Proposal to Fork Mastercoin and Burn a portion of JR's immense stash.

[crazy_rabbit]

Mastercoin- the project that gave birth to the Bitcoin 2.0 Revolution, looks, by nearly any community judgements- to be dead.

For reasons too lengthy and depressing to mention, the project has managed to consistently snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Counterparty has now become the star of the Bitcoin 2.0 movement and rightly so. Had the Mastercoin foundation been a bit more farsighted and less greedy, perhaps it would have been Mastercoin building the future of Bitcoin 2.0 with Overstock, etc...

I have come to believe, as many others have, that the core problem at this point is that Mastercoin's founder, JR simply holds too many of the coins and has more then once wielded them to the great detriment of the market and the the project as a whole.

At this point Mastercoin's Foundation is essentially out of Money, having burned through what some say is nearly a million dollars, and most crucially having turn down out of pride the offer of counterparty's founders to collaborate.


As such I propose that if there is sufficient interest- we Fork Mastercoin with the purpose of either erasing the vast majority of JR's holdings, or selling them off with the intent of raising new funds for a new foundation or indeed to interest a new investor into the project.

Although Counterparty has clearly 'won' the 2.0 race when compared to Mastercoin, there still remains a future market of immense size to compete over. When Counterparties Medici project goes live, there will be a significant number of other individuals that will be interested in building a competitive product to Counterparty's Medici. I would say that this would be the opportunity for Mastercoin to shine, however no investor is going to commit to a project where essentially an enormous portion of the wealth would simply go to one person- no matter how brilliant and responsible for the project. The over concentration of coin wealth in JR's wallets has destroyed the community and essentially the project.

What is the communities response? The topic is self-moderated for obvious reasons, and as much as I have time for, I'll delete off topic comments quite vigorously.  This isn't a "Side chains/Etherum/Counterparty rulezzzzzz" thread. Please stay on topic- debating the pro's and con's of forking Mastercoin and starting over.

[1715628886]

1715628886

[1715628886]

1715628886

[1715628886]

1715628886

[1715628886]

1715628886

[TinEye]

You lost all credibility with the Maidsafe IPO. Instead of trying to revive it, join Counterparty and help it get better, or start a different, innovative project.

When Mastercoin started I thought it was a good idea, but as you say the greed of the big holders destroyed it.

[crazy_rabbit]

You lost all credibility with the Maidsafe IPO. Instead of trying to revive it, join Counterparty and help it get better, or start a different, innovative project.

When Mastercoin started I thought it was a good idea, but as you say the greed of the big holders destroyed it.

I don't disagree, but for example- Maidsafe is still delineated with Mastercoin, and as a project- that one still seems to be very much alive. If Mastercoin is just abandoned, so would be the Maidsafe tokens. So in some sense, we need to keep it alive to some degree.

Perhaps it would be possible to transition all those tokens to the counter-party protocol? 

[TinEye]

Perhaps it would be possible to transition all those tokens to the counter-party protocol? 

I think a snapshot can be taken, and all the addresses which hold the Maidafe tokens will be awarded the equivalent over XCP. The issue would be the exchanges, I am not sure what exchange besides Masterxchange trades the Maidsafe coins. If there are few exchanges it becomes easier to make them honor it.

It need not even have to go with Counterparty but can also utilise other platforms like NXT or Bitshares. In that case the transition would quite complicated, and may even be unfeasible.

I would like to see a new project built on top of Bitcoin to provide something different than Counterparty. Mastercoin is too similar, too far behind, and poorly distributed to make sense to carry on.

[CryptoPiero]

I like to collaborate if any effort is to be taken.

[crazy_rabbit]

Perhaps it would be possible to transition all those tokens to the counter-party protocol?  

I think a snapshot can be taken, and all the addresses which hold the Maidafe tokens will be awarded the equivalent over XCP. The issue would be the exchanges, I am not sure what exchange besides Masterxchange trades the Maidsafe coins. If there are few exchanges it becomes easier to make them honor it.

It need not even have to go with Counterparty but can also utilise other platforms like NXT or Bitshares. In that case the transition would quite complicated, and may even be unfeasible.

I would like to see a new project built on top of Bitcoin to provide something different than Counterparty. Mastercoin is too similar, too far behind, and poorly distributed to make sense to carry on.

Well forking it would be intended to address the problem of poor distribution. I agree it's far, far, behind, but it's not totally out of the race. There's no reason to think that in the future Counterpary will be the only version (of it's type). It's easy to imagine a competitor company entering the space and wanting to create it's own "Medici" type of platform. In my opinion it's a last ditch, hail mary type of move. Sure it might be dead to most people, but there are still a few of us who would like to see it survive.

As for moving to Counterparty for Maidsafe, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for them to do this. Indeed I would be surprised if they weren't already thinking about it.

[TinEye]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

[crazy_rabbit]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

Absolutely agree- although I'm tempted to think in this case we are faced with either a definitely dead project or a questionably dead project. We could fork it now because practically no one is using it. After all this time we only even have a Beta 0.0.8.2 that compiles only on linux. There are altcoins with joke names that are more prodigious.

Additionally- forking Mastercoin is very different then forking bitcoin. Mastercoin doesn't require anyone running a client in order for it to 'exist'. It's there in the blockchain. If only one person is happy to stay on the old Mastercoin their coins are just as secure as they always were. So it's not that we are forcibly withdrawing the hashpower of one blockchain to another, thus destroying the previous chain. We're simply choosing to recognize different tokens. Although the argument is worthwhile discussion. It really is not a nice precedent, but perhaps necessary.

[raskul]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

I'm of the mind that this is the most sensible advice.
Why instigate developing further, something which has already failed?

If the options are:

fork it and burn the stash
leave it and let that stash continue to have no value

i'd say the latter is the best option. Let it die.

[djm34]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

+1
and you will probably lose support from the exchange (however, I don't know anything about this kind of cryptocurrencies... so may-be in your case, since it is a lot more centralized...).
I and a few others attempted to fork talkcoin because the original dev was scamming the rest of us, the exchange didn't want to side with us as it was seen as an aggressive take over.
So you might just destroy the coin and end up with something nobody supports...

[crazy_rabbit]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

I'm of the mind that this is the most sensible advice.
Why instigate developing further, something which has already failed?

If the options are:

fork it and burn the stash
leave it and let that stash continue to have no value

i'd say the latter is the best option. Let it die.

We can't just let it die- MaidSafe is delineated with Mastercoin. That's a big multi-million dollar project, so we can't just let that die. BUT if nothing of value happens, it does endanger Maidsafe in that once an opportunity comes along to actually get out of Maidsafe because of lack of faith in Mastercoin, then people might abandon it in droves- which would be bad for an otherwise great project.

[crazy_rabbit]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

+1
and you will probably lose support from the exchange (however, I don't know anything about this kind of cryptocurrencies... so may-be in your case, since it is a lot more centralized...).
I and a few others attempted to fork talkcoin because the original dev was scamming the rest of us, the exchange didn't want to side with us as it was seen as an aggressive take over.
So you might just destroy the coin and end up with something nobody supports...

True, but I think few people would argue it could get too much worse than it already is. And possibly JR might see a compromise to rebuild the community.....maybe.....

