Bitmark

[coinsolidation]

Sounds risky but reasonable at the same time.

Risky in what way? Please clarify.

We have also started to have a one year long Bitmark Foundation conversation. Join in at any point.
https://trello.com/c/UjdtmLw9/29-bitmark-foundation-defining

[Androidicus]

I think I have a solution, completely optional and variable donations.

For the IPM Pool I will add the following interface instead:

percentage BTC donation to current development [slider 0-100]
percentage BTM donation to future development [slider 0-100]
enter btm address [ ]
[ place btm order ]

This is simple.

Each person when using the IPM pool to acquire BTM at production cost, can slide a % amount to contribute - with no pressure, and anonymously - to either current development (BTC for now), or future development (BTM to the foundation)

This is not an immediate fix to pressing matters, it does potentially solve the funding issue for say next month onwards.

I think this is a great idea - but, here's the thing; I have a relarively small amount of hash power - a few months ago it would have been impressive, six months ago; collosal!

I can split this hash power because of the hardware - approx 60/40 - ok, I'm earning BTM, not stacks but more than happy. Becasue I don't have BTC to use the IPM but can point some of my hash power at a multipool I can direct some BTC to the pot in that way instead of my BTC address...

I am tired - is my thinking skewed?

 

[pabloangello]

Sounds risky but reasonable at the same time.

Risky in what way? Please clarify.

We have also started to have a one year long Bitmark Foundation conversation. Join in at any point.
https://trello.com/c/UjdtmLw9/29-bitmark-foundation-defining

Risky that lot of people will set it to 0 unfortunately. Because in a world full of money (and cryptocurrency world is most certainly it) it is hard for people to donate something.
However they can decide to donate if it will cause their potential ROI from this invest to be higher.
Hence it needs to be clear that moving the slider into donate direction contributes to Bitmarks grow in value.

[coinsolidation]

I think this is a great idea - but, here's the thing; I have a relarively small amount of hash power - a few months ago it would have been impressive, six months ago; collosal!

I can split this hash power because of the hardware - approx 60/40 - ok, I'm earning BTM, not stacks but more than happy. Becasue I don't have BTC to use the IPM but can point some of my hash power at a multipool I can direct some BTC to the pot in that way instead of my BTC address...

I am tired - is my thinking skewed?

 

It is my fault for not being clear.

With this approach you could set the BTC donation to 0-100% and do as you say.

A typical pattern may be to mine at a multipool, have the BTC exit to the IPM, with your donation amounts set up, so that you get BTM and donate and profit and mine. All entirely automated.

[Androidicus]

I think this is a great idea - but, here's the thing; I have a relarively small amount of hash power - a few months ago it would have been impressive, six months ago; collosal!

I can split this hash power because of the hardware - approx 60/40 - ok, I'm earning BTM, not stacks but more than happy. Becasue I don't have BTC to use the IPM but can point some of my hash power at a multipool I can direct some BTC to the pot in that way instead of my BTC address...

I am tired - is my thinking skewed?

 

It is my fault for not being clear.

With this approach you could set the BTC donation to 0-100% and do as you say.

A typical pattern may be to mine at a multipool, have the BTC exit to the IPM, with your donation amounts set up, so that you get BTM and donate and profit and mine. All entirely automated.

Of course - we discussed this in IRC leading up to the IPM announcement document... doh!

[Este Nuno]

I think I have a solution, completely optional and variable donations.

For the IPM Pool I will add the following interface instead:

percentage BTC donation to current development [slider 0-100]
percentage BTM donation to future development [slider 0-100]
enter btm address [ ]
[ place btm order ]

This is simple.

Each person when using the IPM pool to acquire BTM at production cost, can slide a % amount to contribute - with no pressure, and anonymously - to either current development (BTC for now), or future development (BTM to the foundation)

This is not an immediate fix to pressing matters, it does potentially solve the funding issue for say next month onwards.

Sounds risky but reasonable at the same time.

I agree that it's risky.

I suggest making the slider a minimum of 5% as was the original intention.

I do like the idea that people can contribute more than 5% though.

[Superxfast]

I think I have a solution, completely optional and variable donations.

For the IPM Pool I will add the following interface instead:

percentage BTC donation to current development [slider 0-100]
percentage BTM donation to future development [slider 0-100]
enter btm address [ ]
[ place btm order ]

This is simple.

Each person when using the IPM pool to acquire BTM at production cost, can slide a % amount to contribute - with no pressure, and anonymously - to either current development (BTC for now), or future development (BTM to the foundation)

This is not an immediate fix to pressing matters, it does potentially solve the funding issue for say next month onwards.

Sounds risky but reasonable at the same time.

I agree that it's risky.

I suggest making the slider a minimum of 5% as was the original intention.

I do like the idea that people can contribute more than 5% though.

+1

[coinsolidation]

If we can agree that it is good to provide, then it can be made. Then later we can see how the settings perform, and adjust it if necessary. Fair?

[coinsolidation]

IRC channel promotion: tipbot, quizbot, trivia, marks give-aways, irc channel promo on other channels - https://trello.com/c/3lwwcU5z/31-irc-channel-promotion

Giving tips when you feel somebody has earned them (marking) by IRC sounds great.

