Bonus!

General Discussion
#201

A physical silver coin is worth say 0,1 btc but a stake is worth 2btc or more.

NEM has to be sold in large amounts to fund 1000+ coins and that will send the price down.

Stakeholders that did not sell till now are unlikely to  immediatelly sell after launch.

Forcing stakeholder into investing in something is not a good thing.
The 75% should be distibuted to the stakeholders and the market will do the rest.


So by doing this, other than selfish gains, will it make NEM the best crypto in crypto land?

Market will certainly do the rest and create a big crap on the coin.

#202


Rockethead's proposal seems to be a good compromise between the desire to use stakes taken from socks to develop the NEM ecosystem and the current stakeholders' desire to use these stakes for their own benefit.

However, there seem to be some details that are somewhat missing, so I would maybe outline the following for such a proposal:


    [li]Every stakeholder who is on the stakeholder list or bought NEMstake assets on the NXT AE will get a free silver coin. 1 stake, 1 coin.[/li]
    [li]Not just coins, but also "special privileges" in NEM should be given to each stake holder.[/li]
    [li]If stakes are fractional (e.g., 0.3), the stakeholders will get a fractional asset, tradable on the NEM asset exchange (e.g., 0.3 NEMsilver). They could then just sell this on the market.[/li]
    [li]Dev/marketing stakes will be excluded[/li]
    [li]If anyone lives in a place that cannot receive silver in the mail or they don't want to give out their address, they will receive a NEMsilver asset on the NEM asset exchange that they can sell.[/li]
    [li]AltNemo should have some limits imposed on the rate of selling the stakes for fiat, so as not to flood the market. This could be enforced via a multisig acct.[/li]
    [li]At least 108 stakes from socks should be distributed to people running nodes on the NEM network. There is an internal proposal on how to do this using 108 stakes distributed over 3 years.[/li]


    The advantages of a proposal like this are:

      [li]NEM ecosystem can get pushed forward and this will benefit everyone.[/li]
      [li]Every stakeholder will be given special privileges in AltNemo and also a free silver coin (with NEM cold wallet). The silver coin will create a tangible connection to NEM for people and I would argue this would make stake holders less eager to dump, given the tangible, emotional connection.[/li]
      [li]Enough stakes will be given to reward anyone running a node on the network, for a period of several years.[/li]
      [li]AltNemo will need to convert a majority of NEM to fiat to pay for the coins. If done responsibly, this will give liquidity to the market and further the distribution of NEM.[/li]



This definitely one of the more well thought out and detailed proposals I have heard so far. 

I think using the extra stakes to buy coins and then give those coins to the stakeholders will make a lot of stakeholders very happy.

I love the idea that NEM will have 3 years worth of support for Node runners.  I really think that this could make a big difference. 

I would like to hear about when multi-sig comes and how the account can be managed.  I think it would be nice to have Rockethead and a dev on in control of funds and some others too (but not me!)

Maybe some votes by the community could be used as guidelines for which projects get funding in the future.  That way AltNemo is a greater extension of the community. 

I like the idea of original stakeholders with coins having special privileges.  I am not sure exactly how that would work though if they sold their silver coin, or if they sold all their NEM.  Maybe some kind of key that comes with the coin, a key that can be transferred upon selling of the coin. 

I guess for me, it sounds like a pretty clean idea that the community can get behind and it creates a nice story.  Especially if NEM takes off, these little "NEM commencement founders coins" will become quite the prized possession. 

It is also just one more thing that would make NEM special and set us apart from the rest of the alt community.  The more things that we can do like that, the better.  Something like this has not ever been done before, ever, with any crypto. 

It would probably cause a flood of scams that would say they were doing the same thing, but actually just take the money.  In the long run, it would legitimize NEM more, as the one that started it, and actually did it. 

Also, silver coins are just kind of cool too.  Especially the 1oz 99.99 sliver ones.  They are big, heavy, and shiny.  I actually keep one at my desk and play with it while I read sometimes.  I think if we got those out to the founders, they would be really quite impressed.


I don't think we will launch without multisig, given the problems other coins have had. So in such a case, it should be possible to share an acct between AltNemo and a dev and release the coins at a rate that the market will not be flooded at.

Giving nemsters a physical coin for joining will be pretty huge, I think. That might even make a splash around various news outlets, creating a lot of buzz about NEM (especially since the coins will be minted at the Perth Mint).
#203

Perhaps I misunderstood the issue.

Not all unclaimed stakes should be issued as physical coin just a small part?

my math was:

Total 4000 Stakes (3000 Stakeholders - 1000 Development)

3000 - claimed stakes = total amount of stakes for physical NEM coins

#204

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-9-billion-witness-20141106



Great article.  In the midst of tinfoil-hat UKIPers slagging Brand off, a perfect example of the very thing he is highlighting.

