Bitcoin Forum
November 14, 2024, 01:36:12 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 [102] 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] ORA :: NXT 'monetary system' currency  (Read 181197 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
poornamelessme
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 509


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 07:15:39 PM
 #2021


ORA distribution option:[*Sakura*] - version 1.0.0.0

1 Give the second shares to existing stakeholders. But only to those who hold at least 50% of the first share. In my opinion, those people who have sold their entire share - a classic dumpers. These people do not believe in the success of any currency other than BTC. So if they get the second part, with a probability of 200% they will do it again after few seconds.
2 Keep the acceptable amount for later distribution & future bounties.
3 Implement an automated system of stakeholders bounty. You can ask for help from NHZ developers. [/b]

This seems reasonable to me. I would state that it should be original stakeholders, not all existing stakeholders,, unless you want things to get overly complicated. You could end up with people who hold a lot of ORA simply splitting up their coins into different accounts, to then appear like multiple people... expecting multiple 2nd stakes then. If you just go with the original list, and reward those who held at least 50% of their stake, it'd seem fair and simple to me.

It may also have the bonus of weeding out a lot of puppets too, as I'd guess a lot of puppets tend to sell off quickly.
ltcrstrbrt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1575
Merit: 1057



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 08:56:04 PM
 #2022

I agree with Ochi. If it weren't for a dumper I would not have received any stake. I was not aware of Ora until after the distribution process ended, so I joined late. Probably there are other people that are in the same situation than me.

^ Give more to people like mess-lelouch ^

Give nothing to those who don't believe in Ora enough that they sold at first opportunity.

Give a bonus to all who have Ora tokens as % of current balance.
+1

0x0984274936F54ab6D34B6E4c1A8aAA92416e5cfe
tomavbttt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 40
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 10:34:56 PM
 #2023


ORA distribution option:[*Sakura*] - version 1.0.0.0

1 Give the second shares to existing stakeholders. But only to those who hold at least 50% of the first share. In my opinion, those people who have sold their entire share - a classic dumpers. These people do not believe in the success of any currency other than BTC. So if they get the second part, with a probability of 200% they will do it again after few seconds.
2 Keep the acceptable amount for later distribution & future bounties.
3 Implement an automated system of stakeholders bounty. You can ask for help from NHZ developers. [/b]

This seems reasonable to me. I would state that it should be original stakeholders, not all existing stakeholders,, unless you want things to get overly complicated. You could end up with people who hold a lot of ORA simply splitting up their coins into different accounts, to then appear like multiple people... expecting multiple 2nd stakes then. If you just go with the original list, and reward those who held at least 50% of their stake, it'd seem fair and simple to me.

It may also have the bonus of weeding out a lot of puppets too, as I'd guess a lot of puppets tend to sell off quickly.


Well, my advice to you is similar, or not, or to allocate shares now held by the user, there is no absolute fairness.

megashira1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1146
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 10:56:01 PM
 #2024

POS block rewards is also a good idea

Tompa
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 11:11:27 PM
 #2025

My take: (Tompa) (sorry for the wall of text but there is TL;DR at the end)

Don't give anything to anybody for free. Why? We already had a initial distribution phase. It went long enough and no one on BTT can say it ended prematurely or that somebody didn't have the chance to "get in on time".
What to do with the surplus Oras?

We didn't have a fancy Ethereum or similarly BIG IPO through which we acquired thousands of BTC to be able to spend money on developers or media or something like that. But we can still have ORA if we don't do this redistribution v2.0 now. I know we have a bounty fund but what I had in mind is what I'm propose in paragraph after next one. What will be achieved if we give more oras to those who already have it? Will it bring more people to support ORA? Will it help the growth (in price/engagement/loyalty etc)? I don't think so.

