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

[Tachikoma]

According to my implementation the address tried to create selling offers, but since they have no coins they were invalidated: http://mastercoin-explorer.com/addresses/17nCCJ5ge5et5oKfHEDeoWJhebR2GEjPDG

[jeroenn13]

Please add a sell order for 100 MSC @ .15 .14, thank you.

Wrong forum.

[bitexch]

There has recently been some question regarding when and under what conditions JR will start working on MSC full-time. As everyone may or may not remember, JR said that when the value of MSC is .7BTC/MSC, he will sell 1% of his MSC holdings, which, at the current vauation of BTC is over $1 million (in contrast to his earlier remark that it would take ~$600 ,000 for him to work on a BTC-related project full-time). In apparent contrast to this statement, some fellow board members (e.g. vokain and ripper) have assured us that JR is doing "all he can" to start working on MSC full-time. Now, on the contrary, JR himself has written that he is indeed waiting for MSC to go to .7BTC/MSC. JR goes on to say that there is "no uncertainty" here - a statement, with which I have to disagree, since I would hardly call waiting to secure +$1,000,000 "doing all one can"! vokain and ripper, how do you account for your own vagueness and essentially false assurances?

It also turns out that we have hired full-time devs (refer to link above), in spite of the fact that there was neither a vote nor a discussion among the community regarding these developers! This is so obviously a breach of Mastercoin's purported transparency that it's unclear how our board will justify itself. Indeed, it's unclear who had the authority to hire these developers since at least 6 of 7 board members must agree before $5-20 thousand are spent  - and one would think that at least *one* of the board members would have thought to get the community's input before voting to spend such a large sum.

Going forward such autocratic and careless behavior by the board is unacceptable, and I am surprised that the community has not taken greater issue with this.

[klee]

There has recently been some question regarding when and under what conditions JR will start working on MSC full-time. As everyone may or may not remember, JR said that when the value of MSC is .7BTC/MSC, he will sell 1% of his MSC holdings, which, at the current vauation of BTC is over $1 million (in contrast to his earlier remark that it would take ~$600 ,000 for him to work on a BTC-related project full-time). In apparent contrast to this statement, some fellow board members (e.g. vokain and ripper) have assured us that JR is doing "all he can" to start working on MSC full-time. Now, on the contrary, JR himself has written that he is indeed waiting for MSC to go to .7BTC/MSC. JR goes on to say that there is "no uncertainty" here - a statement, with which I have to disagree, since I would hardly call waiting to secure +$1,000,000 "doing all one can"! vokain and ripper, how do you account for your own vagueness and essentially false assurances?

It also turns out that we have hired full-time devs (refer to link above), in spite of the fact that there was neither a vote nor a discussion among the community regarding these developers! This is so obviously a breach of Mastercoin's purported transparency that it's unclear how our board will justify itself. Indeed, it's unclear who had the authority to hire these developers since at least 6 of 7 board members must agree before $5-20 thousand are spent  - and one would think that at least *one* of the board members would have thought to get the community's input before voting to spend such a large sum.

Going forward such autocratic and careless behavior by the board is unacceptable, and I am surprised that the community has not taken greater issue with this.

I really think by now you have a hidden agenda to ruin Mastercoin like a worm eating flesh from the inside - I will not pay attention to your efforts anymore.

Trojan Horse in Ignore mode.

[bitexch]

There has recently been some question regarding when and under what conditions JR will start working on MSC full-time. As everyone may or may not remember, JR said that when the value of MSC is .7BTC/MSC, he will sell 1% of his MSC holdings, which, at the current vauation of BTC is over $1 million (in contrast to his earlier remark that it would take ~$600 ,000 for him to work on a BTC-related project full-time). In apparent contrast to this statement, some fellow board members (e.g. vokain and ripper) have assured us that JR is doing "all he can" to start working on MSC full-time. Now, on the contrary, JR himself has written that he is indeed waiting for MSC to go to .7BTC/MSC. JR goes on to say that there is "no uncertainty" here - a statement, with which I have to disagree, since I would hardly call waiting to secure +$1,000,000 "doing all one can"! vokain and ripper, how do you account for your own vagueness and essentially false assurances?

