Hmm...not return/make excuses. So first you say its Keiretsu, I demolish that. Then you accuse me of "not understanding your grand plans". I say ok, answer three questions. Again you avoid answering questions and make up some BS story. Let me take your own post apart:
"Please do not just make up something and present it like a fact.
txids 13869109530637325948 and 18177681832696022121 are for 500 and 24500 NXTprivacy assets from my personal acct NXT-DE2F-W76R-GL25-HMFPR into the BTCD donation acct NXT-EVK5-KLZV-NHSZ-H4Z7R
So you falsely accuse me of taking assets from the JLH account all the while pretending you are being factual."
The JLH issuing account is - NXT-DE2F-W76R-GL25-HMFPR, which I guess was the JLH account. But now you say its your personal account. As you say I am "making" things up, so:
1. Why use a personal account as the issuing account? I have checked your other assets InstaDex and sharkfund0, these werent done from this account?
2. If this is your personal account, pray where you are holding jl777's coins/assets? The account name? Can you state the facts for me please?
The account that issues an asset is simply the account that issues the asset. Sometimes I issue an asset from the operation asset's account. For example, the SuperNET acct NXT-MRBN-8DFH-PFMK-A4DBM is the one that issued the TOKEN asset 15641806960898178066. I issued the jl777hodl asset from my jl777 account because it made sense to me to do so. There is no requirement for this, for some strange reason I felt that issuing the jl777hodl asset from the jl777 account was a reasonable thing to do. What about this is unreasonable to you and makes you write in a accusatory tone. All you have to do is ask me about this, without couching it in terms to make me look like I am doing something unethical. Now, since the JLH (jl777hodl abbreviated) is going to be holding assets I certainly dont want to be commingling anything into it, so I created an acct just for this purpose and this is described in the asset description. this acct is NXT-2AHU-UXZW-K9Q2-HENLW.
So it seems that you started with the conclusion that I am a crook and are searching for "facts" that fit this theory. This is bad scientific method. The proper way is to form the theory that jl777 is a crook and then gather data to see if it confirms or denies this fact. So far all we have is confirmation that you mistakenly assumed that my personal acct was the JLH acct and the fact that I am using my personal acct for doing personal things like donating $33,000 USD worth of NXTprivacy to the BTCD community.
BBR and the sharkfund0 -- "Boolberry’s market cap stands at around $400,000 and a 10 percent share – already obtained by sharkfund0, most of which will be going into the SuperNET core – would cost only 80 BTC." -- from your pdf. Now how can one read this, tell me? Two ways:
1. You are investing coins from sharkfund0 into supernet, market rate or not, doesn't matter. Effectively propping Supernet with watever btc (4k BTC, was it?) sharkfund0 has. A market news of Supernet raising say 7k BTC (doesn't matter if it contains 4k BTC from sharkfund0, is a market moving news, isnt?)
2. You are investing a percentage of the sharkfund0 into supernet (keeping in with the risk mitigation and all). Say 40% of sharkfund0 --- that wud amount to only effective 4% of BBR being invested. Wouldn't it?
Now as you clarified (or provided proof
) that you will be investing your personal sharkfund0. Fair enough. How much do you hold? And how much of BBR wud it represent? Not 10% for sure.
The text you quote is from an older version, cassius wrote the document and I missed the potential confusion, so as soon as somebody else pointed this out we modified it. If this text is still in the current version then I must have made a mistake in the uploading. I was having many connection problems that day (and most days). So I apologize for this error, I believe it has been corrected and you have an older doc. as far as my percentage of sharkfund, you can just look in the acct:
http://nxtreporting.com/?a=NXT-SQ9J-JCAN-8XVY-5XN7K&c=USDI have 521 sharkfund0 right now. I used to have 800+, but in order to pay for core assets held by the various operating assets, I had to swap a all my NXTventure, JLH and a big chunk of my sharkfund. I did most transfers within a few minutes, but there was one that had some hours gap. I forget the exact swap, but half was pending for some few hours. Now I am rounding, so when I see 6989495 or something like that I round it to 7 mil. It could be that for some marketrate swaps I am guilty of some fractional gains due to this rounding. If this is an issue, please specify which swaps I am guilty of having benefited from and I will refund the difference. Though, it would only seem fair that in the cases the rounding error went against me, I should get a credit, so I ask that you calculate all these roundings and the net difference between myself and the various assets, and this I will refund. Let me know if you think that is fair.