I want everyone in the world with computer and Internet access to be able to participate in projects/ideas like this one. I believe most of us do too. I would like to see a widespread adoption of cryptos and I would love to see ORA leading in that field. 900+ is not enough. And out of that number how many really active people do we really see here? We all know that cryptos are going to be big in the coming years. We are now in a perfect condition/time/place to decide what way to go and how. Although we have a fantastic team so far. I love everything our present leaders say and do and how they think. But that is not enough. We need entire divisions of marketing/legal/design/customer care (help to newbies)/development etc. Ethereum guys have money to hire them. We have Oras! NHZ started something that I think could be useful for us.
It was a good idea to have ORA on NXT AE. Now it is a fact that ORA has some value. And that value now can be further distributed to help attract more people and engagement and also holding.

Why not distribute all those ORA that haven't been distributed in the first round to those who are willing to work for it? That way some newbie can acquire oras and really be a part of the team and be encouraged to do so as well as someone who already has ORA stake (and even was buying ORA asset on AE). Also sockpuppeting is gone that way. We need motivated people who won't feel they've missed the boat! Who wouldn't like to join NXT and work now if there would be a big chunk of NXTs still to be distributed? Even BTC cannot do that in this stage any more. Imagine the opportunity we'd have for inviting new people in? You could go to a friend who is maybe not a programmer and say to him: Look here is a new crypto you can really be a part of and really get some coins and in return you can help it by doing ____ (betatesting/translating/spreading the word/etc) also It would be a great incentive to invite businesses to start accepting ORA - Look every actual business that accept ORA as payment method will be given x ora per day or month for he first year. And it shouldn't be a big amount. Few oras per day. or even a percentage of 1 ora per day. Imagine being able to tell businesses that they will be paid for accepting ORA?!? a really groundbreaking stuff.
Everyday there is a new coin that tries to have a good/fair distribution that will attract as much people possible and then everybody hopes that out of that number of people a few would emerge who would carry on their shoulders everybody else on their way "to the moon"TM. But we know it doesn't happen like that.

I've been thinking what can set ora apart from other cryptos and some of the ideas are to have designated spots for potential participants with set "payments" in ora for doing that task/job/role and also very important clearly set goals. We don't want to have someone saying that he'll be IDK a wiki guy/gal and then after x months and X amount of ORA we have a 3 page wiki. I love the starfish approach and I think that is only way to have a really decentralized project and we need now to work on a solutions how to be able to make decisions quickly and in the same time allow everyone to participate. System for this MUST be included in the client. Similar to what Kora was thinking in development thread, I think it would be awesome to have fee free transactions. everyone who has the stake in ORA will be responsible for the network and also merchants. They have their computers on all the time anyway and if they want to be able to see when someone pays them, they have to run the client anyway. I think spam preventing fees should be introduced selectively. Example: If I'm going to be sending 10-20 or even a 100 transactions per day that shouldn't burden the network too much but if I want to run something like oradice then fees should be incorporated and those fees should return to this fund to pay the work. I hate fees. If I can send an email for free I should be able to send cryptos as well. For the beginning to avoid DDOS attacks and to draw more people into running the nodes, they could be paid similar to what NHZ is doing. But ora could be way better at that then NHZ if it is successful in figuring out a system how to collectively make propositions and decisions. Each point of that starfish can even have some kind of autonomy like a board.

For instance marketing point of the starfish could form somekind of a board of several people who are specialists in marketing and they would have their meetings and work similar how nioccoin is now in charge of dev. and after they've done their part they would just need a confirmation on final voting of the community. Quick and easy.

Another example: picking of logo. I'm not a designer, and I don't want to see (and take the life of my mouse wheel scrolling) here in this thread dozens of logo applications and ideas out of which 90% are total crap. Instead I want to be presented with one post with top 3 logos that our design gurus have chosen are the best and they explained the story behind those logos and then we just vote which we all like the best. and that design gurus should be paid in oras for taking all the submissions in, looking at them, improving the design, communicating to logo creators what we are seeking, making the choice down to top 3 etc. And of course the winner for the logo be paid in ora as well.