Social conditioning means you are supposed to hate Russell Brand.  The status quo must be maintained.  Your masters have it all worked out for you. 
#205

Perhaps I misunderstood the issue.

Not all unclaimed stakes should be issued as physical coin just a small part?

my math was:

Total 4000 Stakes (3000 Stakeholders - 1000 Development)

3000 - claimed stakes = total amount of stakes for physical NEM coins


Yes, that is the intention, roughly that, one silver coin per stake.
#206


Perhaps I misunderstood the issue.

Not all unclaimed stakes should be issued as physical coin just a small part?

my math was:

Total 4000 Stakes (3000 Stakeholders - 1000 Development)

3000 - claimed stakes = total amount of stakes for physical NEM coins


Yes, that is the intention, roughly that, one silver coin per stake.


That would set the cost of one NEM silver artificially to 2 BTC at current value.

How will that lead to a wider distribution?

Sounds to me like taking the unclaimed stakes through the backdoor.

I think if someone wants a NEM silver he can buy it, but should not be forced to.

Everybody who wanted to dump NEM perhaps already did on the asset exchange.
So why is everybody so afraid to just distribute the 71% or 75% to the stakeholders?
Removing them from cirtulation one way or the other will cause many other problems.

Who will buy NEM when there is a large amount under the control of few people?
And that will happen if they are not distributed.
It doesn
#207



Perhaps I misunderstood the issue.

Not all unclaimed stakes should be issued as physical coin just a small part?

my math was:

Total 4000 Stakes (3000 Stakeholders - 1000 Development)

3000 - claimed stakes = total amount of stakes for physical NEM coins


Yes, that is the intention, roughly that, one silver coin per stake.


That would set the cost of one NEM silver artificially to 2 BTC at current value.

How will that lead to a wider distribution?

Sounds to me like taking the unclaimed stakes through the backdoor.

I think if someone wants a NEM silver he can buy it, but should not be forced to.

Everybody who wanted to dump NEM perhaps already did on the asset exchange.
So why is everybody so afraid to just distribute the 71% or 75% to the stakeholders?
Removing them from cirtulation one way or the other will cause many other problems.

Who will buy NEM when there is a large amount under the control of few people?
And that will happen if they are not distributed.
It doesn
#208

If you can prove to me that everyone who wanted to dump in the AE had already done so then I can accept your statement. Otherwise, I will take it as a baseless claim.

It is not about being afraid to distribute to Stakeholders. It is more like why it should be distributed to the current stakeholders for free? What can the stakeholders do to better NEM? Why should NEM be given to stakeholders to further their gains when this can be put into projects to make NEM a better platform and ecosystem and enhance its use and subsequently create better value? In fact, why should NEM be distributed to the same stakeholders without increasing the base of stakeholders.

Who is removing NEM from circulation? Why do you think there is large amount under control of a few people? What is large in your definition? 5%? 10%? Who are these few people who are controlling "large" amount? Why is it backdoor when it is being proposed here? Why is it "forcing"?

We made no mistake like Nxt. Weren't you one of the recipients of NEM Stake? Did we have 71 stake holders to start with, with each holding an average of 14% of the coins in circulation?

Did you see beyond what is being proposed here? Some >100NS are being slowly released into the market over time to BUY SILVERS. Is it not better distribution than giving back to the same stakeholders without increasing the number of stakeholders? There is no attempt to control here. There is a genuine attempt here to proliferate NEM and to better improve the NEM ecosystem.

There are three choices. Distribute all to the stakeholders but the above questions must be answered. Put all of them into furthering projects or middle of the road solution which is what is being proposed here.

Is your concern about the control of NEM coins or you are not comfortable with some people using them to build NEM into a better ecosystem?

Giving Silvers in lieu of NEM coins is already a clear intention of distributing the NEM coins to a larger crowd. There is absolutely no question of people trying to control here.


This claim comes from my experience with many other coins. You know that nobody can prove that no dumping will happen in the future.
Dumping will happen if people don
#209


If you can prove to me that everyone who wanted to dump in the AE had already done so then I can accept your statement. Otherwise, I will take it as a baseless claim.

It is not about being afraid to distribute to Stakeholders. It is more like why it should be distributed to the current stakeholders for free? What can the stakeholders do to better NEM? Why should NEM be given to stakeholders to further their gains when this can be put into projects to make NEM a better platform and ecosystem and enhance its use and subsequently create better value? In fact, why should NEM be distributed to the same stakeholders without increasing the base of stakeholders.

