NastyFans: The Bitcoin Enthusiast Fan Club (est. 2012)

[silverfuture]

Nice disaster aversion OgNasty! Lol @ plasticAiredale. Hold strong spartans, I mean nastyfans. THIS IS BITCOIN!

[1714007087]

1714007087

[1714007087]

1714007087

[1714007087]

1714007087

[1714007087]

1714007087

[1714007087]

1714007087

[Squirrel Dearing]

OGNasty, be sure to check your smoke alarms regularly! Only you can prevent mine fires!

That actually isn't a bad idea.  I wonder if there's an easy way to rig a smoke alarm to a circuit breaker...

Hmm.. Sounds like a job for Arduino!

[kroneko]

Jeez sorry to hear that!  I was unfortunate/lucky to have been around a 60 gh psu when it went, just gave off a smell of ozone and the miner's fan went off - five minutes later I had another power supply plugged in and was back up and running.  Either way, glad to hear you and everything at your place is safe!

[OgNasty]

Jeez sorry to hear that!  I was unfortunate/lucky to have been around a 60 gh psu when it went, just gave off a smell of ozone and the miner's fan went off - five minutes later I had another power supply plugged in and was back up and running.  Either way, glad to hear you and everything at your place is safe!

Thanks.  Even with all the fans and ventilation, the house still smells slightly of ozone. On the plus side, Butterfly Labs contacted me today and said they will be shipping 3 new power supplies and I don't even need to return the dead ones.

[nonnakip]

1 poll closed

[member opinion] increase percentage of donations for fundraising
     25%: 1425 (34.4%)
     50%: 833 (20.1%)
     75%: 1839 (44.3%)
     100%: 50 (1.2%)
     abstain: 18102
     RESULT: WE WILL CONSIDER INCREASING FUNDRAISING DONATIONS TO 75%

[nonnakip]

1 poll opened

[policy change] temporarily increase donations for fundraising to 75%

The results of member opinion poll show 25% and 75% as clear favorites. This means policy changes to 75% or stays same (25%).

The new poll is to change policy.

[CumpsD]

Tricky one, 34+20% voted for less than 75%

Would they now choose between 75% or leave it unchanged at 25%

[btcboston]

According to current nastyfans rules, we would need a 75% majority to vote for the 75% option in order to implement the change, correct?

"for a poll choice to result in a action there must be at least a three-fourths majority for that poll choice (seats owned by a membership in suspension have no voting rights and are not counted)"

[maqifrnswa]

According to current nastyfans rules, we would need a 75% majority to vote for the 75% option in order to implement the change, correct?

"for a poll choice to result in a action there must be at least a three-fourths majority for that poll choice (seats owned by a membership in suspension have no voting rights and are not counted)"

polls are non-binding, just consulations

[Carnth]

polls are non-binding, just consulations

The previous pool was to get member opinion.
This poll is binding and to actually change the donations for fundraising.

[silverfuture]

Yes, and keep in mind that this is only until our debt is paid. Once the debt is gone, we can go back to 25% retained.  The recent break in the price has been good for us both on the mining front and concerning our debt.  We should be in good position for the next epic bubble if we have our debts paid and a some coin to save before it comes. It's likely to happen again sooner than anyone thinks.

[nonnakip]

Distribution 276103 is complete. Thanks for the donations!

[nonnakip]

According to current nastyfans rules, we would need a 75% majority to vote for the 75% option in order to implement the change, correct?

Correct. From member opinion poll we see 65.6% in favor of 50% or more. This also is not enough for majority. If current poll does not pass we can consider a smaller increase.

[kroneko]

Received my 1 oz. coin tonight!   I'm really happy with it - the pictures Nasty posted don't do it justice. 

[smooth]

Is there someplace on the web site where the unpaid donations (those below the payout threshold in settings) can be viewed? I can't find that.

[nonnakip]

Is there someplace on the web site where the unpaid donations (those below the payout threshold in settings) can be viewed? I can't find that.

I work on that feature. It will be visible on home page.

[Yogafan00000]

Yes, and keep in mind that this is only until our debt is paid. Once the debt is gone, we can go back to 25% retained.  The recent break in the price has been good for us both on the mining front and concerning our debt.  We should be in good position for the next epic bubble if we have our debts paid and a some coin to save before it comes. It's likely to happen again sooner than anyone thinks.