Considering your confusions, maybe the NXTsharks acct NXT-ZWW7-PSXW-89TR-AA67Z is not known to you. This is the acct that issued the sharkfund0 and if you look at it you will see that it has 8'625.0026 sharkfund0 assets. But these are assets that it has issued and not sold. You can also find out that a total of 10000 sharkfund0 were issued, so subtracting them we get 1374.9974 sharkfund0 which makes my 512 to be 37.236434047075% of the total. So if all these sharkfund0 goes into the SuperNET, then 3.7% of BBR is in the SuperNET. However, the actual total is higher as the other assets that I swapped the sharkfund0 with are having more of the sharkfund0, so we will get more contributions indirectly. i dont have a way to estimate the exact figure, due to uncertainity as to the total core assets to be put into the SuperNET, but it will probably end up being around 5%. If the 10% amount is something that you are feeling strongly that is needed, this could be solved by using the proceeds to directly purchase the 5%
I have a theory for Mgw but lets not talk about it as it will piss you off more.
Since I own very little MGW, you will have to be quite creative to make me look like I am being unethical after I gave away about half of MGW to around a dozen people and sold most of the rest at half the market price. There is the 10% in JLH and I have some small amount I believe, but I think I am controlling less than 5% of MGW now. The way I determined the market price was by making a price ladder for MGW and the sales of anything at 5 was gone very fast. Then when it got to 7, it still happened, but not so fast, so I took the conservative number of 5 as the market price, even though I could have justified 7. Then I reduced it to 2.5 and sold it in small batches. To be fair to the people that "overpaid", I calculated the amount they should have gotten if the price was 2.5 vs. what they actually paid and transferred this to each account. [this does sound very familiar!]. Since you probably dont believe me about this, please research the trade history of MGW.
That all said, you say I declined your offer to do any real work. I already asked you some questions. Let me repeat them again:
a. What is your holding pattern in each of the assets? This will clarify how much of your one asset is owned by another asset. ie answer the ponzi query clearly. --> Or do you want me to dig up info which you should be having already?
You are using a word that is indicating fraud, this I take offense at. Now the ponzi is an unsustainable system where the existing owners are paid by the new buyers and the only way this can keep working is to always get new buyers. I didnt bother to answer your accusation of fraud as this is nonsensical when applied to my assets. I am not selling the asset promising returns of X% and funding this X% return by selling more assets. Since you continue to accuse me of fraud with no basis, I suggest you can do your own homeworks to fund out which of my assets are owning which of the other assets using the blockchain. I have better things to do than make reports when the reports are already there for everybody to see. So, one asset owning another is not a ponzi and yes you should "dig" up this info because I dont do GUI. If the data is already there for everyone what use is it for me to waste my time on it?
b. Even if you are consider these linked assets as Keiretsu, how do you mitigate the single point of risk - YOU. Not only from a scam point of view but also from unforeseen events too - say an IRL issues, many of us have those. --> This is more out of concern for you and people both. But fuck it, why have a contingency plan when you are the great jl777 --- no one should question you.
c. If your answer to above is "escrow", then who/what will be holding the "escrow". What are the terms? I have gone through the pdf and don't see the escrow terms.
I have written my contingency plan and it is in this thread and since you continue you accusatory tone even after my continue requests to use this "innocent until proven" guilty philosophy and also that you have only demonstrated my generous donations and your lack of understanding of how the NXT assets are working (this is ok, but you should understand the facts before jumping to conclusions). I have stated that this thread contains the latest up to date info, this is an obvious thing as this is the official SuperNET thread, where else would the latest info be? So, generally speaking I am getting direct access to 1% of the funds, which is about 30 BTC at current levels and in this case putting in 300BTC, so I would be losing access to ~270 BTC. For this, I dont thing any contingency plan is needed as if something is happening to me, the SuperNET is gaining 270 BTC. For the other 99%, I have stated that we are going to have to find the escrow methods during the fund raising process, which is 2 to 4 weeks from now. Since I am not getting access to most of the funds, I though this would be acceptable.
The wrinkle was that an unexpected amount of NXT came in via AE (20 million NXT!) and I have had personal access to this 1600 BTC all day. You can see that it is all still there. I could have just disappeared with 1600 BTC, yet I continue to tolerate all these questions which could have been asked in a respectful manner that I feel I have earned. I think that I have at least earned the right to not be interrogated like some crook, but rather just asked factual questions without biasing the reader by using words like "ponzi" when it has no behavior like ponzi that I can even think of. Anyway, you probably didnt even bother to read the post I made about finding the NXT community escrows for this 20 million. Since I figured the people like you will feel that I am a flight risk with all this NXT, I thought it best to get it taken care of as soon as possible. Just think, 1600 BTC just there and all I have to do is go send NXT and its gone. Does it affect your opinion at all that I could have already taken all this money, but havent and instead am spending all this effort answering your accusatories? The community is making a discussion on who in the community should be holding this and I am not participating in it so as not to be accussed of tampering with the selection process.