[Cablez]

Are there any other high profile projects that would suffer from leaving things as is in addition to maidsafe?  The handling of mastercoin has been a lesson in what not to do but I don't know if forking to a mastercoin 2.0 is the right way especially since it appears now to be easy enough to port over to other protocols such as counterparty or etherium.

[TaunSew]

This seems more like desperation than a good idea.  I have seen many people holding bags asking for their dead coin to be revived and/or forked but it never works that way.

This was earlier in the year but I think the reason Mastercoin got a bad reputation was this big IPO and the fact that you would had made more money off Doge and NXT if you had bought those two in their first weeks.

[crazy_rabbit]

This seems more like desperation than a good idea.  I have seen many people holding bags asking for their dead coin to be revived and/or forked but it never works that way.

Desperation/good idea, probably a mix of both. Having been hanging out here since 2011 I've seen plenty of projects be revived + forked with good and bad results. It all depends on why and how you do it.

This was earlier in the year but I think the reason Mastercoin got a bad reputation was this big IPO and the fact that you would had made more money off Doge and NXT if you had bought those two in their first weeks.

Doge and NXT are separate things entirely and don't contribute anything of value back to Bitcoin. Mastercoin got involved to improve bitcoin, not create entirely new blockchains.

[jrmg]

I think best if Maidsafe give for shareholders possibility burn Maidsafe coins and get it back in Counterparty. I think can have Maidsafe in both platform  (different asset name in Counterparty)? Create same amount coins under Counterparty same time when users burn their mastercoin from address where they own privatekey and send Counterparty asset back.. (maybe manual process is only way, but if owners want that then i think it is best option) If over half of owners vote and move to Counterparty then you know what to do with own holdings... I own all msc, xcp and maidsafe and when following all projects its look like there is two parties who can be really happy together same time one continue making quiet dead Sry english hope can understand my point...  

[mishax1]

When you say forking do you mean to hand over the control of the project to an entirely different team ?

It's not that mastercoin is broken or something, their main problem as far as I can tell is really bad PR, and the fact that JR is bag holding and selling off his stash instead taking care of PR and building a strong community.

There were some bullshit projects published by Judith (which from what I see is the only voice mastercoin has to the public and she is just posting nonsense things like "ohh look another post by mastercoin i'm so exited".. ) , are any of them actually worth something ?  When it comes to mastercoin, I don't know if it's a new dead project or a multi-million ipo..

[mishax1]

I think best if Maidsafe give for shareholders possibility burn Maidsafe coins and get it back in Counterparty. I think can have Maidsafe in both platform  (different asset name in Counterparty)? Create same amount coins under Counterparty same time when users burn their mastercoin from address where they own privatekey and send Counterparty asset back.. (maybe manual process is only way, but if owners want that then i think it is best option) If over half of owners vote and move to Counterparty then you know what to do with own holdings... I own all msc, xcp and maidsafe and when following all projects its look like there is two parties who can be really happy together same time one continue making quiet dead Sry english hope can understand my point...  

Create some counterparty asset and burn msc for it ? Is that a joke ?   MSC's market cap is currently at 4500BTC   what would hold it's value over counterparty? (nothing..)

[jrmg]

I think best if Maidsafe give for shareholders possibility burn Maidsafe coins and get it back in Counterparty. I think can have Maidsafe in both platform  (different asset name in Counterparty)? Create same amount coins under Counterparty same time when users burn their mastercoin from address where they own privatekey and send Counterparty asset back.. (maybe manual process is only way, but if owners want that then i think it is best option) If over half of owners vote and move to Counterparty then you know what to do with own holdings... I own all msc, xcp and maidsafe and when following all projects its look like there is two parties who can be really happy together same time one continue making quiet dead Sry english hope can understand my point...  

Create some counterparty asset and burn msc for it ? Is that a joke ?   MSC's market cap is currently at 4500BTC   what would hold it's value over counterparty? (nothing..)

I mean burn Maidsafe coins and give same amount NewMaidsafe coins under counterparty.

[mishax1]

I think best if Maidsafe give for shareholders possibility burn Maidsafe coins and get it back in Counterparty. I think can have Maidsafe in both platform  (different asset name in Counterparty)? Create same amount coins under Counterparty same time when users burn their mastercoin from address where they own privatekey and send Counterparty asset back.. (maybe manual process is only way, but if owners want that then i think it is best option) If over half of owners vote and move to Counterparty then you know what to do with own holdings... I own all msc, xcp and maidsafe and when following all projects its look like there is two parties who can be really happy together same time one continue making quiet dead Sry english hope can understand my point...  

Create some counterparty asset and burn msc for it ? Is that a joke ?   MSC's market cap is currently at 4500BTC   what would hold it's value over counterparty? (nothing..)

I mean burn Maidsafe coins and give same amount NewMaidsafe coins under counterparty.

You are forgetting that Maidsafe has a decent amount of Mastercoins, I don't think they would just throw them away if they move to CP..

[Nxtblg]

Keep in mind too that forking off and killing somebody's stash sets a very dangerous precedent. You all may end up being marked forever as the ones who opened this particular door.

I would strongly advise against it for the sake of the entire Crypto space.

FYI, that precedent has already been set by Québecoin: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=708702.0

Granted that the invalidated coins were not part of the dev's personal holdings - they were earmarked for a five-stage airdrop - but there was some suspicion on that count.   

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

crazy_rabbit thank you for bringing this up.

I kinda feel lied to by the mastercoin people. At the beginning there was much talk about things like decentralized markets, and many other wonderful features.

In fact mastercoin was to ALWAYS have the advantage over any technology as they had the first mover advantage and the WILL to change and absorb new things the competitors are doing. But the problem lies in not what they say but what they do.

JR you and the Foundation should be fired for how you have treated the protocol.


I see the only alternative we have is to jump ship by burning our mastercoins/maidsafe to another chain. This way we leave JRs coins alone to play by themsleves. And to prevent JR from jumping with, we simply ban his coins addresses.

Then maybe when serious people like CIYAM bring serious proposals they don't get ignored because JR got his feelings hurt at bitcointalk.

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

I think the original problem was that they immediately had to setup the foundation and create all this bureaucratic bullshit when they should have been a small nimble coding attack force. The mastercoin foundation is too SLOW whereas Robby's team is fast and nimble.

The thing is, I really cared about this project. I never sold any of my exodus coins. In fact I don't give a damn if they go to zero. However, I'd like to avoid that if at all possible, but I am prepared to see them go to zero.

I think we holders of mastercoin and maidsafe collectively have power. If we choose to mass leave then JR and those left can play by themselves. So what options would a mass exodus of coin burning have?

1. We could pull a "reverse fork" (made that up) and burn our coins to an exact copy without JR
-a NEW Mastercoin 2.0

2. We could convince JR or force through threat of burning our coins and leaving, to significantly reduce his own stash by self burning them to a more reasonable level.

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

4. We burn to a new (uncreated) bitcoin 2.0 platform

5. We just leave and let mastercoin die and fade to oblivioin, and accept the losses.

[crazy_rabbit]

I think best if Maidsafe give for shareholders possibility burn Maidsafe coins and get it back in Counterparty. I think can have Maidsafe in both platform  (different asset name in Counterparty)? Create same amount coins under Counterparty same time when users burn their mastercoin from address where they own privatekey and send Counterparty asset back.. (maybe manual process is only way, but if owners want that then i think it is best option) If over half of owners vote and move to Counterparty then you know what to do with own holdings... I own all msc, xcp and maidsafe and when following all projects its look like there is two parties who can be really happy together same time one continue making quiet dead Sry english hope can understand my point... 