+1

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[smooth]

Yes, and keep in mind that this is only until our debt is paid. Once the debt is gone, we can go back to 25% retained.  The recent break in the price has been good for us both on the mining front and concerning our debt.  We should be in good position for the next epic bubble if we have our debts paid and a some coin to save before it comes. It's likely to happen again sooner than anyone thinks.

+1

I couldn't have said it better myself.

I still oppose. 75% is too much and will reduce donation payouts drastically and hurt seat values. The debt is not in and of itself harmful, and especially the idea of paying off "all" debt is misguided. The market cap of the group (see post 1) is over 1200 BTC which is more than 3x the total debt. This is not an unhealthy debt ratio for a business like mining. As we have seen in the past several weeks bitcoin is not always deflationary (in fact at present and for the forseeable future it is massively inflationary, with 3600 BTC being "printed" out of thin air every day), which was part of the argument against using debt. If we had paid off the debt at $1200/BTC, we would be much worse off today.

It is unfortunate that the debt holders have been holding the bag longer than perhaps expected, but they were told up front what the debt was being used for and how it was to be paid off. They took a risk that mining using pre-ordered gear would pay off (in BTC) less and more slowly than expected, which is exactly what happened.

[silverfuture]

Yes, and keep in mind that this is only until our debt is paid. Once the debt is gone, we can go back to 25% retained.  The recent break in the price has been good for us both on the mining front and concerning our debt.  We should be in good position for the next epic bubble if we have our debts paid and a some coin to save before it comes. It's likely to happen again sooner than anyone thinks.

+1

I couldn't have said it better myself.

I still oppose. 75% is too much and will reduce donation payouts drastically and hurt seat values. The debt is not in and of itself harmful, and especially the idea of paying off "all" debt is misguided. The market cap of the group (see post 1) is over 1200 BTC which is more than 3x the total debt. This is not an unhealthy debt ratio for a business like mining. As we have seen in the past several weeks bitcoin is not always deflationary (in fact at present and for the forseeable future it is massively inflationary, with 3600 BTC being "printed" out of thin air every day), which was part of the argument against using debt. If we had paid off the debt at $1200/BTC, we would be much worse off today.

It is unfortunate that the debt holders have been holding the bag longer than perhaps expected, but they were told up front what the debt was being used for and how it was to be paid off. They took a risk that mining using pre-ordered gear would pay off (in BTC) less and more slowly than expected, which is exactly what happened.

Low seat value doesn't mean much unless you are trying to liquidate seats. A low seat price also makes nastyfans more accessible to new or less rich potential participants, not to mention a better entry point for newly minted seats.  3600 BTC per day inflation is a constant, yet year to year BTC has only grown massively in value. It is almost impossible to predict short and mid term movements but I think in that type of environment, debt has the potential to ruin us if we aren't careful. A very high BTC value coupled with a massive difficulty increase does have the potential to be an insurmountable challenge.  Having btc savings (and the access to capital if neccessary) is a far better position to be in than in debt. Fiat debt would be the way to go forward unless we were absolutely sure the BTC price was going down over a protracted period.   We want any creditors to be happy and potentially willing to loan again  because of our excellent reputation.

[smooth]

Low seat value doesn't mean much unless you are trying to liquidate seats.

Hey, I don't know about you but I have a substantial investment in this club, and I don't want to see the seat prices drop. I don't want to see long term prospects hurt either, so we all want the same thing (I think).

It is almost impossible to predict short and mid term movements but I think in that type of environment, debt has the potential to ruin us if we aren't careful.

I actually agree with that but I don't see a 30% debt to equity ratio (both measured in BTC) as being careless at all. It's reflective of the debt being fairly secure as a function of expected future BTC revenues, and also of debt being used to fund purchases of capital equipment, of of which is quite responsible use of debt. Most of the outstanding debt is for equipment that hasn't even been delivered yet.

We want any creditors to be happy and potentially willing to loan again  because of our excellent reputation.

I agree with that too. I believe when the next generation of miners starts arriving and the hash rate increases several fold, the debt should start getting repaid at a faster rate, using the current ratio. The current in-service equipment is aging and shouldn't be expected to yield that much. Trying to pay off future generation equipment with proceeeds from obsolescent hardware a bit of trying to get blood from a stone.