The process to get money out of escrow is described, but I know you are kind of lazy and dont like to do much reading so I will repeat it. For the previously defined (and updated by this thread) uses of the funds that were prior to the first funds being received, a post to this thread that conforms to these defined uses will be all that is required. Then one of the trustees posts that they approve it and then they get confirmed as the one to pay, then they pay. This avoids the possibility of double payment. the procedure is open for all to see. If anything suspicious is happening, I am assuming somebody would protest and then we will use common sense to resolve such matters. I do not have to be specifically involved in these things if it is following the right procedures, but I would think that most trustees would wait for confirmation from me to prevent some random person trying to spend the escrowed funds. All the procedures are not spelled out as SuperNET is not a fiat based corporation, it is a crypto organization. We will use common sense and logic to resolve things.
Now if you had read the official thread you would have also seen that for non-standard expenses, there is a decentralized voting that will be used to approve or decline the spending request. There are three threshold levels 50%, 2/3rds and 90%, the threshold needed is specified in the voting info. if there is some controversy over this, we have a majority wins prevote for the three thresholds and the ones with the most weight is the threshold that is used. The voting weight is the number of SuperNXT assets one has.
The proposing of the vote is something that will probably need to be filtered and at first I imagine that I would be the one to formally propose a funding vote. However, there is no reason this has to be me, as soon as somebody has some good ideas for funding, they should post it here. If I am sensing that the community is divided over the issue I would be compelled to hold a vote. Now this function is really something anybody can do. You just have to notice that either everybody is agreeing or not. So this is one task I look forward to have somebody else do.
It has been quite apparent from the syscoin, another IPO I bought into, that the escrow in crypto space is corrupt. slex has been changing terms for that escrow as and when he likes. worst part, his contention was wallet and blockchain, even in non-working form was enough for him to hold the coins. --> If I remember correctly you were still looking for escrow options. Things weren't finalised before the IPO kicked off. Now can we get some clarity?
If you read this thread and I think the other investors would prefer that you spend an hour reading the thread than me spending two hours responding to questions that would have been answered had you read the thread, you will find that the method for escrow requires that one of the distributed escrow holders accepts the spending request and presumably requiring the appropriate documentation. In cases where there are sensitive details the common sense thing to do is PM the sensitive details and redact the public post. If the spending request is appropriate, the trustee posts his approval and then gets a confirmation to spend. this is a treasurer function and another task that I do not need to be involved in, though the original request for funding is probably something I will always be doing as this is of critical importance, to know where the money is going. We are in the process of doing this for the NXT. I also posted in this thread, but nobody has followed up on it yet. In any case the amount of NXT raised is surprisingly a bit more than half the total so it makes sense to take care of that first. If we cannot find the BTC trustees, I am sure we can have the NXT trustees also hold some BTC too.
I am also planning on using companies like Xapo and Coinbase for some portion, bter for another, but for this we have 2 to 4 weeks yet to solve and not knowing the magnitude of the offering, it is not possible to make any coherent plans. I would not have predicted 26 million NXT would come in the first day, so any plan made would have been wrong. I like to be efficient and solve the problems that need solving and using my experience, judgement and common sense to figure out the best thing to do.
Another example, regardless of all the planning, anything complicated will never go as planned. During the opening both in the NXT AE and on all the bter markets except for the BTCD one, people bid huge amounts and way above the official price. I have predicted SuperNET would raise around 10K BTC, and many have called me crazy, but since the only people that knew of it are small crypto community with just one week from ANN and on a saturday, I did not expect any giant volumes. Certainly not that the first hour would have more volume than etherium's first hour. Here are the numbers. 10,000 in 28 days is 357 BTC per day, spread across five markets we are looking at about 3 BTC per hour average. Of course the largest market would have more than the average, lets say 10 BTC per hour. The parameters were set to 10 BTC per minute per trading pair. So this is 60 times the average rate and it turned out I was off by nearly a factor of 100 as I think we got more than 1000 BTC right at the very beginning. It was quite chaotic and kind of a blur now. Anyway, this combined with allowing the resale of TOKEN (based on user requests) allowed some shrewd buyers to flip it at 2x or more instantly.
This made for some very happy flippers, but for many unhappy buyers who didnt check the official price and just bought what was on the orderbook. There were some of the opinion that the buyer bid for it, so they got what they wanted, but I decided that the right thing to do was to issue some additional TOKEN to make it so all purchasers end up paying the official price. This was my mistake, so I offered to pay from my own pocket if the investors felt that they did not want to suffer from the slight dilution these compensations would cause. I dont have the exact figure but I believe the total dilution will be around 2000 TOKEN or 20 BTC, so if the investors decide they dont want to absorb this, then it comes out of my pocket, but I wont take it from the 30 BTC from the 1% as that is needed for the incidental costs and this is not what I meant by incidental costs for the 1%
This is how I work. I dont waste my time thinking about the zillion things that can happen and make a 1000 page document that will not even cover what is important anyway. That is fiat mentality where it is believe that the universe can be predicted and controlled. I believe it is better to be mentally fit and agile and be able to deal with anything that happens in a calm and logical way using common sense and compassion as a guide.
I am the anti-lawyer
James