It may be a fault of mine but I see little merit in novelty things, it's good to have other people around to balance this.

What benefits come from quiz bots and trivia?

What benefits come from give-aways?

My only point is that marks are reputation, to be earned, that gives them their value. To give them away freely (unless to enable usage), feels like it may be detrimental?

[Este Nuno]

If we can agree that it is good to provide, then it can be made. Then later we can see how the settings perform, and adjust it if necessary. Fair?

Sounds fair to me.

[coinsolidation]

Project Bitmark Status Overview 1

[Este Nuno]

IRC channel promotion: tipbot, quizbot, trivia, marks give-aways, irc channel promo on other channels - https://trello.com/c/3lwwcU5z/31-irc-channel-promotion

Giving tips when you feel somebody has earned them (marking) by IRC sounds great.

It may be a fault of mine but I see little merit in novelty things, it's good to have other people around to balance this.

What benefits come from quiz bots and trivia?

What benefits come from give-aways?

My only point is that marks are reputation, to be earned, that gives them their value. To give them away freely (unless to enable usage), feels like it may be detrimental?

Well winning them via a trivia/quiz bot would count as earning I think. And giving some away to new users would fall under the enabling usage category I think.

[coinsolidation]

IRC channel promotion: tipbot, quizbot, trivia, marks give-aways, irc channel promo on other channels - https://trello.com/c/3lwwcU5z/31-irc-channel-promotion

Giving tips when you feel somebody has earned them (marking) by IRC sounds great.

It may be a fault of mine but I see little merit in novelty things, it's good to have other people around to balance this.

What benefits come from quiz bots and trivia?

What benefits come from give-aways?

My only point is that marks are reputation, to be earned, that gives them their value. To give them away freely (unless to enable usage), feels like it may be detrimental?

Well winning them via a trivia/quiz bot would count as earning I think. And giving some away to new users would fall under the enabling usage category I think.

Reasonable, perhaps we enable marking in some simple ways, then give-away marks for people to use?

[Androidicus]

IRC channel promotion: tipbot, quizbot, trivia, marks give-aways, irc channel promo on other channels - https://trello.com/c/3lwwcU5z/31-irc-channel-promotion

Giving tips when you feel somebody has earned them (marking) by IRC sounds great.

It may be a fault of mine but I see little merit in novelty things, it's good to have other people around to balance this.

What benefits come from quiz bots and trivia?

What benefits come from give-aways?

My only point is that marks are reputation, to be earned, that gives them their value. To give them away freely (unless to enable usage), feels like it may be detrimental?

Well winning them via a trivia/quiz bot would count as earning I think. And giving some away to new users would fall under the enabling usage category I think.

Reasonable, perhaps we enable marking in some simple ways, then give-away marks for people to use?

...and per majority of Bookmakers: "Make your first deposit of 100 Marks and we'll double it up!" etc. Encourages acquisition in the first instance then usage...

On another tack, iro Marking:

http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/
http://www.ratedpeople.com/
http://www.trustatrader.com/

Aspirations of "Marking" adoption!

[coinsolidation]

...and per majority of Bookmakers: "Make your first deposit of 100 Marks and we'll double it up!" etc. Encourages acquisition in the first instance then usage...

On another tack, iro Marking:

http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/
http://www.ratedpeople.com/
http://www.trustatrader.com/

Aspirations of "Marking" adoption!

Well noted, thank you!

Some others which I may have forgotten to document as yet:

Competitions.
Each person in a competition can be voted by marking, every competition entry gains a reputation+money reward for every vote received, it's almost a prize in itself.

Democracy.
Consider the Bitmark Foundation in the future, it will need community representatives, each one can be democratically voted in by marking, which also gives them a reward for the work they will do. Further actions they do can be marked, adding tot heir reputation and earnings.

So much is enabled by marking, it's just giving reputation+money with a simple click.

[johndec2]

Whilst I admire all the effort and dedication going into the coin and the getmarked project (so much that I actually donated to the project), can someone please explain to me why?  At the moment, one whole Bitmark is worth less than 6 cents, a Mark is worth 1/1000th of that, less than I spent on electrons to type this post.

Is the time being well spent?  I can understand the challenge of creating getmarked from an idealistic point of view but if getting marked has no value, it will not be adopted.  Either the value of a Mark has to be increased compared to a Bitmark or the value of a Bitmark has to increase or preferably both to make the project feasible.  Has anyone done a cost to benefit comparison?  Would the time at the moment be better spent promoting the coin?  After all, getmarked was never part of the original plan, it is an afterthought.  A good one, I'll admit, but an afterthought. 

Current plan: Do something really clever, hope people like it and the coin becomes accepted and valuable.

My plan: Create a stable and workable coin (as per the original idea) and then add something to make it even more appealing.

[Este Nuno]

Whilst I admire all the effort and dedication going into the coin and the getmarked project (so much that I actually donated to the project), can someone please explain to me why?  At the moment, one whole Bitmark is worth less than 6 cents, a Mark is worth 1/1000th of that, less than I spent on electrons to type this post.