It also turns out that we have hired full-time devs (refer to link above), in spite of the fact that there was neither a vote nor a discussion among the community regarding these developers! This is so obviously a breach of Mastercoin's purported transparency that it's unclear how our board will justify itself. Indeed, it's unclear who had the authority to hire these developers since at least 6 of 7 board members must agree before $5-20 thousand are spent  - and one would think that at least *one* of the board members would have thought to get the community's input before voting to spend such a large sum.

Going forward such autocratic and careless behavior by the board is unacceptable, and I am surprised that the community has not taken greater issue with this.

I really think by now you have a hidden agenda to ruin Mastercoin like a worm eating flesh from the inside - I will not pay attention to your efforts anymore.

Trojan Horse in Ignore mode.

NB: My "hidden agenda" consists of nothing more than pointing out what I think are problems with Mastercoin's management. I, too, am a Mastercoin investor.

[klee]

 

[dacoinminster]

http://blog.mastercoin.org/2013/12/06/first-full-time-scientistdeveloper-hired-peter-todd/

I am delighted to announce the hiring of our first full-time scientist/developer. Peter Todd is a heavy-hitter with a deep knowledge of the bitcoin network and a long track-record of doing great theoretical work on crypto-currencies. He initially had some very harsh words for the Mastercoin project, but like many of you, he forms his opinions based on data and logic, and is willing to change them when the data and logic change. I’m proud to say that after further review and seeing our progress to date he is now excited to be involved with this project.

Peter’s role will be largely research-oriented. We will look to him to find attack vectors and suggest changes to the spec as needed to avoid them. He will also be contributing code towards these same goals.

Peter will go wherever these attack vectors lead him, including recommending ways to jump to a different block chain if that ever becomes necessary. Everything Peter does will be open-source and completely available for others to learn from and use.

Peter is currently wrapping up other responsibilities, and hopes to start full-time on Mastercoin February 1st.

Note: I know you’ll all be glad to hear that our #1 priority is hiring developers for new features. However, those hires are in various stages of negotiation, or for various reasons can’t be announced yet. The hires that we can currently announce shouldn’t be taken as evidence that we are not working very hard on hiring feature-focused developers as soon as humanly possible. I hope we’ll be making several more announcements on this front soon.

[dacoinminster]

Regarding hiring without consulting the community, there is a reason that companies hire a CEO to make all the decisions, rather than having all stakeholders weigh in on every hire. We are giving Ron room as Executive Director to do his job, and even if he makes mistakes on the way (and he undoubtedly will) I vastly prefer that to decision-by-committee.

[bitexch]

Regarding hiring without consulting the community, there is a reason that companies hire a CEO to make all the decisions, rather than having all stakeholders weigh in on every hire. We are giving Ron room as Executive Director to do his job, and even if he makes mistakes on the way (and he undoubtedly will) I vastly prefer that to decision-by-committee.

You are actively ignoring the spending rules that the board imposed on itself: "The Executive Director has been authorized to spend $10,000 USD in project funds on a rolling basis". Though I suppose you could construe "rolling basis" in order to justify excessive unauthorized expenditures.

It is not really a matter of what *you* prefer; you are one investor, and if the rules for spending are going to be broken the community ought to be informed of it.

Lastly, since Ron was not elected by the community as Executive Director, giving him such free-reign is absurd.

[dacoinminster]

Regarding hiring without consulting the community, there is a reason that companies hire a CEO to make all the decisions, rather than having all stakeholders weigh in on every hire. We are giving Ron room as Executive Director to do his job, and even if he makes mistakes on the way (and he undoubtedly will) I vastly prefer that to decision-by-committee.

You are actively ignoring the spending rules that the board imposed on itself: "The Executive Director has been authorized to spend $10,000 USD in project funds on a rolling basis". Though I suppose you could construe "rolling basis" in order to justify excessive unauthorized expenditures.

