More Bitshares Greed

[Luckybit]

I'll go ahead and predict that within a few months some "phantom" delegates will get voted in at 100% pay. Either controlled by the devs or by someone attempting to tax the blockchain without actually working for it.

This is interesting. Would that be possible? Are there any extraordinarily large holders who could have the voting power to do that?

Maybe only due to voter apathy? So the answer in my opinion is to use a software agent or slates as has been discussed. At some point maybe require users to vote for delegates before they can make their first trade with a recommendation in the tool tip to vote for delegates who are critical to Bitshares.

You can list the developers but there should be other people listed as well who aren't associated with Invictus. You could list "Team Invictus" so people know they are part of a package but there should be other teams too.

[1714326930]

1714326930

[1714326930]

1714326930

[fran2k]

This thread is FUD.

The idea was just to leave as default voted, which I don't like at all as it undermines the trust in BTS, buy anyway could be changed in a few clicks.

[Newmine]

This thread is FUD.

The idea was just to leave as default voted, which I don't like at all as it undermines the trust in BTS, buy anyway could be changed in a few clicks.

You just confirmed my OP and agreed with it. Did you mean the title was FUD? If so, I will go pull all the links where Bytemaster and Stan telling the community Bytemaster was going to go work for VOTE because AGS funds were soon to be gone and DACsun, the front for I3 in Hong Kong, had no money to pay Bytemaster to stay on board and he would leave the BitShares X. Let's all not forget that Bitshares X, the Exchange, or the "ideal free market financial system [IFMFS]" was Bytemaster's original idea, obligation and the reason most of us migrated to Bitshares and gave them money. For him to come out and say he was going to abandon a project because he wasn't going to get paid after he collected $millions to see the project through is greedy. That's why I titled the thread that.  He paid himself $100K or more in salary, and then received a couple $100K in BTS and he supposedly had no obligation to stay and maintain what he started? He would then be allowed to start a competitor DAC VOTE, And siphon money out of them to do the same thing there as he did for BTSX? That's like Bytemaster delegate signing all the forked chains just to be on board the longest one in the end. Don't you think at this point the BTS earned by the Devs is enough incentive to see this through? How many full time Devs does it take? I think BTC has 2-3 full time. We have supposedly 9? 9 full time and we can't get a anything released on time or anything stably released. 1.0 is already scheduled 3 months later than first announced. Let's not even go there yet.

[sumantso]

It didn't ann here - i won't buy it.

Its your money so your decision and your risks. I would urge you to take a broader view for your own sake.

I am very active here, but barring the past few days, I've mostly refrained from mentioning Bitshares. Why? 'coz I know everytime I try to explain anything there would be too many people with vested interest who start shouting, and I never like engaging with them. I always felt bad as I thought (maybe I am blinded) that this is such an awesome, visionary project and most on here are missing out.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

This thread is FUD.

The idea was just to leave as default voted, which I don't like at all as it undermines the trust in BTS, buy anyway could be changed in a few clicks.

You just confirmed my OP and agreed with it. Did you mean the title was FUD? If so, I will go pull all the links where Bytemaster and Stan telling the community Bytemaster was going to go work for VOTE because AGS funds were soon to be gone and DACsun, the front for I3 in Hong Kong, had no money to pay Bytemaster to stay on board and he would leave the BitShares X. Let's all not forget that Bitshares X, the Exchange, or the "ideal free market financial system [IFMFS]" was Bytemaster's original idea, obligation and the reason most of us migrated to Bitshares and gave them money. For him to come out and say he was going to abandon a project because he wasn't going to get paid after he collected $millions to see the project through is greedy. That's why I titled the thread that.  He paid himself $100K or more in salary, and then received a couple $100K in BTS and he supposedly had no obligation to stay and maintain what he started? He would then be allowed to start a competitor DAC VOTE, And siphon money out of them to do the same thing there as he did for BTSX? That's like Bytemaster delegate signing all the forked chains just to be on board the longest one in the end. Don't you think at this point the BTS earned by the Devs is enough incentive to see this through? How many full time Devs does it take? I think BTC has 2-3 full time. We have supposedly 9? 9 full time and we can't get a anything released on time or anything stably released. 1.0 is already scheduled 3 months later than first announced. Let's not even go there yet.

