NEM silver coin for all stakeholders?

Ideas
#61




If the logo discussion caused some dichotomy,
it was still harmless in such way that it was "abstract".

But here we have quite a concrete result, which affect to the stakeholders (their NEMs' price as NEMs must be sold to get dollars, their anonymity, their freedom to choose when obviously there exist many options, they may get different expenses than other members because someone's country may have different toll fees for silver/gold, etc).
And that effect may harm the community.

I would not use this vote's result .. at least not with "majority decides" principle.


Edit: 
before deciding this issue, someone should present all the expenses, which will come for posting one silver coin to another continent. All those will increase the amount of "must sell NEMs".


This all enthusiasm which the "silver coiners" have is naturally understandable, but still there MUST BE exact plans and estimations about the expenses. Without such it is just a discussion of possibilities.

And: also a vote, where has not been - beforehand - defined the rules, is just a consultative vote without any volition.
(I am surprised that people have passed this through their eyes, though here (and in BTT) have been so many, who have talked about legal issues in other discussions... :(

okay ... checked the top of this page: this is a consultative vote )


The silver cost is $120 shipped to your door step.


That is insured, worldwide shipping. So the total costs depend on how many final stakeholders we have.

There are plenty of stakes to afford this, though.


How about toll? .. are there any problems with silver (jewellery and coins may be a special case) ?

120 USD?  isn't that quite a lot...  some stakeholders may want that in cash instead...
(yes, there will be the silver coin markets ... but still that procedure has some risk that the coin holder will not get his original share)


#62





If the logo discussion caused some dichotomy,
it was still harmless in such way that it was "abstract".

But here we have quite a concrete result, which affect to the stakeholders (their NEMs' price as NEMs must be sold to get dollars, their anonymity, their freedom to choose when obviously there exist many options, they may get different expenses than other members because someone's country may have different toll fees for silver/gold, etc).
And that effect may harm the community.

I would not use this vote's result .. at least not with "majority decides" principle.


Edit: 
before deciding this issue, someone should present all the expenses, which will come for posting one silver coin to another continent. All those will increase the amount of "must sell NEMs".


This all enthusiasm which the "silver coiners" have is naturally understandable, but still there MUST BE exact plans and estimations about the expenses. Without such it is just a discussion of possibilities.

And: also a vote, where has not been - beforehand - defined the rules, is just a consultative vote without any volition.
(I am surprised that people have passed this through their eyes, though here (and in BTT) have been so many, who have talked about legal issues in other discussions... :(

okay ... checked the top of this page: this is a consultative vote )


The silver cost is $120 shipped to your door step.


That is insured, worldwide shipping. So the total costs depend on how many final stakeholders we have.

There are plenty of stakes to afford this, though.


How about toll? .. are there any problems with silver (jewellery and coins may be a special case) ?

120 USD?  isn't that quite a lot...  some stakeholders may want that in cash instead...
(yes, there will be the silver coin markets ... but still that procedure has some risk that the coin holder will not get his original share)


You mean customs?

For customs, shipping and insurance are not considered and most countries don't charge or care for under $100 USD equiv, so I think most people won't have to pay anything.
#63





If the logo discussion caused some dichotomy,
it was still harmless in such way that it was "abstract".

But here we have quite a concrete result, which affect to the stakeholders (their NEMs' price as NEMs must be sold to get dollars, their anonymity, their freedom to choose when obviously there exist many options, they may get different expenses than other members because someone's country may have different toll fees for silver/gold, etc).
And that effect may harm the community.

I would not use this vote's result .. at least not with "majority decides" principle.


Edit: 
before deciding this issue, someone should present all the expenses, which will come for posting one silver coin to another continent. All those will increase the amount of "must sell NEMs".


This all enthusiasm which the "silver coiners" have is naturally understandable, but still there MUST BE exact plans and estimations about the expenses. Without such it is just a discussion of possibilities.

And: also a vote, where has not been - beforehand - defined the rules, is just a consultative vote without any volition.
(I am surprised that people have passed this through their eyes, though here (and in BTT) have been so many, who have talked about legal issues in other discussions... :(

okay ... checked the top of this page: this is a consultative vote )


The silver cost is $120 shipped to your door step.


That is insured, worldwide shipping. So the total costs depend on how many final stakeholders we have.

There are plenty of stakes to afford this, though.


How about toll? .. are there any problems with silver (jewellery and coins may be a special case) ?

