MasterCoin: New Protocol Layer Starting From “The Exodus Address”

[vokain]

how many mastercoins are there total?

"A total of 619,478 Mastercoins exist - a fixed cap (no new Mastercoins will ever be created)."

[1715151527]

1715151527

[1715151527]

1715151527

[1715151527]

1715151527

[bitexch]

It is rationally in JR's self interest as a 30% stakeholder to raise the value of his 30% of the system, not make decisions that might tank it.

You're disregarding an obvious point: JR might think that something will raise the value of MSC that others don't agree with. For example, JR has consistently encouraged us to buy 5000 BTC worth of MSC with our funds, which there has been much disagreement over. If, in a proof-of-stake voting system, JR decided, in contradiction to what he had previously said, to exercise his right to vote, he could certainly tip the vote in his favor. This isn't fear-mongering, it's a real concern.

I am not saying that JR should or shouldn't exercise his voting rights. My point is that JR should be *bound to his word*; it is important that he not just be able to change his mind on a case-by-case basis.

[Anon136]

how many mastercoins are there total?

"A total of 619,478 Mastercoins exist - a fixed cap (no new Mastercoins will ever be created)."

thanks vokain.

one more question, for buying mastercoin all you need is a bitcoin address to have them sent to right?

[vokain]

It is rationally in JR's self interest as a 30% stakeholder to raise the value of his 30% of the system, not make decisions that might tank it.

You're disregarding an obvious point: JR might think that something will raise the value of MSC that others don't agree with. For example, JR has consistently encouraged us to buy 5000 BTC worth of MSC with our funds, which there has been much disagreement over. If, in a proof-of-stake voting system, JR decided, in contradiction to what he had previously said, to exercise his right to vote, he could certainly tip the vote in his favor. This isn't fear-mongering, it's a real concern.

I am not saying that JR should or shouldn't exercise his voting rights. My point is that JR should be *bound to his word*; it is important that he not just be able to change his mind on a case-by-case basis.

then we will reconsider if the decision was suboptimal or not, fix anything if necessary, then vote again. The only thing JR would be able to do is turn down a proposal.

[vokain]

how many mastercoins are there total?

"A total of 619,478 Mastercoins exist - a fixed cap (no new Mastercoins will ever be created)."

thanks vokain.

one more question, for buying mastercoin all you need is a bitcoin address to have them sent to right?

only a bitcoin address from a wallet whose private key only you control. still, coin sending is barely supported at the moment.
instructions included here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287145.0

still very experimental and I am sorry to say that this is all done on your own risk. I understand this sounds scary but at this point in time you must tread cautiously.

[bitexch]

Dacoinminister does deserve those mastercoins as he created the white paper and started this project. He bought them fair and square like everyone else, and the reason he had an 'unfair advantage' is because he created the project. So thats where the 'unfair advantage due to risk' is cancelled out. However we do need someone like Robby involved, as controversial as he might be, he can add alot to the future success of mastercoin. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, that may be his opinion, however i get the impression Robby does want mastercoin succeed as much as we all do. I personally think JR should contribute some of his holdings towards mastercoin. Thats not to say he doesn't deserve him, as he entirely does, it is to say that he should contribute a portion of his mastercoin towards the mastercoin project so his remaining holdings is worth more, which makes sense. This would only be due to the fact he has such a large stake in mastercoin that he should drive it with his own holdings more than anyone else. But of course JR willet is free to do what he likes. I hope Robby does come on board, i think he has the right attitude.

The bonus MSCs were meant to *attract and incentivize* early investors, and to that extent it seems a little bizarre that JR would give himself this same bonus, since presumably as the creator of Mastercoin he didn't need incentives...

Anyway, you actually have not addressed the question of "unfair advantage due to risk" yet; JR was sending himself Bitcoins, whereas everyone else was sending Bitcoins to somebody who weren't themselves. Obviously everyone else faced greater risk than JR...

I don't think it's a question of whether someone "deserves" or doesn't deserve his 50k MSC bonus. I think that JR objectively owns too many Mastercoins (which I haven't heard anyone disagree with yet - except for JR), and so now it's a question of damage control. Robby's proposal provides a way for JR to cede some of his Mastercoins that benefits the community at large.