Don't forget the $50,000 bonuses they gave themselves.

[delulo]

This thread is FUD.

The idea was just to leave as default voted, which I don't like at all as it undermines the trust in BTS, buy anyway could be changed in a few clicks.

You just confirmed my OP and agreed with it. Did you mean the title was FUD? If so, I will go pull all the links where Bytemaster and Stan telling the community Bytemaster was going to go work for VOTE because AGS funds were soon to be gone and DACsun, the front for I3 in Hong Kong, had no money to pay Bytemaster to stay on board and he would leave the BitShares X. Let's all not forget that Bitshares X, the Exchange, or the "ideal free market financial system [IFMFS]" was Bytemaster's original idea, obligation and the reason most of us migrated to Bitshares and gave them money. For him to come out and say he was going to abandon a project because he wasn't going to get paid after he collected $millions to see the project through is greedy. That's why I titled the thread that.  He paid himself $100K or more in salary, and then received a couple $100K in BTS and he supposedly had no obligation to stay and maintain what he started? He would then be allowed to start a competitor DAC VOTE, And siphon money out of them to do the same thing there as he did for BTSX? That's like Bytemaster delegate signing all the forked chains just to be on board the longest one in the end. Don't you think at this point the BTS earned by the Devs is enough incentive to see this through? How many full time Devs does it take? I think BTC has 2-3 full time. We have supposedly 9? 9 full time and we can't get a anything released on time or anything stably released. 1.0 is already scheduled 3 months later than first announced. Let's not even go there yet.

Don't forget the $50,000 bonuses they gave themselves.

What is your intention in twisting facts continuously? The bonus is a pay in advance for the next month. It was done in order to have no expenses in 2015. Otherwise there would have been a need to pay taxes on the fundraiser (35%)!

Newmine keeps ignoring the post I made before explaining the merger:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=913075.msg10027129#msg10027129

Regarding the whole discussion about whether to pay developers industry competitive rates: If you don't it makes more sense for a qualified dev to work else where and just buy into BTS with what he earns there. If you don't address trade offs like this the discussion is pointless.

[sumantso]

What is your intention in twisting facts continuously? The bonus is a pay in advance for the next month. It was done in order to have no expenses in 2015. Otherwise there would have been a need to pay taxes on the fundraiser (35%)!

Ignore him, he is the known troll cool4school or something like that. He realized everybody takes him as a joke and so started a new account.
His only intention is to make money by pumping up NXT.

[ruletheworld]

I'll go ahead and predict that within a few months some "phantom" delegates will get voted in at 100% pay. Either controlled by the devs or by someone attempting to tax the blockchain without actually working for it.

I don't have a lot of money, and I'm normally not a betting man.

But man. I want to take this wager.

how about 30 bitUSD?

If you guys are serious, I'd be happy to arrange an escrow for this bet with more specific details on what constitutes 'few months' and what constitutes 'phantom delegate' 

[ThomasVeil]

Don't forget the $50,000 bonuses they gave themselves.

Wasn't there a list somewhere about all the kinds of ways they took money off the system?
Do I have that right:
- They collected IPO's or donations for the development
- Then they took some initial stake of Bitshares.
- They also took stakes of the other coins they had (AGS or whatnot).
- Then profiting when merging those.
- Then they get the delegate inflation.
- The bonus mentioned above...
- Hm... and yeah, lol - they're actually selling the test-coins. Those are supposed to be a top20 coin too.

Forgot anything?
They also say they bought more shares early. They must have made millions. Pretty stunning that that's not enough to pay developers - so now they have to hardcode to make sure they get the tax.

[Newmine]

Don't forget the $50,000 bonuses they gave themselves.

Wasn't there a list somewhere about all the kinds of ways they took money off the system?
Do I have that right:
- They collected IPO's or donations for the development
- Then they took some initial stake of Bitshares.
- They also took stakes of the other coins they had (AGS or whatnot).
- Then profiting when merging those.
- Then they get the delegate inflation.
- The bonus mentioned above...
- Hm... and yeah, lol - they're actually selling the test-coins. Those are supposed to be a top20 coin too.