It is not really a matter of what *you* prefer; you are one investor, and if the rules for spending are going to be broken the community ought to be informed of it.

Lastly, since Ron was not elected by the community as Executive Director, giving him such free-reign is absurd.

Ron is following the rules we all agreed on, including getting board approval for these major expenditures. If you don't like how Ron is running things, you are free to vote for someone else to run things once we've implemented proof-of-stake voting. Right now the biggest holders of MSC are on the board, so board votes are a pretty good proxy for proof-of-stake voting in the meantime.

You'll be horrified to learn that some on the board have actually bought MORE Mastercoin rather than selling as you have been arguing for so strenuously. This is because, like me, they believe Mastercoin will be successful and are acting accordingly.

Obviously we're further consolidating our evil cabal of power in this ecosystem. No doubt the project is doomed because some major investors bought more at a MUCH higher price than they got initially. Oh well. It was fun while it lasted.

[bitexch]

Regarding hiring without consulting the community, there is a reason that companies hire a CEO to make all the decisions, rather than having all stakeholders weigh in on every hire. We are giving Ron room as Executive Director to do his job, and even if he makes mistakes on the way (and he undoubtedly will) I vastly prefer that to decision-by-committee.

You are actively ignoring the spending rules that the board imposed on itself: "The Executive Director has been authorized to spend $10,000 USD in project funds on a rolling basis". Though I suppose you could construe "rolling basis" in order to justify excessive unauthorized expenditures.

It is not really a matter of what *you* prefer; you are one investor, and if the rules for spending are going to be broken the community ought to be informed of it.

Lastly, since Ron was not elected by the community as Executive Director, giving him such free-reign is absurd.

Ron is following the rules we all agreed on.

You're just begging the question. Each MSC employee gets paid 6k and 50MSC per month; at the current valuation that's over 10k per employee per month, and Ron is permitted to spend 10k without authorization "on a rolling basis"....

EDIT: You spoke of multiple hires in your post, so even if you were to chalk up the 50 MSC to stock options or something, by hiring at least 2 people, Ron is overstepping his authority.

If you don't like how Ron is running things, you are free to vote for someone else to run things once we've implemented proof-of-stake voting. Right now the biggest holders of MSC are on the board, so board votes are a pretty good proxy for proof-of-stake voting in the meantime.

This is rather blatant proof that proof-of-stake voting will not calm people's concerns regarding Mastercoin's centralization...

[zbx]

Regarding hiring without consulting the community, there is a reason that companies hire a CEO to make all the decisions, rather than having all stakeholders weigh in on every hire. We are giving Ron room as Executive Director to do his job, and even if he makes mistakes on the way (and he undoubtedly will) I vastly prefer that to decision-by-committee.

Ron and David both told me two days ago that their goal is to dissolve the foundation and have *all* decisions determined by proof-of-stake voting. They are trying to put the governance of the protocol into the protocol itself.

[dacoinminster]

Regarding hiring without consulting the community, there is a reason that companies hire a CEO to make all the decisions, rather than having all stakeholders weigh in on every hire. We are giving Ron room as Executive Director to do his job, and even if he makes mistakes on the way (and he undoubtedly will) I vastly prefer that to decision-by-committee.

Ron and David both told me two days ago that their goal is to dissolve the foundation and have *all* decisions determined by proof-of-stake voting. They are trying to put the governance of the protocol into the protocol itself.

Proof-of-stake voting will almost certainly not ask every person to weigh in on every decision (that would be horribly inefficient). Instead, we'll elect someone to be in charge of a block of money for a block of time. At the end of that time, we'll elect someone else (or the same person, if we like how they ran things) for the next block of money and block of time. The size of the blocks of money and blocks of time will also be decided by proof-of-stake voting.

For instance, we might vote to give Ron authorization to spend 5% of the project funds over the following three months. If Ron does a terrible job, we might elect somebody else after that. If we like how Ron spent the money, we might elect him again.