Also, I would like to reiterate Robby's "beanie baby" point: JR's unwillingness to cede *some* of his Mastercoins in order to help the project may make *all* of his (and everyone else's!) Mastercoins worthless. It is up to the community to decide whether it thinks this is reasonable.

Regardless of what people think of killerstorm personally, I think that a comparison between his commitment to Colored coins and JR's commitment to Mastercoin is apt. killerstorm is making no money from Colored coins, and is using his own funds to support the project, as well as contributing to the project itself. JR on the other hand has thus far about $20 million from MSC, does not contribute to the project, and has stated that he will sell 1% of his Bitcoins when his personal MSC holdings are valued at about $450 million (assuming it's 1,000USD/BTC, when it's .7 BTC/MSC, which in my opinion is conservative).

[vokain]

Dacoinminister does deserve those mastercoins as he created the white paper and started this project. He bought them fair and square like everyone else, and the reason he had an 'unfair advantage' is because he created the project. So thats where the 'unfair advantage due to risk' is cancelled out. However we do need someone like Robby involved, as controversial as he might be, he can add alot to the future success of mastercoin. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, that may be his opinion, however i get the impression Robby does want mastercoin succeed as much as we all do. I personally think JR should contribute some of his holdings towards mastercoin. Thats not to say he doesn't deserve him, as he entirely does, it is to say that he should contribute a portion of his mastercoin towards the mastercoin project so his remaining holdings is worth more, which makes sense. This would only be due to the fact he has such a large stake in mastercoin that he should drive it with his own holdings more than anyone else. But of course JR willet is free to do what he likes. I hope Robby does come on board, i think he has the right attitude.

The bonus MSCs were meant to *attract and incentivize* early investors, and to that extent it seems a little bizarre that JR would give himself this same bonus, since presumably as the creator of Mastercoin he didn't need incentives...

Anyway, you actually have not addressed the question of "unfair advantage due to risk" yet; JR was sending himself Bitcoins, whereas everyone else was sending Bitcoins to somebody who weren't themselves. Obviously everyone else faced greater risk than JR...

I don't think it's a question of whether someone "deserves" or doesn't deserve his 50k MSC bonus. I think that JR objectively owns too many Mastercoins (which I haven't heard anyone disagree with yet - except for JR), and so now it's a question of damage control. Robby's proposal provides a way for JR to cede some of his Mastercoins that benefits the community at large.

Also, I would like to reiterate Robby's "beanie baby" point: JR's unwillingness to cede *some* of his Mastercoins in order to help the project may make *all* of his (and everyone else's!) Mastercoins worthless. It is up to the community to decide whether it thinks this is reasonable.

Regardless of what people think of killerstorm personally, I think that a comparison between his commitment to Colored coins and JR's commitment to Mastercoin is apt. killerstorm is making no money from Colored coins, and is using his own funds to support the project, as well as contributing to the project itself. JR on the other hand has thus far about $20 million from MSC, does not contribute to the project, and has stated that he will sell 1% of his Bitcoins when his personal MSC holdings are valued at about $450 million (assuming it's 1,000USD/BTC, when it's .7 BTC/MSC, which in my opinion is conservative).

At the same time, we in Exodus were all free to agree to these terms. Personally I don't mind that JR gets rewarded as such for obsessing two years on his brainchild.

[bitexch]

It is rationally in JR's self interest as a 30% stakeholder to raise the value of his 30% of the system, not make decisions that might tank it.

You're disregarding an obvious point: JR might think that something will raise the value of MSC that others don't agree with. For example, JR has consistently encouraged us to buy 5000 BTC worth of MSC with our funds, which there has been much disagreement over. If, in a proof-of-stake voting system, JR decided, in contradiction to what he had previously said, to exercise his right to vote, he could certainly tip the vote in his favor. This isn't fear-mongering, it's a real concern.

I am not saying that JR should or shouldn't exercise his voting rights. My point is that JR should be *bound to his word*; it is important that he not just be able to change his mind on a case-by-case basis.

then we will reconsider if the decision was suboptimal or not, fix anything if necessary, then vote again. The only thing JR would be able to do is turn down a proposal.