Who is removing NEM from circulation? Why do you think there is large amount under control of a few people? What is large in your definition? 5%? 10%? Who are these few people who are controlling "large" amount? Why is it backdoor when it is being proposed here? Why is it "forcing"?

We made no mistake like Nxt. Weren't you one of the recipients of NEM Stake? Did we have 71 stake holders to start with, with each holding an average of 14% of the coins in circulation?

Did you see beyond what is being proposed here? Some >100NS are being slowly released into the market over time to BUY SILVERS. Is it not better distribution than giving back to the same stakeholders without increasing the number of stakeholders? There is no attempt to control here. There is a genuine attempt here to proliferate NEM and to better improve the NEM ecosystem.

There are three choices. Distribute all to the stakeholders but the above questions must be answered. Put all of them into furthering projects or middle of the road solution which is what is being proposed here.

Is your concern about the control of NEM coins or you are not comfortable with some people using them to build NEM into a better ecosystem?

Giving Silvers in lieu of NEM coins is already a clear intention of distributing the NEM coins to a larger crowd. There is absolutely no question of people trying to control here.


This claim comes from my experience with many other coins. You know that nobody can prove that no dumping will happen in the future.
Dumping will happen if people don
#210

Would be good if you can answer my questions, so that you don't repeat the same things over and over again[...]

Yes, that would really help.
#211

Buying silver coins for everyone would not really lead to centralization in AltNemo because AltNemo will need to sell most of the NEM to pay for the coins and shipping to people. The remainder will probably be in the range of 10-20 stakes, which should be enough for AltNemo to get started on some projects.

#212


Would be good if you can answer my questions, so that you don't repeat the same things over and over again[...]

Yes, that would really help.


The distribution of real NEM has not startet yet. I am talking about unclaimed and sockpuppet stakes.
If they are not distributed they will stay under control of the dev and core team.
Or what do you think who will control them?

I want so to see the majority of these NEM distributed because there is no proven other method to give them to others.

Rewarding NIS owners for running a node is okay for me, but that will only need a very small amount.
If the amount is too high, useless nodes will be setup just for the "free" NEM. These will then be dumped
immediatelly to finance the server costs, as we see it in bitcoin mining business.
Has any major coin problems getting enough nodes? I dont think so.

Development fund is already 1000 stakes and developers will be the biggest NEM holders by far.
If the NEM the users should get is reduced from 71-75% to 40-50% then NEM is not spread wider.
It is then up to the devs to distibute them and very few will control distribution not very many
as if the stakeholders control them.
#213



Would be good if you can answer my questions, so that you don't repeat the same things over and over again[...]

Yes, that would really help.


The distribution of real NEM has not startet yet. I am talking about unclaimed and sockpuppet stakes.
If they are not distributed they will stay under control of the dev and core team.
Or what do you think who will control them?

I want so to see the majority of these NEM distributed because there is no proven other method to give them to others.

Rewarding NIS owners for running a node is okay for me, but that will only need a very small amount.
If the amount is too high, useless nodes will be setup just for the "free" NEM. These will then be dumped
immediatelly to finance the server costs, as we see it in bitcoin mining business.
Has any major coin problems getting enough nodes? I dont think so.

Development fund is already 1000 stakes and developers will be the biggest NEM holders by far.
If the NEM the users should get is reduced from 71-75% to 40-50% then NEM is not spread wider.
It is then up to the devs to distibute them and very few will control distribution not very many
as if the stakeholders control them.


Development fund is not 1000 stakes for everything and forever. If you look at the development contract you will find that they are not meant to be for a lot of things outside the bare bone NEM ecosystem. In any case, that is to be given to the Dev to see what is best.

You said again, "I am talking about unclaimed and sockpuppet stakes."

I don't think you understood what I have written. Why keep harping on them being in centralized control when a proposal has been put forward?

I would urge you to look at your questions that you keep posting and go back to what has been written and you will find the answers there. For example, 108 NS were proposed for the NIS nodes for 3 years equating to 36NS for one year, about 0.1NS per day. Is that too much? Is that centralized control? Is that a lot of dumping?

You said, "If the NEM the users should get is reduced from 71-75% to 40-50% then NEM is not spread wider.". Again, I don't think you clearly understood what has been proposed here. How is it being reduced when we are talking about increasing the user base with the unclaimed and socks? It is still status quo of 71-75%. There is no central control here.

If you look at all your arguments, I believe they have all been answered. I will appreciate if you can read them through thoroughly and perhaps come out with fresh arguments.
#214

Development fund is not 1000 stakes for everything and forever. If you look at the development contract you will find that they are not meant to be for a lot of things outside the bare bone NEM ecosystem. In any case, that is to be given to the Dev to see what is best.