Create some counterparty asset and burn msc for it ? Is that a joke ?   MSC's market cap is currently at 4500BTC   what would hold it's value over counterparty? (nothing..)

I mean burn Maidsafe coins and give same amount NewMaidsafe coins under counterparty.

You are forgetting that Maidsafe has a decent amount of Mastercoins, I don't think they would just throw them away if they move to CP..

But at the same time- they are as worthless as ever, and if Mastercoin dies, they have a pretty big liability on their hands anyway. They would be better off moving forward with what BTC they have and writing off the MSC coins. At the moment any possible value of MSC is basically propped up on the potential of their project.

[crazy_rabbit]

I think the original problem was that they immediately had to setup the foundation and create all this bureaucratic bullshit when they should have been a small nimble coding attack force. The mastercoin foundation is too SLOW whereas Robby's team is fast and nimble.

The thing is, I really cared about this project. I never sold any of my exodus coins. In fact I don't give a damn if they go to zero. However, I'd like to avoid that if at all possible, but I am prepared to see them go to zero.

I think we holders of mastercoin and maidsafe collectively have power. If we choose to mass leave then JR and those left can play by themselves. So what options would a mass exodus of coin burning have?

1. We could pull a "reverse fork" (made that up) and burn our coins to an exact copy without JR
-a NEW Mastercoin 2.0

This was my initial thought.

2. We could convince JR or force through threat of burning our coins and leaving, to significantly reduce his own stash by self burning them to a more reasonable level.

This could also be a compromise, although I'm not sure if it would re-ignite a community enough to get people back onboard, or pull new people in. We could potentially sell this coins in a new crowdsale where the money raised would not go to JR or the existing foundation. But then of course....who does the money go to? That's a box of snakes for sure.

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

4. We burn to a new (uncreated) bitcoin 2.0 platform

I'm not personally up for that, as there's enough of these going around. Although we could 'restart' mastercoin from zero.

5. We just leave and let mastercoin die and fade to oblivioin, and accept the losses.

Well this is certainly the road we are on now, and as an original Exodus investor that would be sad to see- especially considering Maidsafe is built on Mastercoin.

[crazy_rabbit]

When you say forking do you mean to hand over the control of the project to an entirely different team ?

It's not that mastercoin is broken or something, their main problem as far as I can tell is really bad PR, and the fact that JR is bag holding and selling off his stash instead taking care of PR and building a strong community.

There were some bullshit projects published by Judith (which from what I see is the only voice mastercoin has to the public and she is just posting nonsense things like "ohh look another post by mastercoin i'm so exited".. ) , are any of them actually worth something ?  When it comes to mastercoin, I don't know if it's a new dead project or a multi-million ipo..

Ideally- members of the current 'team' could be convinced to come with us, although to be honest- I am totally in the dark about who is actually working on Mastercoin these days. Mostly everything is Judith in "biz-dev' and I gotta agree with you- some of those are some crazy bullshit projects. Some so bullshit it is embarrassing that they are even listed on the website as 'accomplishments'. You could start a lemonade stand at this point, take MSC and be listed in the "great things are happening with Mastercoin" updates.

But I don't want to be too harsh with Judith, at least she's reaching out and staying active. Or, well, keeping the lights on at least. If it wasn't for her we wouldn't hear anything from them.

[crazy_rabbit]

Another idea is we could potentially move Mastercoin to a SideChain, which might be an interesting idea.

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

***Sarcasm here******

We try and convince counterparty people to follow in the footsteps of Ripple and Bitshares

and combine the total amount of coins from CP and Mastercoin(minus jr of course)

Now with more total coins and XCP price we should see the marketcap explode higher.  It worked for ripple and bitshares..

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

By this I mean, we make a copy of counterparty and call it something else and burn to this. As I doubt counterparty wants us muddling their party.

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

[crazy_rabbit]

By this I mean, we make a copy of counterparty and call it something else and burn to this. As I doubt counterparty wants us muddling their party.

That's probably true, they probably won't want to be involved with us, because- why would they? The only thing we have to offer is Maidsafe, which could be quite convincing for them. Of course if it was as easy as porting MaidSafe tokens as a counterpary asset they might just convince Maidsafe to port to Counterparty and leave Mastercoin in the dust. 

It's an interesting idea to maybe just clone Counterparty, but then of course all we have done is clone an already working project....

[PhantomPhreak]

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

There isn't any Mastercoin code/features that could be useful to Counterparty.

[Cablez]

That's probably true, they probably won't want to be involved with us, because- why would they? The only thing we have to offer is Maidsafe, which could be quite convincing for them. Of course if it was as easy as porting MaidSafe tokens as a counterpary asset they might just convince Maidsafe to port to Counterparty and leave Mastercoin in the dust. 

This is how I see it going.  Why would CP need anything from Master, what does Master bring?...nothing.  I hate to admit it but the resuscitation of master will require much skill and funding and even then its not a guarantee.

Cloning Master onto CP may be interesting though.....

[crazy_rabbit]

That's probably true, they probably won't want to be involved with us, because- why would they? The only thing we have to offer is Maidsafe, which could be quite convincing for them. Of course if it was as easy as porting MaidSafe tokens as a counterpary asset they might just convince Maidsafe to port to Counterparty and leave Mastercoin in the dust. 

This is how I see it going.  Why would CP need anything from Master, what does Master bring?...nothing.  I hate to admit it but the resuscitation of master will require much skill and funding and even then its not a guarantee.

Cloning Master onto CP may be interesting though.....

In which case- i

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

There isn't any Mastercoin code/features that could be useful to Counterparty.

Well I guess that's our answer about that then. I think porting to Counterparty could be very interesting, although I'm more interested in porting our tokens from things like Maidsafe over to counterparty. It would be terrible to let the failures of Mastercoin impact projects like Maidsafe.

[hmmmstrange]

It would be very beneficial to the mastercoin community, if a board member would spill the beans on the real status of the foundation. I suspect that things are a lot worse than anyone could imagine.

[crazy_rabbit]

It would be very beneficial to the mastercoin community, if a board member would spill the beans on the real status of the foundation. I suspect that things are a lot worse than anyone could imagine.

Are there still board members?

[hmmmstrange]

It would be very beneficial to the mastercoin community, if a board member would spill the beans on the real status of the foundation. I suspect that things are a lot worse than anyone could imagine.

Are there still board members?

If there is a foundation, there are board members.

Dissolving the "non profit" foundation is going to be a pain in the ass, particularity with the issue of the exodus private key. You can't just transfer the asset to a private entity, it has to be transferred to another non profit, from my understanding. The exodus key has future value due to the dev msc it controls and the dust it collects on each transaction. To compensate an individual with the exodus private key would be asking for a lawsuit.

They could always make the exodus key public.

edit: I'm pretty sure JR is the only one holding the private key. This almost guarantees the end of the exodus address as no new foundation would have JR on the board. A new foundation sharing the private key with JR is not going to happen. I'm convinced a fork is going to happen no matter what. It's just a question of who's fork is going to win.

[mishax1]

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

There isn't any Mastercoin code/features that could be useful to Counterparty.

You just shot msc holders in the knee.  