Forgot anything?
They also say they bought more shares early. They must have made millions. Pretty stunning that that's not enough to pay developers - so now they have to hardcode to make sure they get the tax.

I am not sure about an initial stake or premine, I don't think they did that.

They did take donations in BTC and PTS(protoshares) and the PTS was a double dip because they then got to keep the BTS allocated for all those PTS shares, which turned out to be a lot.

There was also some evidence of Devs being paid with donated BTC and then donating it right back which was a double dipping on two levels: 1. It artificially inflated the amount of donated BTC and caused other investors to not be able to get the "biggest bang for their buck"' 2. The Devs double dipped and had nothing at risk by basically giving BTC back that they "earned" the first time knowing it would go right back to the pot that pays them next time. It was kind of like a no risk loan for BTS shares because every BTC would be coming right back to them after they gave it to themselves and re-donated. (This is probably where the "bonus" came from)

[fenghush]

The problem with voting is, it's fundamentally flawed, because most people are fundamentally stupid and have no idea what's best let alone to do research on what's being proposed.

[StanLarimer]

Don't forget the $50,000 bonuses they gave themselves.

Wasn't there a list somewhere about all the kinds of ways they took money off the system?
Do I have that right:
- They collected IPO's or donations for the development
- Then they took some initial stake of Bitshares.
- They also took stakes of the other coins they had (AGS or whatnot).
- Then profiting when merging those.
- Then they get the delegate inflation.
- The bonus mentioned above...
- Hm... and yeah, lol - they're actually selling the test-coins. Those are supposed to be a top20 coin too.

Forgot anything?
They also say they bought more shares early. They must have made millions. Pretty stunning that that's not enough to pay developers - so now they have to hardcode to make sure they get the tax.

I am not sure about an initial stake or premine, I don't think they did that.

They did take donations in BTC and PTS(protoshares) and the PTS was a double dip because they then got to keep the BTS allocated for all those PTS shares, which turned out to be a lot.

There was also some evidence of Devs being paid with donated BTC and then donating it right back which was a double dipping on two levels: 1. It artificially inflated the amount of donated BTC and caused other investors to not be able to get the "biggest bang for their buck"' 2. The Devs double dipped and had nothing at risk by basically giving BTC back that they "earned" the first time knowing it would go right back to the pot that pays them next time. It was kind of like a no risk loan for BTS shares because every BTC would be coming right back to them after they gave it to themselves and re-donated. (This is probably where the "bonus" came from)

Everything that was done was publicly disclosed and auditable.  Once employees are paid with donated funds (as intended by the donors) then the funds are theirs to buy lattes or donate to BitShares as they see fit.  Not a double dip at all - and all traceable on the blockchains and explained on public ledgers.  100% of all donations (and their resulting sharedrop dividends) are dedicated to developing the industry.  Zero profits were retained by Invictus and developers were paid merely average salaries.  Their year end bonuses bring them up to full pay for people of their caliber but they will have to live off those earnings for a while, because now they are all in elected positions that pay 1/4 of what they had been making.

There was no premine.  The very first ProtoShares (PTS) block was actually mined by Super3 of StorJ fame.  Our developers had to buy and rent their own mining equipment just like everyone else.  Most of our mining equipment, in fact, never got turned on because because it arrived three weeks late, after an overwhelming number of miners jumped into the action in those early weeks.  So, it was a classic mining gold-rush distribution where everybody got the same shot.  And that well accepted fair distribution was used by our innovative "share drop" approach to distribute shares fairly in future DACs.  Another innovation was our version of simulated mining (AGS) where an alternative fair distribution profile was generated via in a 200 day donation contest.  Now we had two very fair distribution profiles (one for miners and one for donors) which were used to sharedrop tokens in BTSX (now BTS) instead of using wasteful mining over and over again.

I could go on, but suffice it to say that every move has been debated and vetted transparently on bitsharestalk.org. 

NewMine is an outstanding propagandist.  He has an amazing ability to take everything that happened in broad daylight and turn it into a dark conspiracy theory.  You can believe his vandalistic tales if you want.