You said again, "I am talking about unclaimed and sockpuppet stakes."

I don't think you understood what I have written. Why keep harping on them being in centralized control when a proposal has been put forward?

I would urge you to look at your questions that you keep posting and go back to what has been written and you will find the answers there. For example, 108 NS were proposed for the NIS nodes for 3 years equating to 36NS for one year, about 0.1NS per day. Is that too much? Is that centralized control? Is that a lot of dumping?

You said, "If the NEM the users should get is reduced from 71-75% to 40-50% then NEM is not spread wider.". Again, I don't think you clearly understood what has been proposed here. How is it being reduced when we are talking about increasing the user base with the unclaimed and socks? It is still status quo of 71-75%. There is no central control here.

If you look at all your arguments, I believe they have all been answered. I will appreciate if you can read them through thoroughly and perhaps come out with fresh arguments.


600 for V1 + 400 post V1 completion

I understand exactly what is written.

Controlled by 20 people = centralization
Controlled by 1500+ people = decentralization

When these stake are not release to the community, they are under central control one way or another.

They are held back for future use by a central organisation and community can only hope they do the right thing.
Perhaps take away 50% of devs first funding because NEM is now for a smaller community?
That would leave 700 stakes for future development.
Sounds ridiculous right?

I just cannot understand why you want to take away a large part of NEM from circulation and put them under central control.
This will exactly lead to what you don
#215


Development fund is not 1000 stakes for everything and forever. If you look at the development contract you will find that they are not meant to be for a lot of things outside the bare bone NEM ecosystem. In any case, that is to be given to the Dev to see what is best.

You said again, "I am talking about unclaimed and sockpuppet stakes."

I don't think you understood what I have written. Why keep harping on them being in centralized control when a proposal has been put forward?

I would urge you to look at your questions that you keep posting and go back to what has been written and you will find the answers there. For example, 108 NS were proposed for the NIS nodes for 3 years equating to 36NS for one year, about 0.1NS per day. Is that too much? Is that centralized control? Is that a lot of dumping?

You said, "If the NEM the users should get is reduced from 71-75% to 40-50% then NEM is not spread wider.". Again, I don't think you clearly understood what has been proposed here. How is it being reduced when we are talking about increasing the user base with the unclaimed and socks? It is still status quo of 71-75%. There is no central control here.

If you look at all your arguments, I believe they have all been answered. I will appreciate if you can read them through thoroughly and perhaps come out with fresh arguments.


600 for V1 + 400 post V1 completion

I understand exactly what is written.

Controlled by 20 people = centralization
Controlled by 1500+ people = decentralization

When these stake are not release to the community, they are under central control one way or another.

They are held back for future use by a central organisation and community can only hope they do the right thing.
Perhaps take away 50% of devs first funding because NEM is now for a smaller community?
That would leave 700 stakes for future development.
Sounds ridiculous right?

I just cannot understand why you want to take away a large part of NEM from circulation and put them under central control.
This will exactly lead to what you don
#216

For the unclaimed stakes, it seems that the proposal to create a venture fund that pays dividends for all NEM stakeholders has a lot of acceptance, so we will probably do that.


For the stakes taken from sockpuppets, about 110 stakes or so should be used to support nodes that run the network. 100 stakes can be used to buy silver coins and AltNemo "special privileges" for all stakeholders. The remaining stakes could be used for something further, still.


The point is, out of the sock and unclaimed stakes, 0 stakes would be controlled by the dev team.

#217

can you please explain how this fund will gain any profits but through selling nems? i as a holder of many stakes dont think that any amateur fund manager is better in managing my funds than me. so i would enjoy to manage my funds myself…

#218

can you please explain how this fund will gain any profits but through selling nems? i as a holder of many stakes dont think that any amateur fund manager is better in managing my funds than me. so i would enjoy to manage my funds myself....


The venture fund should be managed by a professional, as it will be established as a legitimate corporation. It will pay dividends to all the NEM stakeholders.

The fund will make money the same way any venture capital corporation makes money.
#219

so if i understand it right: ther will be a fund owning a few hundred stakes and about 3000 fund-tokens for the stakeholders. if i dont trust the fund i can just sell my fund tokens via e.g nxt ae?

#220

so if i understand it right: ther will be a fund owning a few hundred stakes and about 3000 fund-tokens for the stakeholders. if i dont trust the fund i can just sell my fund tokens via e.g nxt ae?


When NEM has its AE then it can be put on NEM AE. Technically, I don't think the fund can organize to trade this on the AE. It is not legal. But if the holders should decide that they want to trade this, they have to organize it themselves. Even then, I am not sure how this can be viewed by the authorities. This is jurisdiction dependent and will require the advice of legal experts.