[ANN] Swarm Fund 1.0 - [OFFLINE THREAD]

[merockstar]

voting no.

having a giant portion of coins in limbo is unacceptable to me as well.


edit: counterwallet informs me that the NO vote address from the e-mail is not a valid Bitcoin address?

edit again: I see what happened. the addresses in the e-mail are all caps, and the blockchain is case sensitive. anyone running into this should get the correct address from here: http://blog.swarmcorp.com/2014/06/29/swarm-proposal-1/

props to counterwallet for not allowing me to burn my vote coins.

[1714848223]

1714848223

[1714848223]

1714848223

[1714848223]

1714848223

[sparta_cuss]

@fractastical, With a "NO" vote, I assume your team will be developing the software even while you continue fundraising, no?  

Not really, fundraising is very time intensive and with a NO vote I will probably spend most of the time up until the 20th on marketing/fundraising/PR. If we get a YES vote I will spend the next week just developing the product, hopefully with a working prototype by the 10th of July.

I'm actually quite tired of fundraising so I hope people vote YES.

I think I will vote "YES" unless I can be convinced otherwise.

I want to see a product, and I am, honestly, less concerned with shares that are out there in the ether than I am with having a viable product that will bring in new potential investors/users. I appreciate the importance of taking care of initial investors, but this is not even an alpha product. So far Swarm does not even have a whitepaper. So what, exactly, are we investing in? At this point, this project is susceptible to the "vaporware" insult that is thrown at it.

To put it another way: When I worked in a pool hall in North Carolina, the guys would sit around and talk about how good they were and who could beat who, etc. It was a lot of fun, but with a serious undertone. At some point, one of the guys would lose patience and say to one of the jaw-boners, "Do it, then talk about it." And either the other guy would have to put up his money and play, or shut the hell up. So let's do it, then talk about it.

Or convince me otherwise.

[Bonobo]

I voted YES.  Reasons being:

1. I want to see a product sooner rather than later.

2. It is apparent that the SWARM developers would prefer a YES vote and I believe they will serve my interests better if they can follow their preferred plan

3. I understand that another vote will take place before a further funding round takes place or the remaining SwarmPre is distributed.

[IamNotSure]

I don't get it

How much SWARM per SWARMPRE will be distributed if YES is voted ?

How much SWARM will be in limbo for "future rounds of funding" ?

How much SWARM will "Swarm Reserve" be ?

How could 4500 BTC not be enough ?

[fractastical]

How much SWARM per SWARMPRE will be distributed if YES is voted ?

1 to 1.

How much SWARM will be in limbo for "future rounds of funding" ?

68,000,000

How much SWARM will "Swarm Reserve" be ?

8,000,000

How could 4500 BTC not be enough ?

Depends on what you are trying to do. Look at the funding rounds for something like Square for example. Started with $10M, then $27.5M, then $100M, then $200+M. These are the sort of amounts we will need to eventually raise if we are going to build a global cryptoequity service.


 

[IamNotSure]

How much SWARM per SWARMPRE will be distributed if YES is voted ?

1 to 1.

ok, I thought the 24,000,000 SWARM were to be divided proportiaonly between the SWARMPRE holders at the end of the fundraise.

I don't know where I've read that if only 12.000.000 SWARMPRE are sold in the first round, every SWARMPRE would yield 2 SWARM.

Thanks for the info, I know enough to cast my vote

[fractastical]

How much SWARM per SWARMPRE will be distributed if YES is voted ?

1 to 1.

ok, I thought the 24,000,000 SWARM were to be divided proportiaonly between the SWARMPRE holders at the end of the fundraise.

I don't know where I've read that if only 12.000.000 SWARMPRE are sold in the first round, every SWARMPRE would yield 2 SWARM.

Thanks for the info, I know enough to cast my vote

Sorry, I misunderstood your question. You are correct, in a YES vote the 24,000,000 SWARM will be divided proportionally to SWARMPRE holders. We anticipate that all 24,000,000 SWARMPRE will be sold, but if not the scenario you describe will happen.  For example, if we sell only 12,000,000 SWARMPRE then every SWARMPRE holder will get 2 SWARM.

[mozurt]

Will Swarmcoin eventually be traded on one of the exchanges?

[IamNotSure]

Sorry, I misunderstood your question. You are correct, in a YES vote the 24,000,000 SWARM will be divided proportionally to SWARMPRE holders. We anticipate that all 24,000,000 SWARMPRE will be sold, but if not the scenario you describe will happen.  For example, if we sell only 12,000,000 SWARMPRE then every SWARMPRE holder will get 2 SWARM.

Ok, vote casted.

Pay attention that the 68,000,000 SWARM in limbo should be stored publicly and not moved unless a future round is issued, unless you'll be accused of "premine", espacially if  SWARM is listed on centrlized exchnage after the 20th

[fractastical]

Pay attention that the 68,000,000 SWARM in limbo should be stored publicly and not moved unless a future round is issued, unless you'll be accused of "premine", espacially if  SWARM is listed on centrlized exchnage after the 20th

Agreed.

[fractastical]

Will Swarmcoin eventually be traded on one of the exchanges?