[bitexch]

You'll be horrified to learn that some on the board have actually bought MORE Mastercoin rather than selling as you have been arguing for so strenuously. This is because, like me, they believe Mastercoin will be successful and are acting accordingly.

Obviously we're further consolidating our evil cabal of power in this ecosystem. No doubt the project is doomed because some major investors bought more at a MUCH higher price than they got initially. Oh well. It was fun while it lasted.

Pedantic and dismissive comments regarding people's concerns will not help Mastercoin, and I do not see what you or other investors gain by them. No one doubted that you have faith in the project. The question is whether potential investors will want to invest in spite of their concerns about centralization.

[k99]

I received 9 mastercoins into a btc qt client wallet (1EMPjmn72bHniRCcVsYD2PZ9Bw86n4uRbQ).
I send some btc to a paperwallet (17nCCJ5ge5et5oKfHEDeoWJhebR2GEjPDG) and there my msc seemed to leave the wallet as well.
I imported then that paper wallet into a blockchain wallet and did the msc sending like it is described here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=348789.0 (is that also possible with the qt client?)
Once with 1 msc, then with 8 msc.
that all seemed ok for me, but at https://masterchest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=13sTmHYc2jcUPE4EwZnfULqUHwEHV1o8M6 it is marked as invalid.
I dont understand how exactly the msc are identified, but for me it seems if i moved the btc funds from my receiving address to another wallet, then use that wallet so send out msc, that should work, but seems like not.

I just tried another approach: If the msc is not directly connected to the btc address it should somehow still be in my qt client wallet. so i tried to send it from there, but seemed like also was not valid:
https://masterchest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=1AqJqwRrxQM84bGcdGMZZAZ7Tacs6VV2cW

I hope i have not lost them!
I am pretty disappointed how difficult it is to send/sell my mastercoins.

Valid transaction have green color, not red !

Also, no trace for a transaction to load the sending address so maybe it's a fake transaction or a scam.
Which one is yours ?

[FTWbitcoinFTW]

Your MSC are in this address : 1EMPjmn72bHniRCcVsYD2PZ9Bw86n4uRbQ

Do you still controlling this address ?

If yes, no worries
If no, well... just have a look to my sign... Amen

[prophetx]

we are in the final push for the first documentation contest.

help out if you are interested in this activity. see:

https://trello.com/b/5lolIlqc/documentation-contest-1

some of the content that has been created so far is here:

http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Special:Categories

there still needs to be some organization and links on the main page for all of this.

[prophetx]

check out http://wiki.mastercoin.org if you think it lacks a particular page, please post here 

https://trello.com/c/oRlv67Pl

[k99]

That address is from an active qt wallet, so yes i still have control over it, but its btc balance is 0 as i send btc to a paperwallet. does the btc balance of that address has influence of the msc?
How can i send my mastercoins out from it. I tried the 2 possibilities which seemed to me most logical:
1. send msc from the address where teh btc balance from the original msc receiver address went
2. send msc from the qt client wallet, where i recieved the msc but where the address btc balance is 0.
both are not working, so seems that i am still the owner but how can i access it? how can i send them to somebody who want to buy it?

can anyone explain how the msc are stored in the btc address/wallet?

thanks for any help!

Your MSC are in this address : 1EMPjmn72bHniRCcVsYD2PZ9Bw86n4uRbQ

Do you still controlling this address ?

If yes, no worries
If no, well... just have a look to my sign... Amen

[prophetx]

I'm getting swamped with things to do, so  I am announcing a contest to write the weekly blog.  I will try this out for a couple weeks and see if this is something that can be worked out by folks in the community.

The award is 0.5 Dev MSC  (from the Dev MSC allocated for Head of Communications) for the blog post that gets the most hits.

See rules here https://trello.com/c/gbrOtwVK

I reserve the right to change the rules at anytime to ensure fairness and quality content.

btw this is a pretty neat tool cloudflood.com that I came across a couple years ago.

any questions? please email info@mastercoin.org