You're not addressing the point. Within Mastercoin, JR should be held to his word about whether he will vote. There should be no ambiguity here.

Your responses are obviously dismissive.

[vokain]

It is rationally in JR's self interest as a 30% stakeholder to raise the value of his 30% of the system, not make decisions that might tank it.

You're disregarding an obvious point: JR might think that something will raise the value of MSC that others don't agree with. For example, JR has consistently encouraged us to buy 5000 BTC worth of MSC with our funds, which there has been much disagreement over. If, in a proof-of-stake voting system, JR decided, in contradiction to what he had previously said, to exercise his right to vote, he could certainly tip the vote in his favor. This isn't fear-mongering, it's a real concern.

I am not saying that JR should or shouldn't exercise his voting rights. My point is that JR should be *bound to his word*; it is important that he not just be able to change his mind on a case-by-case basis.

then we will reconsider if the decision was suboptimal or not, fix anything if necessary, then vote again. The only thing JR would be able to do is turn down a proposal.

You're not addressing the point. Within Mastercoin, JR should be held to his word about whether he will vote. There should be no ambiguity here.

Your responses are obviously dismissive.

My apologies. It is of my personal belief that people are allowed to change their minds pending better thoughts. There is a political cartoon somewhere comparing a businessman who changes his mind and a politician who changes his mind on a generic issue. I can't find it, but in it, the businessman who changes his mind is lauded as adaptive and rational whereas the politician who changes his mind is negatively seen as a flip flopper even if the decision is for the better.

But like I said, this is not something I can speak on behalf of JR for, but it is of my conviction that JR would better serve Mastercoin participating with the process than not (yes I know, I know, JR has been MIA this week).

[W2014]

JR on the other hand has thus far about $20 million from MSC, does not contribute to the project, and has stated that he will sell 1% of his Bitcoins when his personal MSC holdings are valued at about $450 million (assuming it's 1,000USD/BTC, when it's .7 BTC/MSC, which in my opinion is conservative).

Correction to the bolded part: "does not post on this forum on weekends for you to read his thoughts." How can you say he does not contribute? How do you know what he is doing (or planning)?

Also, didn't you read above that J.R. is doing all that he can to arrange things so that he can work on this full-time? I guess not. I hope that is true.

Everyone knew the rules going in on how the coins were to be distributed. I actually do think it would be a good move for J.R. to lessen his holdings in some way (that does not tank the market), but that is a separate issue. The investors knew the deal because it was clearly set out from the beginning.

[bitexch]

JR on the other hand has thus far about $20 million from MSC, does not contribute to the project, and has stated that he will sell 1% of his Bitcoins when his personal MSC holdings are valued at about $450 million (assuming it's 1,000USD/BTC, when it's .7 BTC/MSC, which in my opinion is conservative).

Correction to the bolded part: "does not post on this forum on weekends for you to read his thoughts."

The correction should rather be : "is completely off the internet on weekends, evenings and vacations, and has a full-time job and a family." That's rather different from your correction.

How can you say he does not contribute? How do you know what he is doing (or planning)?

I am saying that he's not contributing based on what I know, of course. This project prides itself on its transparency, so I think and hope that all relevant actions and plans would be discussed with the community.

Also, JR has repeatedly shared gratuitous information with us (e.g. how many Bitcoins he owned, that his kids go to private school, etc.). Therefore one would think that if he were doing something actually pertinent to the project, he would let us know.

Also, didn't you read above that J.R. is doing all that he can to arrange things so that he can work on this full-time? I guess not. I hope that is true.

I think that characterizing JR's efforts to start working on Mastercoin full-time as "doing all he can" is misleading. If he were doing all he can, he would quit his job, let the community know he has given his employer notice, and start working on Mastercoin. Since JR has not done this (as far as we know), I can only interpret "doing all he can" to mean "JR is doing all he can to work on Mastercoin full-time, while also making the transition as smooth as possible". That is, you see, a very different statement.