120 USD?  isn't that quite a lot...  some stakeholders may want that in cash instead...
(yes, there will be the silver coin markets ... but still that procedure has some risk that the coin holder will not get his original share)


120 is not a lot if you include shipping. I suggest you do some research first before you say anything. It tantamounts to splitting hairs.

Every procedure has risk. Nem coins sent to you also has its risks.


#64

2. Why is it being ignored to just distribute stakes to nemster and let them give to developers if they want?

Agree!
#65






If the logo discussion caused some dichotomy,
it was still harmless in such way that it was "abstract".

But here we have quite a concrete result, which affect to the stakeholders (their NEMs' price as NEMs must be sold to get dollars, their anonymity, their freedom to choose when obviously there exist many options, they may get different expenses than other members because someone's country may have different toll fees for silver/gold, etc).
And that effect may harm the community.

I would not use this vote's result .. at least not with "majority decides" principle.


Edit: 
before deciding this issue, someone should present all the expenses, which will come for posting one silver coin to another continent. All those will increase the amount of "must sell NEMs".


This all enthusiasm which the "silver coiners" have is naturally understandable, but still there MUST BE exact plans and estimations about the expenses. Without such it is just a discussion of possibilities.

And: also a vote, where has not been - beforehand - defined the rules, is just a consultative vote without any volition.
(I am surprised that people have passed this through their eyes, though here (and in BTT) have been so many, who have talked about legal issues in other discussions... :(

okay ... checked the top of this page: this is a consultative vote )


The silver cost is $120 shipped to your door step.


That is insured, worldwide shipping. So the total costs depend on how many final stakeholders we have.

There are plenty of stakes to afford this, though.


How about toll? .. are there any problems with silver (jewellery and coins may be a special case) ?

120 USD?  isn't that quite a lot...  some stakeholders may want that in cash instead...
(yes, there will be the silver coin markets ... but still that procedure has some risk that the coin holder will not get his original share)


120 is not a lot if you include shipping. I suggest you do some research first before you say anything. It tantamounts to splitting hairs.

Every procedure has risk. Nem coins sent to you also has its risks.


I think that now your arrogance hit your back. 120 USD can be a lot for some NEMsters : it has a big difference to have it in cash or a silver coin, whose silver has a value of X. You must not be too western or too cowboyish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_wage

You have forgotten the baseline :
1. Each Nemster has his own share as coins and he is free to use them;
    eg. give to fund / development projects

Now you have come this far:
2. Each Nemster have to receive a silver coin.


Can't you see how far from each others those alternatives are?
Or is here some misunderstanding?


   

Edit:
Utopianfuture's original plan was that 4 000 000 000 NEMcoin's will be distributed with the genesis block. Due to the total amount of coins it was probably suitable that there will be 4000 stakeholders - then everyone will get a nice round number: 1 000 000 NEMs.  (Edit2: utopianfuture January 19: "After we reach a critical mass, we will launch the NEM genesis block, (we plan not to have more than 4000 accounts in total, see FAQ below). A total of 4 billion NEM will be distributed equally to all adopters. That means every stakeholder will have an equal and fair share of NEM when NEM blockchain officially starts. Then you can sell- buy NEM freely and let the market forces determine the price.")

Two examples:

Example 1. The NEM announcement is very well followed and there will be 4000 BTT users, who want to participate to NEM. All of their reservations are checked and all of them are accepted to be stakeholders.
Then happens as it was planned in the original idea:
everyone of those 4000 stakeholders will get an equal amount of NEMs (if the total amount was 4000000000, then each got that 1 million).

Example 2. The NEM announcement is very well followed and there will be 4000 BTT users, who want to participate to NEM. All of their reservations are checked, but
there is detected so called sock puppets, and after few audit processes it has revealed that there exist only 2000 accepted stakeholders.
Then happens as it was planned in the original idea:
everyone of those 2000 stakeholders will get an equal amount of NEMs (if the total amount was 4000000000, then each got that 2 million).

Is there any conflict between the example 1 and the example 2?


Edit3:

no conflict ... at least no one has pointed any ...

During the spring, while the audit and other processes were going on,
it was seen that there will not be any round number of stakeholders,
maybe near 3000 and that was taken as a target.
Also it was studied that it is good to reserve some coins for the development, marketing and to the development team.
After those ideas there has been written down the distribution plans,
where the "common stakeholders" will get eg. 73 % of the total amount of NEMcoins.

After the findings of sock puppets it has been discussed what to do with puppets' stakes.
If following the example 2 above, it is very clear, what should be done:
the puppets' coins belong equally to everyone.