Key requirement for this to even be possible is to have a great voting system and also a great and convenient way to propose stuff. If we could have that in our clients that would really be groundbreaking. Imagine that everyone can really be a part of ORA. With this everyone would matter, every tip of the starfish would have it's own purpose and it would be transparent and well organized as well as we would

TL;DR: Don't redistribute ORAS for free. Instead pay people to participate but with clear goals and results - NHZ influenced idea. No fees. Bounties for running a node.

Guys what do you think?

BTW, does anyone know why this http://nxtreporting.com/shareholder.php?a=16194910134118257692 hasn't been updated in 8 days?
Mac Red
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 299
Merit: 252


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 11:15:51 PM
 #2026

Interesting how suddenly after Kora posted his thoughts a lot of big words are being thrown around; "mistake" about distribution, threats of dumping and concerns if we've joked about letting people actually vote, market manipulation...well at least something he said apparently lit the discussion. Don't get me wrong, people being passionate about something is a very good sign.
megashira1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1146
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 11:24:49 PM
 #2027

My take: (Tompa) (sorry for the wall of text but there is TL;DR at the end)

Don't give anything to anybody for free. Why? We already had a initial distribution phase. It went long enough and no one on BTT can say it ended prematurely or that somebody didn't have the chance to "get in on time".
What to do with the surplus Oras?

We didn't have a fancy Ethereum or similarly BIG IPO through which we acquired thousands of BTC to be able to spend money on developers or media or something like that. But we can still have ORA if we don't do this redistribution v2.0 now. I know we have a bounty fund but what I had in mind is what I'm propose in paragraph after next one. What will be achieved if we give more oras to those who already have it? Will it bring more people to support ORA? Will it help the growth (in price/engagement/loyalty etc)? I don't think so.

I want everyone in the world with computer and Internet access to be able to participate in projects/ideas like this one. I believe most of us do too. I would like to see a widespread adoption of cryptos and I would love to see ORA leading in that field. 900+ is not enough. And out of that number how many really active people do we really see here? We all know that cryptos are going to be big in the coming years. We are now in a perfect condition/time/place to decide what way to go and how. Although we have a fantastic team so far. I love everything our present leaders say and do and how they think. But that is not enough. We need entire divisions of marketing/legal/design/customer care (help to newbies)/development etc. Ethereum guys have money to hire them. We have Oras! NHZ started something that I think could be useful for us.
It was a good idea to have ORA on NXT AE. Now it is a fact that ORA has some value. And that value now can be further distributed to help attract more people and engagement and also holding.

Why not distribute all those ORA that haven't been distributed in the first round to those who are willing to work for it? That way some newbie can acquire oras and really be a part of the team and be encouraged to do so as well as someone who already has ORA stake (and even was buying ORA asset on AE). Also sockpuppeting is gone that way. We need motivated people who won't feel they've missed the boat! Who wouldn't like to join NXT and work now if there would be a big chunk of NXTs still to be distributed? Even BTC cannot do that in this stage any more. Imagine the opportunity we'd have for inviting new people in? You could go to a friend who is maybe not a programmer and say to him: Look here is a new crypto you can really be a part of and really get some coins and in return you can help it by doing ____ (betatesting/translating/spreading the word/etc) also It would be a great incentive to invite businesses to start accepting ORA - Look every actual business that accept ORA as payment method will be given x ora per day or month for he first year. And it shouldn't be a big amount. Few oras per day. or even a percentage of 1 ora per day. Imagine being able to tell businesses that they will be paid for accepting ORA?!? a really groundbreaking stuff.
Everyday there is a new coin that tries to have a good/fair distribution that will attract as much people possible and then everybody hopes that out of that number of people a few would emerge who would carry on their shoulders everybody else on their way "to the moon"TM. But we know it doesn't happen like that.

