They set aside a chunk of ethers for themselves and allow devs to buy in the crowd sale. But they set a kind of limit for their devs. However on one can monitor it. The Augur team did the same in their crowd sale.

Iota team decideed to not set aside a chunk of coins for themselves and their devs have to buy if they want to own some coins. What else can you ask?

[lordoliver]

Guys, guys... try to understand.
If the programmer does not hold a serious amount of tokens, why the hell should he care about the coin after release? It will just die sooner or later then..

The previous scheme was, that the programmer keeps a few as a "premine" (what was completely fine for me). But then you guys complain about not fair and so on.
Thats why iota even chose to give ALL for sell and buy some themselves. They want to show, that they believe in their coin.

Of course we have a little problem now because of the following calculation:
founderBTCout = x BTC + founderBTCin
founderBTCsum = founderBTCout - founderBTCin = (x BTC + founderBTCin) - founderBTCin = x BTC (as xeelee said left pocket - right pocket)

and
foundertokens = founderBTCin * allTokens / (x BTC + founderBTCin)
wich becomes more, if more founderBTCin are spent, what doesn't matter, because they will get it back. So - theoretically - if they borrow and put 1 million BTC there, noone gets a shit any more and after they can give them back without a problem.

Maybe it looks like, they want to "cheat", but I am pretty sure iota did not think about that conflict in the first place.
Internal the BTC will probably not flow flow one pocket to the other but from one guy to another, so it looks only that simple outside...

@iota: imho the only way to get out of that dilemma is tell us exactly, what you are planning to spend.
We have to face, that it's an indirect "premine".

[bitcatch]

Doesn't matter how much of their own token founders buy at an IPO, it is cheating anyway. The more the founders cheat, the greater the impact will be. NXT IPO btw probably was free of that, otherwise their IPO would collect more funds.
It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

In this crypto world, so far, there are two ways for devs to own the coins from the crowd sale. One is the devs set aside a big chunk of the coins for themselves for the future development and awards. Another is to participate the crowd sale by themselves.

Ethereum did both. They set aside a chunk of ethers for themselves and allow devs to buy in the crowd sale. But they set a kind of limit for their devs. However on one can monitor it. The Augur team did the same in their crowd sale.

Iota team decideed to not set aside a chunk of coins for themselves and their devs have to buy if they want to own some coins. What else can you ask?

Crypto IPOs are opaque. We can't be sure how much of their tokens respective founders bought from theirselfs.

Let's call a 'founder' a person who has a share in funds collected in an IPO, and a 'developer' - a waged person who has no share in those funds, who will be payed for working on the project by e.g. founders.
It's perfectly OK if a developer participates in an IPO of a project which he will be working on.

So what do you claim as regards Ethereum? That their developers participated in their IPO, or founders? In any case a link would be appreciated.

And again:

It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

[iotatoken]

This is the official stance:

1. IOTA devs have to buy their own iotas in order to get any.

2. They are not required internally or externally to disclose the amount, this will be 100% up to each person. This is simply because it has no bearing whatsoever on how the funds will be spent post-sale and privacy. I will not force any of my devs to disclose how much they purchased either to me or to the world, it's their choice as it's a personal decision.

3. Anyone that thinks this is some sort of premine scheme, there is a very simple solution to your concerns: don't buy the software.

We honestly do not care what some random coin speculators think, IOTA is a serious project that aims to become the official payment protocol for machine-2-machine in Internet-of-Things, we do not have time to worry about coin speculators, which is why we have a long list of risks disclosed in the risk document. If you don't feel comfortable buying the cryptographical software tokens that are IOTA, then don't.

This project needs serious people who want to see the technology succeed above all else.


As for myself I will decide how much to buy on the last day and will disclose it to an approximate amount, but not the exact amount to avoid having people stalk my address. The IOTA project will not be focused around speculators and I will not play any part in making that the focal point of the community that will arise around IOTA.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Let's quote this for posterity.
IOTA founders are going to buy their own token at their own IPO, paying unknown amount of BTC to themselfs. They explicitly state it. They don't perceive it as cheating.

I marked with red an incorrect part, should be replaced with "to company".

[bitcatch]

should be replaced with "to company".

Which consists of themselfs.

[iotatoken]

should be replaced with "to company".

Which consists of themselfs.

Troll on somewhere else.

[Come-from-Beyond]

should be replaced with "to company".

Which consists of themselfs.

I won't argue on this, this goes down to questions like "Does Bill Gates get money back for purchased Windows and Office products?" and I don't have enough info on such cases.