We have had some preliminary conversations about this. I assume it will happen within the next two months.

[mishax1]

Haven't seen this been answered here so I'll ask again,

What is the XCP/Swarm rate from the IPO and how does it calculated ? Is a fixed amount ? Is calculated by the market price ?

[Malibusparky]

Another reason I do not like this proposal is lets say swarm ends phase 1 and starts development. Now you are ready for phase 2 of fundraising. You said you would put it to a vote and lets say majority votes no. But you guys at swarm understand better than the investors in the necessity of more funds to make swarm into a global powerhouse far bigger than any investor can foresee. So you put swarm's fate in the hands of our votes in a decision that could make or break swarm with people who aren't necessarily capable of making that decision? So now no further fundraising because we voted no. What do you do then? Again this vote was a bad idea. Stick to the original plan. At least that way there are no coins in limbo and everyone knows for sure all fundraising is done and all coin distribution is final instead of a confusing limbo status.

[rockhoward]

Malibusparky makes some interesting points however let's consider what happens in real world corporate governance. Here the shareholders approve a board of directors and the corporate officers must convince that board that a new stock offering makes sense. In this case, Swarm's corporate officers are simply bypassing the board and going directly to the existing backers.

Doing things in this way is not all that different from normal corporate governance. I will not attempt to make a value judgement on whether it is better or worse. Like most things, there are tradeoffs. However personally I think that trusting in the wisdom of crowds, especially crowds with a direct stake in the endeavor, is not an unreasonable approach.

This vote also, as a side effect, demonstrates one of the cooler capabilities of the crypto-asset-based approach to corporate backing which is the ability to conduct an adhoc vote of the backers. Very cool.

The whole idea of using crypto-asset-based crowdfunding instead of something like kickstarter is to give everyone involved more flexibility in how the endeavor unfolds. The backers can hold, sell or spend their asset while the issuers can alter their mix of product offerings/discounts, conduct buybacks or conduct additional offerings as warranted by circumstances. The Swarm team came up with a financing plan but now have decided that they want to alter that plan in order to simplify their story and thereby enhance their chances of a successful initial offering. I say fine to that.

[Malibusparky]

Malibusparky makes some interesting points however let's consider what happens in real world corporate governance. Here the shareholders approve a board of directors and the corporate officers must convince that board that a new stock offering makes sense. In this case, Swarm's corporate officers are simply bypassing the board and going directly to the existing backers.

Doing things in this way is not all that different from normal corporate governance. I will not attempt to make a value judgement on whether it is better or worse. Like most things, there are tradeoffs. However personally I think that trusting in the wisdom of crowds, especially crowds with a direct stake in the endeavor, is not an unreasonable approach.

This vote also, as a side effect, demonstrates one of the cooler capabilities of the crypto-asset-based approach to corporate backing which is the ability to conduct an adhoc vote of the backers. Very cool.

The whole idea of using crypto-asset-based crowdfunding instead of something like kickstarter is to give everyone involved more flexibility in how the endeavor unfolds. The backers can hold, sell or spend their asset while the issuers can alter their mix of offerings, conduct buybacks or conduct additional offerings as warranted by circumstances. The Swarm team came up with a financing plan but now have decided that they want to alter that plan in order to simplify their story and thereby enhance their chances of a successful initial offering. I say fine to that.

Everything done so far including the voting is a fantastic preview of what swarm will be like as well as the future of crypto finance. I am just concerned that swarmpre holders have no idea what it will take to get swarm off to the right start compared to the swarm founders themselves. I fully expect lots of voting and such as is the nature of this project when swarm is an actual product with initial funding already taken care of. I just really dislike the limbo of coins aspect of the yes vote. Perhaps in my mind I'm thinking its a long time frame. If the development of swarm and potential second round of fundraising is completed and final swarm distribution all finalizes within say 4 months then I think it is fine with people who think like me. @fractastical do you have an estimate of how long this process will take? Thanks

[fractastical]

Wanted to announce that we also have an open document where anyone can leave (hopefully helpful) critical feedback. Obviously we won't act on all of these immediately, but we do hope we can act on most all eventually. 

[fractastical]

So you put swarm's fate in the hands of our votes in a decision that could make or break swarm with people who aren't necessarily capable of making that decision?

Taking a bunch of yokels who settled in the new world and letting them construct their government from scratch was an experiment with a lot of downside risk. As it turns out, the folks who let them do this later regretted it and sent their red-coated troops to enforce the "proper order."

It didn't work. It turned out that the experimental version evolved much more quickly and proved more resilient than the top-down command and control version.

That's what I expect to happen here. Where there is risk there is also opportunity.

[fractastical]

@fractastical do you have an estimate of how long this process will take? Thanks

Less than four months.

[Malibusparky]

Some good feedback from community members and well put responses from fractastical has swayed me to the yes side. I am as excited as I was when I first decided to buy swarmpre. The future looks bright...... I gotta wear shades.

[fractastical]

Some good feedback from community members and well put responses from fractastical has swayed me to the yes side. I am as excited as I was when I first decided to buy swarmpre. The future looks bright...... I gotta wear shades.

You should take a picture with the shades and post it