Now this silver coin discussions is going into such direction that the original,
egalitarian distribution is "guided" to something else.
The silver coin idea is not bad, but we must respect each individual's wish.
This ditribution issue is very different from the logo issue.

#66

nxkoil: so we should ignore the 70% of people who voted for a NEM coin and listen to you instead?

Basic redistribution or burning are not going to happen. Rather we will put the unclaimed stakes/etc in a fund for the community to use (dev team is taking 0 stakes).

#67

nxkoil: so we should ignore the 70% of people who voted for a NEM coin and listen to you instead?

Basic redistribution or burning are not going to happen. Rather we will put the unclaimed stakes/etc in a fund for the community to use (dev team is taking 0 stakes).



"70% of people who voted for a NEM coin"?
Do you mean this vote's result: ~70% voted for a silver NEM coin?

It is not listening to me ... am I alone here :)  ... but listening yourself: what is the right thing to do.




#68


nxkoil: so we should ignore the 70% of people who voted for a NEM coin and listen to you instead?

Basic redistribution or burning are not going to happen. Rather we will put the unclaimed stakes/etc in a fund for the community to use (dev team is taking 0 stakes).



"70% of people who voted for a NEM coin"?
Do you mean this vote's result: ~70% voted for a silver NEM coin?

It is not listening to me ... am I alone here :)  ... but listening yourself: what is the right thing to do.


Okay, well thank you for your opinion.

If the vote was for redistribution, it would trivially win, because people will agree to give themselves a raise very easily. I think it would be better for NEM long-term to put NEM in the community fund, the proposal for which I will try to write this weekend (I have an idea that I think people will find very interesting).

Giving everyone a physical silver coin will create a lot of press and probably boost the value of everyone's NEM much more than simple redistribution. So at least in fiat terms, I think you will easily get more money by accepting a coin :)
#69



nxkoil: so we should ignore the 70% of people who voted for a NEM coin and listen to you instead?

Basic redistribution or burning are not going to happen. Rather we will put the unclaimed stakes/etc in a fund for the community to use (dev team is taking 0 stakes).



"70% of people who voted for a NEM coin"?
Do you mean this vote's result: ~70% voted for a silver NEM coin?

It is not listening to me ... am I alone here :)  ... but listening yourself: what is the right thing to do.


Okay, well thank you for your opinion.

If the vote was for redistribution, it would trivially win, because people will agree to give themselves a raise very easily. I think it would be better for NEM long-term to put NEM in the community fund, the proposal for which I will try to write this weekend (I have an idea that I think people will find very interesting).

Giving everyone a physical silver coin will create a lot of press and probably boost the value of everyone's NEM much more than simple redistribution. So at least in fiat terms, I think you will easily get more money by accepting a coin :)


it may be so ...
anyway the decision should be concordant, 100%.

I do not require that redistribution. Those points and examples in that long post 
https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2667.msg9497#msg9497
are just arguments for the original baseline:
we all will get the equal amounts of crypto coins.
It is not so easy to adapt to new aspects.

I have collected coins and therefore silver coin is a little bit interesting ... but there lies several "buts" :)  And as you see the vote's current result, it is not my opinion only :)

#70







If the logo discussion caused some dichotomy,
it was still harmless in such way that it was "abstract".

But here we have quite a concrete result, which affect to the stakeholders (their NEMs' price as NEMs must be sold to get dollars, their anonymity, their freedom to choose when obviously there exist many options, they may get different expenses than other members because someone's country may have different toll fees for silver/gold, etc).
And that effect may harm the community.

I would not use this vote's result .. at least not with "majority decides" principle.


Edit: 
before deciding this issue, someone should present all the expenses, which will come for posting one silver coin to another continent. All those will increase the amount of "must sell NEMs".


This all enthusiasm which the "silver coiners" have is naturally understandable, but still there MUST BE exact plans and estimations about the expenses. Without such it is just a discussion of possibilities.

And: also a vote, where has not been - beforehand - defined the rules, is just a consultative vote without any volition.
(I am surprised that people have passed this through their eyes, though here (and in BTT) have been so many, who have talked about legal issues in other discussions... :(

okay ... checked the top of this page: this is a consultative vote )


The silver cost is $120 shipped to your door step.


That is insured, worldwide shipping. So the total costs depend on how many final stakeholders we have.

There are plenty of stakes to afford this, though.


How about toll? .. are there any problems with silver (jewellery and coins may be a special case) ?

120 USD?  isn't that quite a lot...  some stakeholders may want that in cash instead...
(yes, there will be the silver coin markets ... but still that procedure has some risk that the coin holder will not get his original share)


120 is not a lot if you include shipping. I suggest you do some research first before you say anything. It tantamounts to splitting hairs.