I've been thinking what can set ora apart from other cryptos and some of the ideas are to have designated spots for potential participants with set "payments" in ora for doing that task/job/role and also very important clearly set goals. We don't want to have someone saying that he'll be IDK a wiki guy/gal and then after x months and X amount of ORA we have a 3 page wiki. I love the starfish approach and I think that is only way to have a really decentralized project and we need now to work on a solutions how to be able to make decisions quickly and in the same time allow everyone to participate. System for this MUST be included in the client. Similar to what Kora was thinking in development thread, I think it would be awesome to have fee free transactions. everyone who has the stake in ORA will be responsible for the network and also merchants. They have their computers on all the time anyway and if they want to be able to see when someone pays them, they have to run the client anyway. I think spam preventing fees should be introduced selectively. Example: If I'm going to be sending 10-20 or even a 100 transactions per day that shouldn't burden the network too much but if I want to run something like oradice then fees should be incorporated and those fees should return to this fund to pay the work. I hate fees. If I can send an email for free I should be able to send cryptos as well. For the beginning to avoid DDOS attacks and to draw more people into running the nodes, they could be paid similar to what NHZ is doing. But ora could be way better at that then NHZ if it is successful in figuring out a system how to collectively make propositions and decisions. Each point of that starfish can even have some kind of autonomy like a board.

For instance marketing point of the starfish could form somekind of a board of several people who are specialists in marketing and they would have their meetings and work similar how nioccoin is now in charge of dev. and after they've done their part they would just need a confirmation on final voting of the community. Quick and easy.

Another example: picking of logo. I'm not a designer, and I don't want to see (and take the life of my mouse wheel scrolling) here in this thread dozens of logo applications and ideas out of which 90% are total crap. Instead I want to be presented with one post with top 3 logos that our design gurus have chosen are the best and they explained the story behind those logos and then we just vote which we all like the best. and that design gurus should be paid in oras for taking all the submissions in, looking at them, improving the design, communicating to logo creators what we are seeking, making the choice down to top 3 etc. And of course the winner for the logo be paid in ora as well.

Key requirement for this to even be possible is to have a great voting system and also a great and convenient way to propose stuff. If we could have that in our clients that would really be groundbreaking. Imagine that everyone can really be a part of ORA. With this everyone would matter, every tip of the starfish would have it's own purpose and it would be transparent and well organized as well as we would

TL;DR: Don't redistribute ORAS for free. Instead pay people to participate but with clear goals and results - NHZ influenced idea. No fees. Bounties for running a node.

Guys what do you think?

BTW, does anyone know why this http://nxtreporting.com/shareholder.php?a=16194910134118257692 hasn't been updated in 8 days?

What you're saying is increase the bounty fund which itself is already pretty large. I prefer that to distributing to people who want free $. However this could draw fears regarding treasury holding such a large portion of ORA and scare people off.

"LOL DEV HOLDS 70% PREMINE LOL SCAMCOIN!" .. This can become a real concern once ORA actually becomes worth something significant.

Yes, i'm sure all those in charge are trustworthy and honest people but money is easily corruptible.

Tompa
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 11:35:22 PM
 #2028

What you're saying is increase the bounty fund which itself is already pretty large. I prefer that to distributing to people who want free $. However this could draw fears regarding treasury holding such a large portion of ORA and scare people off.

"LOL DEV HOLDS 70% PREMINE LOL SCAMCOIN!" .. This can become a real concern once ORA actually becomes worth something significant.

Yes, i'm sure all those in charge are trustworthy and honest people but money is easily corruptible.

what I'm saying is to have everyone who votes decide who will get hired and paid. And it shouldn't be the dev to be holding the funds. They should be programming and earning more ORAS that way. We could even have that fund in an escrow and randomly pick 10 active ORA holders to set them in a 6/10 multisig something to be responsible for the funds and then rotate them on some predetermined time frame.
So who knows - next month maybe you'll be one of those 10. Just an example. Who is now holding NHZ? I believe we can do even better.