[lordoliver]

founderBTCout = x BTC + founderBTCin
founderBTCsum = founderBTCout - founderBTCin = (x BTC + founderBTCin) - founderBTCin = x BTC (as xeelee said left pocket - right pocket)

and
foundertokens = founderBTCin * allTokens / (x BTC + founderBTCin)
wich becomes more, if more founderBTCin are spent, what doesn't matter, because they will get it back. So - theoretically - if they borrow and put 1 million BTC there, noone gets a shit any more and after they can give them back without a problem.

Iota, I am not against your purpose, but any argument against this? You have to admit, that this is a valid point of criticism.
You demand trust in this case. We all know that this is not that easy and not the crypto way.

[achimsmile]

IOTA founders are going to buy their own token at their own IPO, paying unknown amount of BTC to themselfs. They explicitly state it. They don't perceive it as cheating.

I cannot understand why this should be an issue, or even cheating.
In your world, the public should have the right to invest an unknown amount, but developers should not be allowed to purchase any shares.
Even if the developers publicly state that they will invest some with their own money, it's still cheating.

Imagine you invent something that could change the world. Would you sell it all to the public without investing yourself?

[Tobo]

should be replaced with "to company".

Which consists of themselfs.

company=all employees + all shareholders + all its assets + all its debts as every company does.

[bitcatch]

IOTA founders are going to buy their own token at their own IPO, paying unknown amount of BTC to themselfs. They explicitly state it. They don't perceive it as cheating.

In your world, the public should have the right to invest an unknown amount, but developers should not be allowed to purchase any shares.

It's perfectly OK if a developer participates in an IPO of a project which he will be working on.

And again:

It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

[bitcatch]

IOTA founders are going to buy their own token at their own IPO, paying unknown amount of BTC to themselfs. They explicitly state it. They don't perceive it as cheating.

I cannot understand why this should be an issue, or even cheating.

Too bad.

founderBTCout = x BTC + founderBTCin
founderBTCsum = founderBTCout - founderBTCin = (x BTC + founderBTCin) - founderBTCin = x BTC (as xeelee said left pocket - right pocket)

and
foundertokens = founderBTCin * allTokens / (x BTC + founderBTCin)
wich becomes more, if more founderBTCin are spent, what doesn't matter, because they will get it back. So - theoretically - if they borrow and put 1 million BTC there, noone gets a shit any more and after they can give them back without a problem.

Iota, I am not against your purpose, but any argument against this? You have to admit, that this is a valid point of criticism.
You demand trust in this case. We all know that this is not that easy and not the crypto way.

[achimsmile]

It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

How to enforce this? Every developer could promise to do so and use a middle man to buy during IPO without you knowing.

[iotatoken]

founderBTCout = x BTC + founderBTCin
founderBTCsum = founderBTCout - founderBTCin = (x BTC + founderBTCin) - founderBTCin = x BTC (as xeelee said left pocket - right pocket)

and
foundertokens = founderBTCin * allTokens / (x BTC + founderBTCin)
wich becomes more, if more founderBTCin are spent, what doesn't matter, because they will get it back. So - theoretically - if they borrow and put 1 million BTC there, noone gets a shit any more and after they can give them back without a problem.

Iota, I am not against your purpose, but any argument against this? You have to admit, that this is a valid point of criticism.
You demand trust in this case. We all know that this is not that easy and not the crypto way.

I think we already addressed this very complaint on the first few pages of this thread over a month ago. Yes there are ways to cheat, but it would defeat the purpose of the software.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Iota, I am not against your purpose, but any argument against this? You have to admit, that this is a valid point of criticism.
You demand trust in this case. We all know that this is not that easy and not the crypto way.

Correct, it's possible to borrow 1 million BTC. Why anyone would give that much money without collateral for even higher amount is another question, act assuming that I do have 1'000'000 BTC.

[bitcatch]

It's perfectly OK however if the founders buy their token after the IPO.

How to enforce this? Every developer could promise to do so and use a middle man to buy during IPO without you knowing.

Let's distinguish developers and founders:

Let's call a 'founder' a person who has a share in funds collected in an IPO, and a 'developer' - a waged person who has no share in those funds, who will be payed for working on the project by e.g. founders.

You are right.

Crypto IPOs are opaque. We can't be sure how much of their tokens respective founders bought from theirselfs.

But some of them at least don't openly state that they will buy their own coins at the last moment, when there is enough info for them to calculate how much BTC they need to transfer from their left pocket to their right pocket, to get desirable share of their tokens.