Is the time being well spent?  I can understand the challenge of creating getmarked from an idealistic point of view but if getting marked has no value, it will not be adopted.  Either the value of a Mark has to be increased compared to a Bitmark or the value of a Bitmark has to increase or preferably both to make the project feasible.  Has anyone done a cost to benefit comparison?  Would the time at the moment be better spent promoting the coin?  After all, getmarked was never part of the original plan, it is an afterthought.  A good one, I'll admit, but an afterthought. 

Current plan: Do something really clever, hope people like it and the coin becomes accepted and valuable.

My plan: Create a stable and workable coin (as per the original idea) and then add something to make it even more appealing.

Someone is attempting to manipulate the price to buy cheap coins by putting 1 or 2 BTM for sale at the buy rate to make it look like there is no spread. And apparently it just worked out for them surprisingly.

The price tag doesn't really have much effect on anything really.

But in the short term these are a few things that are happening now:

- bitmark.co website
- IPM
- discussions on how to expand our outreach efforts and get more people aware of the project
- and more mentioned here in Mark's overview post on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitmark/comments/2cbwgj/project_bitmark_status_overview_1/

Any other suggestions of things we should be focusing on in the short term?

As far as one Mark not having any appreciable value at the moment, some people are suggesting that it's not a bad thing to introduce Marking as something that mainly counts as reputation now, and gradually becomes currency over time. Lots of discussion in IRC going on about how we want to approach that at the start. Plus it's not like you can't just mark something you like with thousands of Marks if you deem that it's earned them.

[Chronikka]

Whilst I admire all the effort and dedication going into the coin and the getmarked project (so much that I actually donated to the project), can someone please explain to me why?  At the moment, one whole Bitmark is worth less than 6 cents, a Mark is worth 1/1000th of that, less than I spent on electrons to type this post.

Is the time being well spent?  I can understand the challenge of creating getmarked from an idealistic point of view but if getting marked has no value, it will not be adopted.  Either the value of a Mark has to be increased compared to a Bitmark or the value of a Bitmark has to increase or preferably both to make the project feasible.  Has anyone done a cost to benefit comparison?  Would the time at the moment be better spent promoting the coin?  After all, getmarked was never part of the original plan, it is an afterthought.  A good one, I'll admit, but an afterthought. 

Current plan: Do something really clever, hope people like it and the coin becomes accepted and valuable.

My plan: Create a stable and workable coin (as per the original idea) and then add something to make it even more appealing.

Isn't the coin stable already? It works to store value and send transactions. What more should the currency do? I think you are confusing stability of the coin with stability of the price.

We have already reached the point of adding more to make the coin more appealing. The coin functions like it should, there is nothing to stabilize. Getmarked is the first major project being taken on to promote usage of Bitmark. If you have another idea then promote it here.

[coinsolidation]

John and others, thank you for your continued support, I hope I can address any concerns you may have.

First let me say that John's plan is shared by all, and then immediately get to the crux of the matter:

Stable Growth: 0 premine, 0 instamine, 0 IPO, 0 artificial inflation - Natural Growth and Adoption. This isn't about short term profit, any value given to the Bitmark will be a reflection of it's adoption and usefulness over time

The first part is handled already you must agree. A confusion may be that we speak of value differently, here is the dictionary definition - given here as it is useful, not to patronize

noun
1. the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.
2. principles or standards of behaviour; one's judgement of what is important in life.

verb
1. estimate the monetary worth of.
2. consider (someone or something) to be important or beneficial; have a high opinion of.

I would suggest that you are looking at verb 1, and we are working on the other definitions, which will in turn increase the value you refer to.

We have defined a Mark to be a token which represents all of these things. The process of marking associates value with the tokens, over time the tokens come to reflect that value.

At this time, 2,700 Bitmarks have been given to the foundation, 350 to the designer of our logo, and consequently 1,350 to me personally. Each of those reflect the value we seek to capture.

The rest have been held or traded according to the 'estimated monetary worth' of them, the basis of most other crypto currencies you will see. For Bitmark each token is perfectly average, below the inflated currencies and above the valueless ones. It puts an estimated current worth on the project, the cap of all tokens, to be between $10k and $40k, which is both fair and reasonable for where we currently stand.

Do we work hard to ensure that our tokens come to represent value, or do we work less hard to give a temporary perception they have some inflated unearned value for a time?

Regarding some other points raised.
1. Our definition of stability is already achieved.
2. Our project is growing in value, here is our team working, as a measurement what we have achieved in the last week, and as another measurement check the network hashrate.

John, you ask the following question

Whilst I admire all the effort and dedication going into the coin and the getmarked project (so much that I actually donated to the project), can someone please explain to me why?

I sincerely hope that text above helps you answer this for yourself, if it does not please do ask further so that we can seek to clarify. I must however qualify that with our ethos "This isn't about short term profit, any value given to Bitmark will be a reflection of it's adoption and usefulness over time".

Warmest Regards,

Mark

[bitcoinwonders010]

27.58million coins max