Every procedure has risk. Nem coins sent to you also has its risks.


I think that now your arrogance hit your back. 120 USD can be a lot for some NEMsters : it has a big difference to have it in cash or a silver coin, whose silver has a value of X. You must not be too western or too cowboyish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_wage

You have forgotten the baseline :
1. Each Nemster has his own share as coins and he is free to use them;
    eg. give to fund / development projects

Now you have come this far:
2. Each Nemster have to receive a silver coin.


Can't you see how far from each others those alternatives are?
Or is here some misunderstanding?


There is definitely a misunderstanding on your part. It is vexatious that there are people who parachute from the sky without trying to understand the whole picture of what have been proposed now and not forced upon.

I don't wish to press further unless you understand what Altnemo is all about, how NEM may benefit as a project with Altnemo's intended value adds and what Altnemo is trying to achieve here. As I have been saying many times, don't miss the forest for the leaves in front of your feet.

Your research of wages is like a dog barking up the wrong tree. Can you not interpret $120 as not expensive when compared to buying coins from elsewhere and have them shipped to you? And before you run off to research and try and prove  otherwise, do understand the objective of Altnemo is to raise funds to do something good for NEM.

I don't think you appreciate what we are trying to do here. You don't like the idea of  NEM going to the silvers because you think it is a ripoff and you don't believe AltNemo will help make NEM a better project and therefore you believe that NEM coins should go into your pocket instead. Your priority is in that order. Fine. Heard you loud and clear.

You just want the NEM for yourself. You've said your piece and you have obviously voted. We don't need to hear more counter arguments as they're counterproductive.

Just remember that you have as much right as I have to choose how these stakes are to be used. There is no forcing here. And do remember that at the end of the day, a consensus must be reached and some people will be disappointed. There is no such thing as 100% absolute consensus as there will be some who won't and we shall see a deadlock. In fact we shall see deadlock in every possible route if 100% is used as a yardstick. I am not sure how you can so selfishly think that it has to be 100%. It has to work with a simple majority. But we still need to soldier on for better or for worse.

Remember also that if ever we choose for re-distribution, I want to fight for this too as it is in the principles set forth: https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2501.msg9008#msg9008. I am sure that those who bought stakes from the AE will support this idea as it is to their interest. I am also sure that a vast majority will come out and support and will be more than 60% of all stakeholders. Then what?

AltNemo is an idea after the departure of UP. Does it mean that an entity like AltNemo should not exist at all for eternity? Multisig is something not conceived for this launch. Does it mean that we should not include it? If things are to remain as they were, we would all be living in the caves like the Flintstones. Why should we stick to things as we like and change other things to suit ourselves? Isn't it then self gratification? The change in the crypto economy is a constant and if we continue to be stagnant, then the initiative will be stagnant too while we watch the world passes us by.

In any case, you have expressed your opinion by voting. Close to 1200 have read this topic and if they really care for either way, they would have voted. Otherwise, it can be assumed that a vast majority of the 1500+ stakeholders have read and understood. They would have understood that if a decision comes out either way, they are not adverse and we have to respect their stand as well.

I wish to end by reiterating that there is no forcing here. It is a proposal. Please do not distort the meaning of this topic.  It is also good to take cognizance of the statements below in blue.
#71

Close to 1200 have read this topic and if they really care for either way, they would have voted.

1) Close to 1200 different IPs were logged but not 1200 people read it.
2) I think your conclusion is wrong: At least I didn't vote yet, because I miss a clear overview of the possibilities with a pro/cons list or a list of arguments. Its hidden in all the posts in this thread or even in other threads and I didn't have the time yet to read that much really concentrated, collect all the core points and decide for myself.
#72


...
You have forgotten the baseline :
1. Each Nemster has his own share as coins and he is free to use them;
    eg. give to fund / development projects

Now you have come this far:
2. Each Nemster have to receive a silver coin.
...


...
There is no forcing here. And do remember that at the end of the day, a consensus must be reached and some people will be disappointed. ...


First one suggestion:
remove your last post, if you want to give the impression that you are a trustworthy and non-biased person/researcher, whose postings and their objecitivity can be trusted. You are writing as you would know, what I think and what I have studied and what I understand and what I appreciate and how greedy I am and also that I think ripoffs. Those are very [u]wrong [/u]assumptions and show that you do not trust. You are not following your own 'blue line'.