I don't think that's what crazy_rabbit meant when he said "Do you think you could contribute over in the thread?"    (although, I have to admit, this was a great contribution to where this thread is going...)

[hmmmstrange]

As to forking and deleting JR's remaining coins:
(these numbers are rough)

He purchased 140,000 coins, of which 40k were bonus coins. After he stated he would not invest at the beginning to not take a large bonus. So I make the conclusion he should have only 100k.

He has sold 35k coins. So he should have 65k left.

Any fork, at the very least, should delete the equivalent of his bonus coins.

[crazy_rabbit]

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

There isn't any Mastercoin code/features that could be useful to Counterparty.

You just shot msc holders in the knee. 

I don't think that's what crazy_rabbit meant when he said "Do you think you could contribute over in the thread?"    (although, I have to admit, this was a great contribution to where this thread is going...)

Well if it's true, it's true. We might as well know it out loud. It certianly makes me think harder about the porting our tokens over to Counterparty idea.

[led_lcd]

3. We burn to a counterparty clone.

It would be interesting to know if Counterparty would have us. They added the Ethereum code, why not mastercoin?

There isn't any Mastercoin code/features that could be useful to Counterparty.

You just shot msc holders in the knee.  

I don't think that's what crazy_rabbit meant when he said "Do you think you could contribute over in the thread?"    (although, I have to admit, this was a great contribution to where this thread is going...)

Well if it's true, it's true. We might as well know it out loud. It certianly makes me think harder about the porting our tokens over to Counterparty idea.

Hi, this is Jeremy from Vennd. I'll stay out of the political talk and let you guys make the decisions that you need to make.

If there are any asset issuers out there who would like to move over to Counterparty, I'd be happy to assist (for free). There are a few ways in which a migration of assets from MSC could work. We could set up a vending machine which detects a burn of a MSC asset - a send to a provably unspendable address and then send the Counterparty equivalent to the burner. This is an opt-in burn. This burn period could be run for a while to allow people to withdraw funds from exchanges, etc.

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

@ JR and Mr. Johnston

You guys would be wise to make a public appearance before this mastercoup (tm) goes any farther.


NOW is your chance to rebrand. I hope you make your first act to deal with the whale issue.

[hmmmstrange]

Hi, this is Jeremy from Vennd. I'll stay out of the political talk and let you guys make the decisions that you need to make.

If there are any asset issuers out there who would like to move over to Counterparty, I'd be happy to assist (for free). There are a few ways in which a migration of assets from MSC could work. We could set up a vending machine which detects a burn of a MSC asset - a send to a provably unspendable address and then send the Counterparty equivalent to the burner. This is an opt-in burn. This burn period could be run for a while to allow people to withdraw funds from exchanges, etc.

Is there any reason why the burn period would have to be of limited time?

[hmmmstrange]

I just want to point out that it's been 5 days with zero activity on github.

[led_lcd]

Hi, this is Jeremy from Vennd. I'll stay out of the political talk and let you guys make the decisions that you need to make.

If there are any asset issuers out there who would like to move over to Counterparty, I'd be happy to assist (for free). There are a few ways in which a migration of assets from MSC could work. We could set up a vending machine which detects a burn of a MSC asset - a send to a provably unspendable address and then send the Counterparty equivalent to the burner. This is an opt-in burn. This burn period could be run for a while to allow people to withdraw funds from exchanges, etc.

Is there any reason why the burn period would have to be of limited time?

Technically, there is no reason. It's just impractical to keep it going forever.

Scotcoin moved from their own blockchain to Counterparty in a similar burn. They decided on a similar mechanism to remove inactive holders of their coin. Note: They didn't use Vennd.

edit: 'supporters' to 'holders'

[crazy_rabbit]

Hi, this is Jeremy from Vennd. I'll stay out of the political talk and let you guys make the decisions that you need to make.

If there are any asset issuers out there who would like to move over to Counterparty, I'd be happy to assist (for free). There are a few ways in which a migration of assets from MSC could work. We could set up a vending machine which detects a burn of a MSC asset - a send to a provably unspendable address and then send the Counterparty equivalent to the burner. This is an opt-in burn. This burn period could be run for a while to allow people to withdraw funds from exchanges, etc.

Is there any reason why the burn period would have to be of limited time?

Technically, there is no reason. It's just impractical to keep it going forever.

Scotcoin moved from their own blockchain to Counterparty in a similar burn. They decided on a similar mechanism to remove inactive holders of their coin. Note: They didn't use Vennd.

edit: 'supporters' to 'holders'

I just checked out Vennd and I'm pretty impressed, very cool! Here's another question then- if something like maidsafe choose not to move over to counterparty, could we still use Vennd to port the tokens over to Counterparty so we could more easily buy/sell/whatever with them on counterparty, and then 'cashout' to move them back to mastercoin? It might be a nice way to 'introduce' token issuers to the idea of moving to counterparty.

[dexX7]

Here's another question then- if something like maidsafe choose not to move over to counterparty, could we still use Vennd to port the tokens over to Counterparty so we could more easily buy/sell/whatever with them on counterparty, and then 'cashout' to move them back to mastercoin?

A gateway that allows to move between both protocols? This is interesting. Politics aside, like erasing JR's stash, I'm more interested in the technical side of things.

Because there is no fixed conversion rate of MSC/XCP and XCP/MSC, proxy tokens on each side would have to be created.

So how are tokens transfered between both protocols? I guess the easy way is to use a third party (e.g. Vennd) that has knowledge about both sides and acts as mediator, but I'm wondering, if there is an alternative without a centralized, single point of failure.

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

CIYAM.org

Atomic Cross-Chain Transfer
-------------------------------------

An AT that enables an atomic cross-chain transfer to be executed by creating two separate instances of itself
on two seperate blockchains

[crazy_rabbit]

CIYAM.org

Atomic Cross-Chain Transfer
-------------------------------------

An AT that enables an atomic cross-chain transfer to be executed by creating two separate instances of itself
on two seperate blockchains

I think it's a great idea, but I just can't wrap my head around how it works. :-)

[jrmg]

https://www.maidsafe.org/t/what-happen-for-maidsafe-if-mastercoin-run-out-of-money/2120

[davidpbrown]

Frustration with Mastercoin is understandable but I am not convinced by what has been suggested above.

OP's major objections appears to be JR's holdings. I'm unclear what is being suggested for others holding MSC but it would be odd to resolve that problem without JR's input.

Having a coup and grabbing the utility and community, is all very well as a simple idea but what about developers? Developers are the most fundamental element but nothing in the OP seemed to address what development team any new fork would have.

If there is value in Mastercoin's utility; its developers; and its community, then it would be better those assets are retained and the frustration with JR's holdings is resolved directly. Mastercoin could easily come alive on the back of interest in other Bitcoin2.0 projects. Everyone seems to overstate where we are right now - there's a long way to go, I expect at least three years before mainstream.


OP appears more concerned about the value of OPs stake to be talking for Maidsafe
> It would be terrible to let the failures of Mastercoin impact projects like Maidsafe.
but has Maidsafe expressed such concern. They might well be wise to the long term potential of project's like their own and Mastercoin.


There seems little doubt mistakes were made with Mastercoin's use of resources to date; and its PR sucks but it's not easy to market before there is real utility - even BitShares understands that.. there is huge potential here and the OP appears to be suggesting a nuclear option that is perhaps coming far too soon.