And I don't think anyone will be saying that: "LOL DEV HOLDS 70% PREMINE LOL SCAMCOIN!" because everyone had the chance to get in. An we can always advertise that the "devs" want to give that away in exchange for adding to the ORA value. Don't forget that the devs still hold 100% of ORA that even hasn't been created yet and that we all now play with assets that may never even be exchanged for real ORA one day at all and NO ONE is saying that now. :-) Funny isn't it.
megashira1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1146
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 12:10:35 AM
 #2029

Interesting how suddenly after Kora posted his thoughts a lot of big words are being thrown around; "mistake" about distribution, threats of dumping and concerns if we've joked about letting people actually vote, market manipulation...well at least something he said apparently lit the discussion. Don't get me wrong, people being passionate about something is a very good sign.

We are talking about a very large portion (almost 1/3) of total ORA ever to be in existence (315M).  What to do with this amount certainly seems a big deal.  And yes, I do consider it a mistake to let this question linger.  Would have been far easier to distribute all at beginning and be done with it.  Now we have many competing ideas, all which tout their own vision of 'fair'.

If we run some numbers:
* 889 * 166,666 = 148,166,074 distributed to first round entries.
* Of those, 125 no longer hold their stake = 20,833,250 dumped
* This has created total trade volume of 58,039,433.  Clearly, there are people day-trading on the spread and ups-and-downs already.
* If we assume another round of 315M distributed as before, expect around the same 15% to sell = ~47,250,000 newly released ORA dumped on market.
* For the early supporter who chose to buy after initial distribution, 47M dropped on market will almost certainly reduce the value of their holding significantly.
* With another round as presented, you are harming your most loyal supporters.

Sorry, I just can't agree an approach that devalues early market supporters.  I bought into Ora because I believed in the vision, and felt Kora had a strong commitment to building a healthy community.  Promoting an idea which economically damages your most ardent supporters is disheartening.

The options which I support are:
1. Burn it
2. Top-off existing holders based on balance
3. Reserve for PoS block rewards


My thoughts exactly.

wojtek
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 75
Merit: 12


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 01:09:04 AM
 #2030

my proposal:
distribure oras to original shareholders.

why?
because it is simple and fair and should be done from the start.
as long as majority of coins are not distributed some people will consider ora scam or at least fishy.
Fair distribution was advertised as kora main advantage, you made mistake with initial distribution but it is easy to fix.
there is no point in overthinking it.
ARGpentem
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154
Merit: 100



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 01:47:31 AM
Last edit: August 10, 2014, 02:01:48 AM by ARGpentem
 #2031

my proposal:
distribure oras to original shareholders.

why?
because it is simple and fair and should be done from the start.
as long as majority of coins are not distributed some people will consider ora scam or at least fishy.
Fair distribution was advertised as kora main advantage, you made mistake with initial distribution but it is easy to fix.
there is no point in overthinking it.

The initial poll was to distribute the rest to original stakeholders, wasn't it ? The way I see it ORA distribution is similar to Stellar's Facebook giveaways. The difference is that one uses forum account and the other uses Facebook account.

I also see a potential issue that some people mentioned. So far a original stakeholder our of 800+ received 1/3000 of 50%. Either continue with the plan to find 3000 stakeholders or distribute the rest of the 50% to the original stakeholders. Anything else represents a broken promise. 

A freedom fighter. Stop all your bull shit !
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 02:51:06 AM
 #2032

An observation:  the options to burn the remaining undistributed stakes, and to distribute the remaining stakes as a proportion of current holders are equivalent.  Either way, the current ratio remains the same and burning would be simpler.

"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
Ochi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 10


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 02:51:20 AM
 #2033

It seems like nobody like "dumpers" except me.
I will give you a real example,after the IPO of NXT some initial stakers sell their coin at such low price just want more people can join the community.The price is 1BTC=1000KNXT.Just because they sell their coin at such low price then more and more people can buy NXT at such low price.That's good for the NXT's development.
I have to say people shouldn't hate "dumpers" dump their stake(coin) at low price because they just do the right thing,they just spread the stake(coin) wildely.We should hate "dumpers" dump their stake(coin) at high price because they will harm the market.
megashira1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1146
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 02:56:48 AM
 #2034

An observation:  the options to burn the remaining undistributed stakes, and to distribute the remaining stakes as a proportion of current holders are equivalent.  Either way, the current ratio remains the same and burning would be simpler.