They will only cost you a big opportunity. 
That doesn't really hurt anybody, does it?   
He's just having a little harmless fun.

Or you can come on over to bitsharestalk.org and do your own research. 

Sometimes you want to go,
where everybody knows our (real) names.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

LIVE FREE OR DIE!!!!

[Newmine]

Stan,

No dark clouds of conspiracy here. I am just pointing out that every major change as of late is only to the benefit of the I3 Teams wallets.

As for an outstanding propagandist, thank you. And just think of the wonders I could've done had I been incentivized to toe the line with a 3 million bts bonus...😉

[EvilDave]

What is your intention in twisting facts continuously? The bonus is a pay in advance for the next month. It was done in order to have no expenses in 2015. Otherwise there would have been a need to pay taxes on the fundraiser (35%)!

Ignore him, he is the known troll cool4school or something like that. He realized everybody takes him as a joke and so started a new account.
His only intention is to make money by pumping up NXT.

I think you'll find that 2cool4skool (if DE is him, which really wouldn't surprise me   ) is driven by a very serious philosophical belief in decentralisation and the original vision of Satoshi N., so dismissing him (and other Nxt'ers like myself) as simple trolls is getting dangerously close to being FUD.

I have no idea on the OP's intentions with this thread  (probably not very BTS-friendly, though) but I've got no real interest in kicking BTS unless there's a good reason for it, and I reckon I've treated BTS fairly on this point. I don't see BTS as a threat to NXT in any way, the world of crypto (and the financial 'real world' ) is more than big enough to support a good selection of crypto currencies/platforms, and NXT and BTS don't seem to be sharing all that much common market space.
 
BTW: $50,000 ? Fukinell......that seems like lots to me. How much cash are the core BTS devs pulling down per month?

[StanLarimer]

The entire core dev team is currently paid automatically by the blockchain in a slow trickle of about 50 BTS (71 cents) every 17 minutes. This works out to about $22K per year at today's prices.

Last year, they wound up with Google-equivalent salaries for the top tier alpha-geeks they all are.
This year, they just get paid in equity worth 20% to 25% of what they had been making.

Thus, they are highly motivated to increase the BTS price to get their salaries back up to where they were!  

Where is the greed?
There is nothing but huge risk taking on everyone's part.
True entrepreneurship.
I'm proud of them all.

[StanLarimer]

By the way, if you'd like to use these new innovations to launch your own self-funding decentralized start-up, read how to do it the BitShares way here:  http://bitshares.org/regulation-proof-self-funding-dacs/

[brekyrself]

The problem with voting is, it's fundamentally flawed, because most people are fundamentally stupid and have no idea what's best let alone to do research on what's being proposed.

This is a very good point however in the case of a blockchain, I'll take voting over mining pools any day of the week.  At least all stakeholders have a vote where as anyone can buy hash power and simple non mining users have no say.

[Indemnified]

Stan,

No dark clouds of conspiracy here. I am just pointing out that every major change as of late is only to the benefit of the I3 Teams wallets.

As for an outstanding propagandist, thank you. And just think of the wonders I could've done had I been incentivized to toe the line with a 3 million bts bonus...😉

That's just silly. I am not an I3 member, nor have I ever met one. But I have been involved with this project since the very first day of mining PTS (and even before that, when I read the white paper and articles on Let's Talk Bitcoin).

And EVERY change has been debated and has turned out to be to the advantage of my wallet as well. The Larimers are by far the most transparent and honest people in the crypto space. Their integrity shines through every action and decision.

Something entirely different adds an obnoxious odor to your postings, Newmine.

[Newmine]

The problem with voting is, it's fundamentally flawed, because most people are fundamentally stupid and have no idea what's best let alone to do research on what's being proposed.

This is a very good point however in the case of a blockchain, I'll take voting over mining pools any day of the week.  At least all stakeholders have a vote where as anyone can buy hash power and simple non mining users have no say.

You can buy stake the same way you can buy hash power, with money. If I had $10 million to buy mining equipment for BTC, couldn't I take that $10 million and buy 1/4 or the BTS shares instead?