For all other offering having a larger market cap, the market cap is an illusion until mainstream are on board and there isn't the utility anywhere yet for that.


Even if there was clear evidence that the whole dev team less JR was on board with such a radical idea, then there would still be a question about the sense of it in the absence of JR's input. It seems JR's input has been substantial to date, I think there remain better ways to resolve this and JR should be provided opportunity to respond to these concerns.

Looking for short term profits, tends to prompt short term answers to what appear to be difficult problems - but those answers are not always the best.

Also don't let envy of big stashes get the better of you. In the event that JR evidenced use of his holdings for the benefit of Mastercoin, then there would be no problem. Indeed the way Mastercoin was setup, was exactly expecting that such holdings would be used in this way, so I wonder that the OP mistakes the reality of the way that Mastercoin IPO worked. Remember there have been many different approaches to IPOs, and really noone can say yet which has worked and which has not. Again, market cap is an illusion until the point that mainstream consensus is behind a project, all value is an illusion - you cannot sell more than a small fraction of any marketcap, including Bitcoin without the market collapsing.


The core question is properly when will Mastercoin have utility and what can be done to support that. Then there is another concern about that relative to other offerings and mainstream users coming on board. Remember how large the potential market is. Forking for forking sake as the OP appears to encourage, does not convince me.

 

[crazy_rabbit]

Frustration with Mastercoin is understandable but I am not convinced by what has been suggested above.

OP's major objections appears to be JR's holdings. I'm unclear what is being suggested for others holding MSC but it would be odd to resolve that problem without JR's input.

Having a coup and grabbing the utility and community, is all very well as a simple idea but what about developers? Developers are the most fundamental element but nothing in the OP seemed to address what development team any new fork would have.

If there is value in Mastercoin's utility; its developers; and its community, then it would be better those assets are retained and the frustration with JR's holdings is resolved directly. Mastercoin could easily come alive on the back of interest in other Bitcoin2.0 projects. Everyone seems to overstate where we are right now - there's a long way to go, I expect at least three years before mainstream.

To be clear- this thread is about discussing the idea. These days precious little seems to draw anyone who is working on Mastercoin out to speak with the community at length or indepth. The updates on the blog are great to see, but the "great things are happening with mastercoin" updates leave a lot to be desired when Judith keeps linking to projects that don't have working websites, (http://www.coinproz.com/) or are down right silly (http://www.thefestivalofhope.org/).

Thus far JR seems very unwilling to talk about the frustration with his holdings. If you look back at the thread you'll see I was always highly supportive of JR's holdings and had no issue with it. The truth of the matter is though that while things are indeed happening with Mastercoin, I think very few people seem to see any indications that anything has been learned from the mistakes of the past, or that better processes are put in place for the future. Indeed, I think many of us know hardly anything about what is going on with the project. The last feedback that we had on the official mastercoin thread here was that they were going to close the thread and thus end the discussion entirely. A week goes by with no activity on the git-hub, no one shows up on the thread to reach out to the community and mastercointalk is a near ghosttown. I think in many people's minds the shop certainly seems to be empty.

OP appears more concerned about the value of OPs stake to be talking for Maidsafe
> It would be terrible to let the failures of Mastercoin impact projects like Maidsafe.
but has Maidsafe expressed such concern. They might well be wise to the long term potential of project's like their own and Mastercoin.


There seems little doubt mistakes were made with Mastercoin's use of resources to date; and its PR sucks but it's not easy to market before there is real utility - even BitShares understands that.. there is huge potential here and the OP appears to be suggesting a nuclear option that is perhaps coming far too soon.

I'm an original Exodus investor, but I'm also an Maidsafe holder and I'm concerned for both. I've been directed to a few things regarding Maidsafe's plans for a possible mastercoin collapse, and I'll read those.

I don't think it's a question of just the mistake of Mastecoin's use of resources, and PR sucking, at this point it becomes a question of is anyone at the helm, and if there is- is there even any crew left to speak of? CIYAM posted a perfectly resonably offer to be involved in a cross chain transaction project and no one gets in touch with them. There's plenty of time to update us on nonsense "gold hope coins for world peace global concert series" mastercoin projects, but no one can send an email out to a project that actually a) has a bounty and b) could prove a seriously viable use case for our existence?

For all other offering having a larger market cap, the market cap is an illusion until mainstream are on board and there isn't the utility anywhere yet for that.
Even if there was clear evidence that the whole dev team less JR was on board with such a radical idea, then there would still be a question about the sense of it in the absence of JR's input. It seems JR's input has been substantial to date, I think there remain better ways to resolve this and JR should be provided opportunity to respond to these concerns.

Market cap doesn't really enter into it for me. As for JR's input, I think I would phrase it best: After Counterparty was rebuffed, they went ahead without JR's input and look what it's done for them.

I do indeed think JR has an opportunity to respond and debate- indeed I hope he shows up!

Looking for short term profits, tends to prompt short term answers to what appear to be difficult problems - but those answers are not always the best.
Also don't let envy of big stashes get the better of you. In the event that JR evidenced use of his holdings for the benefit of Mastercoin, then there would be no problem. Indeed the way Mastercoin was setup, was exactly expecting that such holdings would be used in this way, so I wonder that the OP mistakes the reality of the way that Mastercoin IPO worked. Remember there have been many different approaches to IPOs, and really noone can say yet which has worked and which has not. Again, market cap is an illusion until the point that mainstream consensus is behind a project, all value is an illusion - you cannot sell more than a small fraction of any marketcap, including Bitcoin without the market collapsing.

It's not stash envy, nor pursuit of short time profit (that time passed for mastercoin a long time ago!) it's a question of the management of such a large stash of coins, and the commitment of the person holding them. If JR was on the forum day in and day out, and making commits day in and day out, I wouldn't be asking the community to debate this. But where is he? Where are the commits? Where is the community outreach? It's great that Mastercoin had all this funding from the outset, but at this point even ColoredCoins are much farther down the road than we are. It's fantastic we raised all this money to pay PR agencies and developers, but if no love was given to building a community that would keep the ship sailing even without a captain and strong winds- whats the future now that we are out of money and out of community? JR has wielded his giant stash to negative effect on the community, creating confusion, doubt and disappointment. It's not a question of being envious of his stash, but why should a community coalesce around a project that will most benefit one individual, an individual who has proven they will dump large amounts of coins early in the game when speculation is high, and an individual who simply isn't acting like he stands to gain monumentally from any incremental positive development. Like I said, if he was out and about drumming up support, day in and day out, engaging the community, commiting on github, etc... even if he was making all bad decisions, we wouldn't be at this point. We're at this point because it's been a litany of questionable decisions and he's, nor anyone else, is anywhere to be found.

The core question is properly when will Mastercoin have utility and what can be done to support that. Then there is another concern about that relative to other offerings and mainstream users coming on board. Remember how large the potential market is. Forking for forking sake as the OP appears to encourage, does not convince me.

I'm tempted to think the core question maybe- is Mastercoin a great idea with a bad team? Counter-party seems to have settled that question, which the begs, what can be done to fix this and turn things around? The other concern is that with the track record the project has, maybe our main impediment is JR at the helm- despite it being his baby. By forking mastercoin we don't destroy his mastercoin, we simply take those who are still left, and still interested and build our own project. I don't think I'm the only one here.