Yes burning would be simpler and would avoid distribution criticisms. 

pt7
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 03:07:20 AM
 #2035

my proposal:
distribure oras to original shareholders.

why?
because it is simple and fair and should be done from the start.
as long as majority of coins are not distributed some people will consider ora scam or at least fishy.
Fair distribution was advertised as kora main advantage, you made mistake with initial distribution but it is easy to fix.
there is no point in overthinking it.

The initial poll was to distribute the rest to original stakeholders, wasn't it ? The way I see it ORA distribution is similar to Stellar's Facebook giveaways. The difference is that one uses forum account and the other uses Facebook account.

I also see a potential issue that some people mentioned. So far a original stakeholder our of 800+ received 1/3000 of 50%. Either continue with the plan to find 3000 stakeholders or distribute the rest of the 50% to the original stakeholders. Anything else represents a broken promise.  

"Distribute to existing stakeholders" is what won.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=673587.msg7629545#msg7629545

That is different than "Distribute to original stakeholders".

Besides, the poll was taken before real $$$ was put into Ora.  If it was respected and handled that way before appearing on NXT AE, then no problems.  Now that market has been established, more large giveaways harm those who believe(d) in Ora the most.  Don't disenfranchise your biggest supporters.

 

If you look at the following link, there was a distinction made by Kora between "existing" and "future" stakeholders.  This was the intended meaning of "existing stakeholders" - the original 800.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=673587.msg7696320#msg7696320
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 03:14:21 AM
 #2036


If you look at the following link, there was a distinction made by Kora between "existing" and "future" stakeholders.  This was the intended meaning of "existing stakeholders" - the original 800.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=673587.msg7696320#msg7696320


You certain?  Original stake holders at time of distribution would be "past" stakeholders.  Those who currently have Ora stakes on the asset exchange would be "existing" stakeholders.  Those who have no stakes at the moment, but who would like to have some Ora in the future would be "future" stakeholders.  No?

"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
megashira1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1146
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 03:14:57 AM
 #2037

It seems like nobody like "dumpers" except me.
I will give you a real example,after the IPO of NXT some initial stakers sell their coin at such low price just want more people can join the community.The price is 1BTC=1000KNXT.Just because they sell their coin at such low price then more and more people can buy NXT at such low price.That's good for the NXT's development.
I have to say people shouldn't hate "dumpers" dump their stake(coin) at low price because they just do the right thing,they just spread the stake(coin) wildely.We should hate "dumpers" dump their stake(coin) at high price because they will harm the market.

Oh yeah? How's that working out for NXT? Seems to me the whales keep dumping while the community keeps paying the price for it. Giving dumpers free $ to dump on stakeholders isn't going to help with distribution, it'll just concentrate the ORA into even fewer hands who buy them up super cheap and at the same time hurt every stakeholder.

Counter intuitively people invest in coins which increase in price not decrease.

DarkhorseofNxt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 04:08:57 AM
 #2038

Certainly something that Kora said has lit the discussion and its good.

Has anyone also thought about hold any distribution for now. Get on to the new distribution plan, which is a video submission plan. We can call this round 2. Once that has settled then we have a total list of "stake holders". The remaining balance then can be redistributed to everyone holding a certain percentage. We still have lots of time until the client comes to existence. What say you?

Kora (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 04:56:17 AM
 #2039

There's some very good discussion going on here, so thanks everyone! I'm very grateful to all those who speak their mind and have their say!! As long as we 'play the ball, and not the man', then I welcome ALL opposing opinions to mine, and I respect passion too Smiley

Personally, I think I'm quite open minded, and long ago I realised listening to the opinions of smart people is 'smart', and it's better to stay flexible and open to being convinced that someone else has a better plan. Values & goals tend to be fixed, but I always think it's better to have some flexibility with strategies & tactics!