I am not criticizing JR for wanting to make his transition to working full-time on Mastercoin as smooth as possible, but I am certain we can find a developer who has fewer commitments than JR does, and hence can begin to work full-time on Mastercoin sooner (insofar as the developer doesn't have a full-time job currently). Aside from sentimental remarks like "he's the heart and soul of the project" and "we love him", I have not heard anyone explain why it is so necessary JR work full-time on Mastercoin. Do people think it is so unlikely that we can find a programmer of comparable skill to work on the project? If so, what evidence do you have the JR is such a superb developer?

Everyone knew the rules going in on how the coins were to be distributed. The investors knew the deal because it was clearly set out from the beginning.

That's not the point. The current investors are hopefully not the only people who will ever be involved in Mastercoin; we will need to attract more people, and one of the things that people who aren't invested in Mastercoin don't like is the centralization that comes with one person owning so many Mastercoins. And it's not a case of "if they don't like it, that's too bad for them", because we absolutely need more investors, and since there are (and will continue to be) similar projects to Mastercoin; investors can take their money to those projects.

[keystroke]

When sending MSC from a wallet that has a bunch of addresses in it, one which bought MSC through the genesis block, can I use coin control rather than sending everything in my wallet to my address which has the MSC?

[rbdrbd]

Guys, just an FYI: I have a meeting with several board members today to present a proposed corporate structure for the Mastercoin foundation.

Other things I am interested in:

• Discussing defining a specific date for elections of the non-provisional board
• Discussing the creation of formal bylaws for the foundation (if none already exist), which lay out things like board term length, board voting rights, corporate structure, etc.
• Discussing the core development team: How it will look, who will be hired, etc.

Next step after this is a call with the current and proposed developers to see if we can reach consensus on a technical direction and approach. That will dictate the exact direction we take with the reference client (i.e. if it makes sense for me to finish up the first version of masterdaemon and get it over to start with that, then I can do that).

-Robby

[dacoinminster]

Hey guys,

I just got back online after spending several days offline focusing on my family. I see my name mentioned over and over again on the preceding pages. Let me see if I can help . . .

I see a lot of speculation about if/when/whether I will quit my job to focus full-time on Mastercoin. I am currently working on this, but I think you guys are giving me way too much credit. Do you realize that something like 99% of the work on this project has been done by other people? Once I kicked things off, other people got very enthusiastic and essentially took it over. This is an open-source decentralized project. If I got hit by a bus tomorrow, everything would keep going quite nicely without me. Also, even when I DO finally come aboard full-time, I think it's safe to assume I won't be taking a salary from the Mastercoin foundation, because I intend to continue my infuriating habit of being offline evenings, weekends, and vacations (just like I did for the past few days). Yes, I will have a lot more time for Mastercoin, and the project will benefit from that time, but it isn't going to be a game-changer.

At some point I remember saying that if we voted on what features to work on next, I planned to abstain. This was because it seemed wrong for me to hold the keys to ALL the project money AND use my large stake in MSC to bully what we worked on. However, I've been divvying up our project funds for security reasons, and once we move to a decentralized bounty system, this will be far less of a concern, and I will be perfectly happy to vote on how those project funds are used, along with the rest of you. Certainly I won't be able to dictate the direction of the project without a lot of you agreeing with me.

Finally, a few words about the criticisms that have been leveled against our project technically. Yes, we need to change how we roll out features a bit, mostly by limiting each new feature to Test Mastercoins until they are well tested, then announcing a block number after which the new feature will be valid for use with real Mastercoins. This is an unbelievably simple thing to do, and since we haven't rolled out the distributed exchange yet for MSC, no harm has been done in this area yet. Something so stupidly simple is not worth the pages of flames I see here and elsewhere about this topic.

I'd guess that I see about fifty inquiries every single day about Mastercoin here and elsewhere that deserve a response. Currently, those questions are answered by whoever happens to have some time, whenever they get around to it. We're working very hard to improve this situation, but we will always be decentralized, and therefore we will always be somewhat chaotic.