Anyway, thanks for posting. I saw your cross post at mastercointalk, no one had read it but me, but it would be nice if developers, JR, Judith, anyone, from the project would really enjoin a serious and critical debate about the future of Mastercoin.

[CIYAM]

CIYAM.org

Atomic Cross-Chain Transfer
-------------------------------------

An AT that enables an atomic cross-chain transfer to be executed by creating two separate instances of itself
on two seperate blockchains

I think it's a great idea, but I just can't wrap my head around how it works. :-)

It's not that hard to understand - if two blockchains have both implemented AT then you can use a similar "atomic cross-chain transfer" technique that TierNolan had described for doing the same thing between Bitcoin clones (which unfortunately isn't usable except on testnets because nLockTime is non-standard).

The two AT instances (one on each blockchain) have "timeout refunds" and the need to send a "secret" that both ATs hold the hash of (as you can't reverse a hash the secret cannot be determined except through brute force which would never be practical).

Once the initiator sends the secret to the AT on the second blockchain the creator of that AT sends the secret back to the AT on the first blockchain. As ATs act as their own accounts they automatically do the escrow (and unlike TierNolan's approach there is no issue of tx malleability).

You can read the details here: http://ciyam.org/at/at_atomic.html

[davidpbrown]

I'm an original Exodus investor, but I'm also an Maidsafe holder and I'm concerned for both. I've been directed to a few things regarding Maidsafe's plans for a possible mastercoin collapse, and I'll read those.

I don't see how Mastercoin's fate affects Maidsafe holders. As I understand it, Safecoins will exist regardless once that network goes to ~beta and as I understand it that will be the end of Maidsafe's engagement with Mastercoin or BTC blockchain.. except for their MSC holdings which will either become of no consequence or will become useful to them later.

I'm tempted to think the core question maybe- is Mastercoin a great idea with a bad team? Counter-party seems to have settled that question, which the begs, what can be done to fix this and turn things around? The other concern is that with the track record the project has, maybe our main impediment is JR at the helm- despite it being his baby. By forking mastercoin we don't destroy his mastercoin, we simply take those who are still left, and still interested and build our own project. I don't think I'm the only one here.

You make valid points and there is no doubt Mastercoin's engagement with community and opportunities could be much better.

Certainly, I would like to see those core to the project respond in some way that suggests refocusing or at least a restated intent, in order they can encourage us that all is well.

The only point I would add is that if such turnaround can be acheived with JR on board, then that would be hugely advantagous. Splitting what is one of the bigger offerings in Bitcoin2.0 space, at such an early stage, might be an error, for the all the good intentions.

Those are rare people, that are good at all aspects of business. Management; Productivity; and Adminsitration are very different skills. Fair questions then about who leads Mastercoin and how, given the state of play.

[StarenseN]

following

[crazy_rabbit]

I'm an original Exodus investor, but I'm also an Maidsafe holder and I'm concerned for both. I've been directed to a few things regarding Maidsafe's plans for a possible mastercoin collapse, and I'll read those.

I don't see how Mastercoin's fate affects Maidsafe holders. As I understand it, Safecoins will exist regardless once that network goes to ~beta and as I understand it that will be the end of Maidsafe's engagement with Mastercoin or BTC blockchain.. except for their MSC holdings which will either become of no consequence or will become useful to them later.

[/quote]


I think you're right about that. I didn't understand their plans so well before. My other issues still hold water though.

I'm tempted to think the core question maybe- is Mastercoin a great idea with a bad team? Counter-party seems to have settled that question, which the begs, what can be done to fix this and turn things around? The other concern is that with the track record the project has, maybe our main impediment is JR at the helm- despite it being his baby. By forking mastercoin we don't destroy his mastercoin, we simply take those who are still left, and still interested and build our own project. I don't think I'm the only one here.

You make valid points and there is no doubt Mastercoin's engagement with community and opportunities could be much better.

Certainly, I would like to see those core to the project respond in some way that suggests refocusing or at least a restated intent, in order they can encourage us that all is well.

The only point I would add is that if such turnaround can be acheived with JR on board, then that would be hugely advantagous. Splitting what is one of the bigger offerings in Bitcoin2.0 space, at such an early stage, might be an error, for the all the good intentions.

Those are rare people, that are good at all aspects of business. Management; Productivity; and Adminsitration are very different skills. Fair questions then about who leads Mastercoin and how, given the state of play.

Well I hope we can hear from them on this thread! I think we would all like to know some answers. :-)

[EvilDave]

Here's another question then- if something like maidsafe choose not to move over to counterparty, could we still use Vennd to port the tokens over to Counterparty so we could more easily buy/sell/whatever with them on counterparty, and then 'cashout' to move them back to mastercoin?

A gateway that allows to move between both protocols? This is interesting. Politics aside, like erasing JR's stash, I'm more interested in the technical side of things.

Because there is no fixed conversion rate of MSC/XCP and XCP/MSC, proxy tokens on each side would have to be created.

So how are tokens transfered between both protocols? I guess the easy way is to use a third party (e.g. Vennd) that has knowledge about both sides and acts as mediator, but I'm wondering, if there is an alternative without a centralized, single point of failure.

I'm just going to tiptoe into this topic and mention NXT a few times.......the above exchange scenario can be run effectively using Nxts Asset Exchange and/or MultiGateway. There will need to be some coding done to get MSC and XCP gateways up, but nothing major. Could be up and running before the end of the week, if you feel the need to rush.

Nxt will release its Monetary System feature with the coming update, allowing you to issue custom made Nxt-backed currencies.
Of course, there is a natural desire for MSC to stay within the BTC eco-system, but take a good look at Nxt. It's in a strong position right now, and the underlying technology has proved to be rock-solid over the last year.

Did I mention that Nxt is committed to open-source principles ?
If MSC/Maidsafe/whoever decide to move over to the Nxt blockchain, they are completely free to do so.
No need to ask permission from anyone, just do it. The Nxt community will be happy to provide support.  

Edit:
Heres an MS overview from our Devs:
https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issue/136/monetary-system

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

Can the "community" get an update on how your "last community" funds were spent? with a comparison and cost analysis to the only other project out there?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The vision of a community driven model


http://blog.mastercoin.org/2014/10/31/the-great-transition/
Oct 31 2014
David A. Johnston
Chairman of the MSC Foundation Board of Directors


Many in the community are asking: What will happen when the funds originally contributed to develop the MSC protocol are all spent? Its an important question and rather than leave people guessing, here I will outline the plan moving forward.

community sponsorships will make it possible for the core developers of Omni Wallet and the Omni Core implementations to continue and expand their work on these open source projects.

My goal is to launch January 1st 2015 with a new entity and a clear path forward for the community. That way there is a smooth transition from the existing Foundation to the new Omni Foundation.

In order to fully embrace this vision of a community driven model, there has been a planned election of new board members for the MSC Foundation.

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

Maybe a possible solution would be for JR to agree to lock the bulk of his coins into an escrow vault of some-kind that puts a time-lock / yearly withdrawal limit as insurance that he can't crash the market.

[davidpbrown]

Maybe a possible solution would be for JR to agree to lock the bulk of his coins into an escrow vault of some-kind that puts a time-lock / yearly withdrawal limit as insurance that he can't crash the market.