We're doing OK so far, and learning how to make decisions and get things done efficiently & effectively as a 'Starfish' community *could* be the biggest challenge we face, and if we work out ways to do this then ORA will have a great future. I'm optimistic we can! I feel lots of goodwill and sincerity from intelligent thoughtful people here, so thank you ALL!



My position hasn't really changed, and I'm still in favour of keeping the left over stakes in trust while we come up with 'clever' ways to continue with the distribution until we reach the original goal of 3000 unique people. ORA has real 'value' now, and we're giving it away FREE, so who doesn't think it's possible to find ~2,100 unique people and give them a genuine freebie, with no strings attached?

I'm in favour of continuing until we reach 3k stakeholders for many reasons:
- Every new stakeholder is a potential 'doer', and ORA needs people doing things
- It's a great marketing tool - 'who wants some free money?'
- It could be a while before nio finishes the ORA software, so it'll give the community something to focus on so we don't fall off the radar
- We can ask people to do useful things for a stake e.g. promo stuff (I've got lots of ideas, I bet others have too)
- We can make the anti-sockpuppet measures more stringent, but generate something useful, like a blog post
- ~880 'looks' small (like 73 or 137) - '3,000 stakeholders' has more marketing appeal

I know many of us have been conditioned in the alt coin crypto world to feel time is moving ultra fast, and we see  new coins born, rise, decline & die in a few months almost, but ORA will be different, and it has to be, because we're a long way from having our finished software. nio might be able to give us a rough estimate, but from reading his posts, and his development documents so far, I'd say he is being smart & very comprehensive with his approach, so I'd be very surprised if he rushed something out in the next little while. That's just my opinion, but it feels like we're talking months and not weeks before we have ORA software up & running, so we have lots of time to come up with ideas on how to reach 3000 unique people.

Here's a new distribution idea off the top of my head.

Short story competition, minimum 1000 words "Satoshi & BCNext on a road trip together"
How many sockpuppets would write more than one entry?
Would it really matter if someone wrote two or more entries?
Could we use the submitted short stories to add some benefit to ORA (website of all the stories with ORA branding)?
Would a few people bother to write 1000 words for 166,666 ORA assets (do some people write stories for fun for FREE as a hobby)?
Would running a short story competition be fun?
Would it keep us occupied and bumping this thread while nio beavers away on the software?

Obviously we wont get ~2K new registrations from people on this forum, and Mac Red has finished his work, and maybe we don't use the original webapp either, but I think we can collectively come up with some really clever ways to get more stakeholders, and generate some good outcomes for ORA, especially marketing. Obviously the task is still to eliminate sockpuppets, but I think that's possible, especially if we raise the bar a bit, and ask people to 'do something', like write blog post, or contribute to a wiki. I think with some creativity we can come up with lots of great ideas that make the ORA community & eco-system much stronger.


I'm not in favour of giving existing stakeholders a top-up, but if we do, then what I said yesterday is relevant. I don't think it's wise to discriminate against ORA stakeholders who sold their stake. The idea of a stakeholder top-up came once we realised getting 3000 people using the registration webapp was not going to happen, but I've always been advocating we see every stake as an 'opportunity' to further the cause of ORA.

I am concerned about the consequences on the price of a big dump for loyal supporters who have PAID for ORA, and thanks to those who have highlighted that. That is a very valid point.

Maybe it is better to decide this sooner rather than later. NXT voting system wont be live for a few more weeks. We *could* use another method, but forum polls aren't reliable IMO. We could do this maybe. Get the options, start a thread, and then ask that people vote in the thread with a post AND 4-5 lines why they're voting that way. It wouldn't be perfect, but we could see which users were original stakeholders.

maimaiti
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 82
Merit: 10


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:58:57 AM
 #2040

why the price is so low?

Pages: « 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 [102] 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!