One of my near-term goals for the spec is to add proof-of-stake voting on distributed bounty allocation, and my biggest challenge there is to figure out how to avoid the chaos of decision-by-committee. I think the right answer will probably be to use proof-of-stake voting to elect someone to be in charge of a chunk of money for a chunk of time, rather than having every stakeholder second-guessing every expense.

My biggest priority right now is to get our devs focused on this project full-time. We're currently discussing that with them, but they each have their own unique situation.

Thanks for your patience while we work through our growing pains.

[marcelus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBEXSiFzOfU

[prophetx]

we need help testing the faucet 

is this a test phase for the faucet , with bounties given out for any bugs found ?

It's a test phase giving out very smallish amounts of Test MSC to see, if everything goes smooth.

Is there something you found?

The real MSC are ready to be distributed, so let's fix it before going live.

Bug bounties were not intended, but if it's worth, then a report shall be worth something, too.

Please contact me via PM or at dexx@bitwatch.co, if it's sensible.

[prophetx]

I might need to extend the documentation contest to give everyone enough time to get the content onto the wiki.


If you want to help out https://trello.com/b/5lolIlqc/documentation-contest-1

We do need help with voting to ensure quality content.

Since we need help with votes, if you are not an org member, and you like an answer. you can vote simply by commenting "+1".

Feel free to suggest that an answer needs to be refine.  We are paying out a good chunk of money for this, so lets get the best value. 

[bitexch]

This post  was meant as Ron's formal and final goodbye to bitcointalk. I thought I'd tell the community this, because I, for one, found this "goodbye" at best ambiguous, and I am quite surprised that our Executive Director would be so off-handed when saying he would not be engaging with the community, where it was most of active.

Besides deciding "never to check this thread again" without discussing with the community whether *it* thought this was the right thing for him to do, I find it quite troubling that, as far as *he* is concerned, "J.R can just lock this thread soon, because Aric is moving us to another forum". Obviously, Aric can only move "us" to another forum, if we move ourselves there! While cryptocurrencies do indeed often have their own forums, bitcointalk is still an important forum for all kinds of discussions, and it seems to me unnecessarily autocratic to close down the main thread where we discuss Mastercoin. Ron has decided not to check this thread ever again, why shouldn't we have the same right to keep checking this thread if we want to?

[Bebopzzz]

we need help testing the faucet 

is this a test phase for the faucet , with bounties given out for any bugs found ?

It's a test phase giving out very smallish amounts of Test MSC to see, if everything goes smooth.

Is there something you found?

The real MSC are ready to be distributed, so let's fix it before going live.

Bug bounties were not intended, but if it's worth, then a report shall be worth something, too.

Please contact me via PM or at dexx@bitwatch.co, if it's sensible.

the faucet works fine for me...

The only problem I found is that I managed to get two transactions in the space of a couple of minutes using the sam account. Is this a bug or is it set up that way?

[bitexch]

At some point I remember saying that if we voted on what features to work on next, I planned to abstain. This was because it seemed wrong for me to hold the keys to ALL the project money AND use my large stake in MSC to bully what we worked on. However, I've been divvying up our project funds for security reasons, and once we move to a decentralized bounty system, this will be far less of a concern, and I will be perfectly happy to vote on how those project funds are used, along with the rest of you. Certainly I won't be able to dictate the direction of the project without a lot of you agreeing with me.

I think you are missing the point. The only reason you would ever exercise all 28% of your voting rights is if you wanted to do something the majority of the community was against. Twice as many people could be in favor of a policy decision as against it, and you could single-handedly turn the vote against the policy.

I don't think you're quite considering the seriousness of the situation.

EDIT: If your voting rights aren't limited (either to a definite, *much smaller* percentage or to none at all), then there won't be anything to say to critics who complain about Mastercoin's centralization - they will be right!

My biggest priority right now is to get our devs focused on this project full-time. We're currently discussing that with them, but they each have their own unique situation.

Have you considered looking outside of the project for full-time devs? There are people who are currently not involved in Mastercoin who would be well suited to it. I am surprised that it needs repeating, but a few of our current main devs have repeatedly said that they do not want to work on Mastercoin full-time, and I don't see why we should keep trying to convince them.We have a great idea and lots of funding, I don't see any reason for begging people to develop the project.