Yes, that could work. A strong move in that direction should give new investors another reason to look to MSC. Currently the market does appear stalled and badly undervalued.

A statement on the limits to the volume in the sell side from JR coupled with a clearer effort to communicate where developments are relative to utility, can only help. The only factor might be the size of whatever JR's holding is now and whether such a statement would suggest an inevitable sell with a volume relative to the buy side that might pose a problem. Given the intention to rebrand in the new year as above, perhaps there is an opportunity to fix what seems to be a stalled market and then engage a wider community through 2015. I don't know how dependant Mastercoin devs are on JR's selling. Perhaps a break for six months of any risk of his selling beyond what the market buy side will easily accommodate would be useful too.

[udecker]

Hello folks, Craig from Mastercoin here.

While I certainly can admit that our team’s communication with the community can be improved, the talk of forking the protocol likely takes us down the wrong path.  If the issue is with JR’s holdings, remember that the bulk of the funds used in development came from JR in the form of BTC during the crowdsale last year.  Those are legitimately purchased tokens.  The same can be said for large NXT holders, where it appears this is less of an issue (although why large anonymous holders is better, from the community’s perspective, is a mystery to me).

With regards to the progress on the platform and protocol, including new issuers, let me provide some recent news, as it appears the really good news doesn’t get spread (all of our /r/Bitcoin links get deleted shortly after being posted….):

1. Integration of Master Core with large partners is increasing rapidly.  Bitfinex, Expresscoin, GoCoin, ZenBox, HolyTransactions (among others) have all integrated in the past two weeks.  More wallet integrations are coming soon as well. 
2. The Decentralized Exchange phase II is in testing currently on testnet (sneak peek at testnet.omniwallet.org) with release before the end of the year.
3. Master Core QT wallets for Linux, Windows and OS X are also in testing, and we will release a testnet version imminently (which will include DEx Phase II UI).
4. Larger issuers such as Tether (of which I am involved), Factom, HopeGold, etc are only a few of the larger, announced issuers taking advantage of the protocol.  The feedback we receive from major issuers (most unannounced) are that the Master Protocol (soon to be re-branded Omni), is the preferred platform due to ongoing development to the core protocol and software, and the expertise within the team.
5. The move from crowdsale financed development to community sponsorship is taking hold well with these larger issuers (and several of the smaller ones).
6. We have contracted with a well-known crypto firm to redesign OmniWallet UI from the ground up, and we’re in final review of this interface.  It should be implemented along with the DEx Phase II release before the end of the year.

Some of the other items being discussed are which smart contract technologies to leverage going forward, and how we can coordinate interop with other technologies such as Ethereum, Sidechains, etc.  Our focus is not to be an isolated island of functionality, but instead to be a bridge between complimentary technologies.  The partnerships we have made are extremely strong, and as they get announced the rest of the community will see the results.

In short, adoption of the platform is growing, but most of it is occuring quietly in the background.  Our progress has been dictated by making sure what we release is rock solid, as the possibility of disabling features after release due to problems is unacceptable.  This may not happen as quickly as everyone would like, but it’s prudent and I firmly believe that the platform is being adopted by so many third parties because of the quality of the work in each release.  We are constantly told how easy it is to complete an integration with Master Core.  The same can’t be said for other platforms.  As we continue to become integrated with other large partners (again, several of which are unannounced), it should become evident how strong of a platform we have.

Do not hesitate to reach out to me with any questions.

Craig

[EvilDave]

Large stakeholders can be both a blessing and a curse.
On the downside you have nervous investors who may be reluctant to invest because of the fear that a whale may dump his/her/its holdings and kill the price, and, of course, the vocal cries of 'unfair distribution' from the cheap seats. 

On the upside: it's good to have large quantities of a currency in safe hands, providing you can trust the whales in question, and it is very useful to be able to rely on large holders to cover some of the development and marketing costs.

I think Nxt got lucky with its initial distro, we had 73 stakeholders, most of whom have supported Nxt development pretty well. 
Many Nxt whales have remained anonymous, but I've never seen that as an issue.....we know how to find them, even if we have no clue of their IRL identities. 

[TinEye]

While I certainly can admit that our team’s communication with the community can be improved, the talk of forking the protocol likely takes us down the wrong path.

I agree that forking will end in disaster. But its headed into disaster anyway.

Mastercoin is finished in its current format, you can quote me on that. Either try something different which doesn't represent a challenge to Counterparty directly and tries to solve a different problem, or abandon it entirely.

[crazy_rabbit]

While I certainly can admit that our team’s communication with the community can be improved, the talk of forking the protocol likely takes us down the wrong path.

I agree that forking will end in disaster. But its headed into disaster anyway.

Mastercoin is finished in its current format, you can quote me on that. Either try something different which doesn't represent a challenge to Counterparty directly and tries to solve a different problem, or abandon it entirely.

It could be extended to do something beyond what counterparty is doing. But I'm skeptical if anyone is really interested in that, or just busy with other things. It's hard to tell.

Is JR ever going to chime in?

[crazy_rabbit]

Here is an idea- what if by forking Mastercoin we attempted to do something different than what Mastercoin 1.0 and Counterparty are trying to do? What if Mastercoin 2.0 was reborn using Litecoin? That is a project that has major hashing power behind it, but it's own existential crisis of purpose. Perhaps the two could make a nice fit.

[mishax1]

Here is an idea- what if by forking Mastercoin we attempted to do something different than what Mastercoin 1.0 and Counterparty are trying to do? What if Mastercoin 2.0 was reborn using Litecoin? That is a project that has major hashing power behind it, but it's own existential crisis of purpose. Perhaps the two could make a nice fit.

I just canceled my Titan batch1 order and filed a lawsuit against KNC, so NO. 

[TinEye]

Here is an idea- what if by forking Mastercoin we attempted to do something different than what Mastercoin 1.0 and Counterparty are trying to do? What if Mastercoin 2.0 was reborn using Litecoin? That is a project that has major hashing power behind it, but it's own existential crisis of purpose. Perhaps the two could make a nice fit.

Counterparty inspired project beat you to that too. Check out Dogeparty.

I wouldn't put to much faith in Litecoin now. With Scrypt ASICS out there its basically a faster, lower network effect version of Bitcoin.

[dexX7]

Here's another question then- if something like maidsafe choose not to move over to counterparty, could we still use Vennd to port the tokens over to Counterparty so we could more easily buy/sell/whatever with them on counterparty, and then 'cashout' to move them back to mastercoin?

A gateway that allows to move between both protocols? This is interesting. Politics aside, like erasing JR's stash, I'm more interested in the technical side of things.

Because there is no fixed conversion rate of MSC/XCP and XCP/MSC, proxy tokens on each side would have to be created.

So how are tokens transfered between both protocols? I guess the easy way is to use a third party (e.g. Vennd) that has knowledge about both sides and acts as mediator, but I'm wondering, if there is an alternative without a centralized, single point of failure.

I'm just going to tiptoe into this topic and mention NXT a few times.......the above exchange scenario can be run effectively using Nxts Asset Exchange and/or MultiGateway. There will need to be some coding done to get MSC and XCP gateways up, but nothing major. Could be up and running before the end of the week, if you feel the need to rush.

Nxt will release its Monetary System feature with the coming update, allowing you to issue custom made Nxt-backed currencies.
Of course, there is a natural desire for MSC to stay within the BTC eco-system, but take a good look at Nxt. It's in a strong position right now, and the underlying technology has proved to be rock-solid over the last year.

Did I mention that Nxt is committed to open-source principles ?
If MSC/Maidsafe/whoever decide to move over to the Nxt blockchain, they are completely free to do so.
No need to ask permission from anyone, just do it. The Nxt community will be happy to provide support.  

Edit:
Heres an MS overview from our Devs:
https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issue/136/monetary-system

Thanks for the input!

I'm impressed by what the NXT community has developed over time, you guys got my attention with the MultiGateway project some time ago..

Nevertheless, and this is just my personal opinion, I believe moving away from BTC is not an option, because that's one of the key properties.

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

Thank you for the response Craig.

If the issue is with JR’s holdings, remember that the bulk of the funds used in development came from JR in the form of BTC during the crowdsale last year.  Those are legitimately purchased tokens.  The same can be said for large NXT holders, where it appears this is less of an issue (although why large anonymous holders is better, from the community’s perspective, is a mystery to me).

Now is the perfect time to put this issue to rest. Maybe we aren't aware of all of the development that JR has paid for. Can you please go over the funds that JR has spent on development.  I don't really think that large holders even if anonymous are necessarily bad, satoshi being one of the most famous, however all we can go by are actions. Has JR ever crashed the market by cashing his MSC out?

With regards to the progress on the platform and protocol, including new issuers, let me provide some recent news, as it appears the really good news doesn’t get spread (all of our /r/Bitcoin links get deleted shortly after being posted….):

If your updates are getting removed then this is unfortunate. Over here at bitcointalk, mention of mastercoin has evaporated. Maybe there is a PR person at mastercoin that can post updates to the altcoin section and spur some discussion on. Several projects are doing this right now. Can you re-introduce to us who the current developers are?

Some of the other items being discussed are which smart contract technologies to leverage going forward, and how we can coordinate interop with other technologies such as Ethereum, Sidechains, etc.  Our focus is not to be an isolated island of functionality, but instead to be a bridge between complimentary technologies.  The partnerships we have made are extremely strong, and as they get announced the rest of the community will see the results

I'm glad to hear that you wish to continue to evolve mastercoin. Can you start a discussion thread about the "bridge to complimentary technologies"? Have you atleast had a chance to talk to CIYAM?

In short, adoption of the platform is growing, but most of it is occuring quietly in the background.  Our progress has been dictated by making sure what we release is rock solid, as the possibility of disabling features after release due to problems is unacceptable.  This may not happen as quickly as everyone would like, but it’s prudent and I firmly believe that the platform is being adopted by so many third parties because of the quality of the work in each release.  We are constantly told how easy it is to complete an integration with Master Core.  The same can’t be said for other platforms.  As we continue to become integrated with other large partners (again, several of which are unannounced), it should become evident how strong of a platform we have.

This would be a perfect time to talk about the ease of Master Core. Do you have any quotes or references from people who are quite happy with how easy Master Core is? Has there been any third party reviews of Master Core vs CounterParty?

Do not hesitate to reach out to me with any questions.

Craig

Yes, we have lots of questions and obviously still care about this project due to the passion that posters still have. Thank you for starting a dialogue with us.

[CIYAM]

I'm glad to here that you wish to continue to evolve mastercoin. Can you start a discussion thread about the "bridge to complimentary technologies"? Have you atleast had a chance to talk to CIYAM?

Please note that I did get a few PMs from @udecker about AT and Mastercoin (I assume this is the Craig that you mention as that is the name he used in the PMs).

Whilst I don't know how easy it would be to implement AT on Mastercoin I am willing to help out where I can (if devs such as Craig are interested to pursue this avenue).

[crazy_rabbit]

Thank you for the response Craig.

If the issue is with JR’s holdings, remember that the bulk of the funds used in development came from JR in the form of BTC during the crowdsale last year.  Those are legitimately purchased tokens.  The same can be said for large NXT holders, where it appears this is less of an issue (although why large anonymous holders is better, from the community’s perspective, is a mystery to me).

Now is the perfect time to put this issue to rest. Maybe we aren't aware of all of the development that JR has paid for. Can you please go over the funds that JR has spent on development.  I don't really think that large holders even if anonymous are necessarily bad, satoshi being one of the most famous, however all we can go by are actions. Has JR ever crashed the market by cashing his MSC out?

Yes he has, it was back at one of the earlier peaks in MSC price. He announced he would be selling and the market tanked. I still supported his holdings at the time, but I think it left people permanently a bit suspicious.

[crazy_rabbit]

I'm glad to see that the suggestion to fork Mastercoin seems to have put a little bit of a fire under the seat. :-)

Still no word from JR though, I would still want to hear what he has to say.

[bitcoin_bagholder]

Fork it.

[crazy_rabbit]

Too little too late I suppose. I'm glad the MSC guys are a bit more communicative on the other thread. The failure of JR to make any comment at all though seems to indicate to me that nothing has changed, and nothing will change. I expect good development will continue, the MSC guys are obviously good coders and I wish them the best. The recent price bump was a nice little opportunity to get out, so I'll be watching from the sidelines from now on. It's a fantastic idea, Mastercoin, but the truth is, you invest in teams- not ideas. Ideas are nothing without execution.

So long and thanks for all the tokens!

:-)

[mishax1]

Who's JR ? 

[littleblue]

  JR have 2# wife? so he sell  msc again?

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

Who's JR ? 

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

Are there any reviews of masteromnicore vs counterparty?

Craig claimed omni was better. Is there any teeth to this?

[mishax1]

It's better. shut up! 

[JohnnyBTCSeed]

It's better. shut up! 

Yes sir...

[crazy_rabbit]

Well MSC is at 303rd place on Coinmarket cap and has ZERO volume. It's not just illiquid right now, it's worthless. JR hasn't appeared at all- despite the threat of forking Mastercoin which inclines me to believe that he just doesn't care one way or another.

[mishax1]

What threat ? you have no community to threat with.. You can try forking but I doubt the other projects would follow..

[Labteck]

the coin is already death with no future,so why not to fork?

[mishax1]

*dead

and the development never stopped. the fork will die faster.

[mr_random]

If JR purchased his stash with Bitcoin fairly then it's setting a bad precedent trying to "delete" his money.

I don't know if JR was ever in the position where he had made thousands of BTC profit from Mastercoin but if he did, it would have been smart of him to take out 20% of his profits and invest it into the future of the coin. Not sure what his current holdings are worth now.

[TinEye]

the coin is already death with no future,so why not to fork?

Because it sets a dangerous precedent. In principle its possible for the majority shareholders to cut out the minority but nobody has ever done it out of fear. For something like Mastercoin which I believe is finished, doing something like this is not worth it.

[crazy_rabbit]

It doesn't matter anymore anyway. Dead horse is dead.

[mishax1]

But.. it's not a horse, and it's not a shitcoin either..

[llildur]

Hi, i never had a chance to buy some mastercoins now seems like things are start moving forward with projects like factom or synereo involved in some how with masterprotocol i think it's a great time to invest in this project, i think that Omni has a very bright future and in some way the words of udecker has proven to be true, the most problems of counterparty at the end was the improves on the fly that was performed on their platform, i guess that this kind of things lead the resignation of the medici project maybe, anyway i am in for the long run, cheers.