In this vote-thread the "AltNemo" is first time mentioned on the page 3.
If AltNemo is important in the big picture, why it is not mentioned already in the vote announcement and explained all those "possibilities" and really sold it to the people - also to 30% of them? 
Well, of course many (but maybe not all the voters) of us know about AltNemo and someone has already even critized that "dependence" ...  not me though: I have seen the forest, I can see, what "may" happen.

If it is so important to get a good start for the AltNemo, then why you "silver coiners" are not ready to do everything to accomplish it? Why you are not ready to sacrifice something and be satisfied with the 70 % of the NEMsters and give a suitable alternative for the rest?
(Make The AltNemo IPO - I may participate.)


About the "change":
a change is understandable in this kind of projects. The change itself is not any problem.

But all the changes and decisions need to be ethically right and 
need to take into consideration the context, to where we all have joined.

With the earlier examples I tried to present the conflict. 
Now this silver project is basically touching to every stakeholders' coins -
as originally the puppets' coins belonged to all of us.
Ok ... of course the community can decide a new target for the puppets' coins; e.g. a fund.
But now "silver coiners" are making a "re-distribution" in a way, which differs quite much from our context, where we have been almost a year.
Yes, there have been presented "solutions" to those who are not pleased to receive the silver coin. Anyway, those solutions bring just more open issues...

One solution was to sell the coin in markets - AE or something else.
That may still set us in a different position and it is not sure, if the price in the markets will be fair.
(Yes, there is a word "may" - similarly as "how NEM may benefit" exists in your post.)
That is a needless risk for those, who do not want to receive the silver coin.
When AltNemo is taking a risk(?), why do we all have to take a risk?

The fact is that also the risks are relative. 
If someone has invested ~500 NXT, is it fair that now he must participate to "120 USD risk" (or what its actual value is) with the rich guys like you, who have invested 2 BTC or even more?
(It is quite usual that the rich people do not see the things from the same point as the rest, but they are good to sell their ideas/businesses.)

#73

@nxkoil: I think there are advantages and disadvantages of any decision we make.


I'm certainly no "rich man" (I am a poor university student, actually), but I do think that giving coins to everyone is the best for NEM on its own merits, without considering extra benefits to NEM and the NEM ecosystem by helping provide funding for AltNemo (which is definitely a good thing for NEM, [font=Verdana]IMHO[/font][font=Verdana][size=78%]).[/font]


I have tried to make the case that the limited edition proofs, minted at the Perth Mint, will be worth quite a lot in the future, that they will build a physical connection between NEM and the nemsters, that giving everyone silver bullion will be huge for NEM's publicity, and that it would be good to take some of the sock stakes, from the people that stole from NEM and everyone, and redistribute to everyone by giving them something of lasting, physical value. I hope that you can think about this some more and try to think about how this is a radical and new idea and that it might be worth trying. No other crypto has even come close to trying something like this.

#74

@nxkoil: I think there are advantages and disadvantages of any decision we make.


I'm certainly no "rich man" (I am a poor university student, actually), but I do think that giving coins to everyone is the best for NEM on its own merits, without considering extra benefits to NEM and the NEM ecosystem by helping provide funding for AltNemo (which is definitely a good thing for NEM, [font=Verdana]IMHO[/font][font=Verdana][size=78%]).[/font]


I have tried to make the case that the limited edition proofs, minted at the Perth Mint, will be worth quite a lot in the future, that they will build a physical connection between NEM and the nemsters, that giving everyone silver bullion will be huge for NEM's publicity, and that it would be good to take some of the sock stakes, from the people that stole from NEM and everyone, and redistribute to everyone by giving them something of lasting, physical value. I hope that you can think about this some more and try to think about how this is a radical and new idea and that it might be worth trying. No other crypto has even come close to trying something like this.



from BTT:
These coins are going to be really worth quite a lot in the future I think. This is truly historical.



I am not sure, if you should anymore write those statements ...
people may start believing in those :)

Well, it is interesting ... but in principle there are those "buts" ...
#75


@nxkoil: I think there are advantages and disadvantages of any decision we make.


I'm certainly no "rich man" (I am a poor university student, actually), but I do think that giving coins to everyone is the best for NEM on its own merits, without considering extra benefits to NEM and the NEM ecosystem by helping provide funding for AltNemo (which is definitely a good thing for NEM, [font=Verdana]IMHO[/font][font=Verdana][size=78%]).[/font]


I have tried to make the case that the limited edition proofs, minted at the Perth Mint, will be worth quite a lot in the future, that they will build a physical connection between NEM and the nemsters, that giving everyone silver bullion will be huge for NEM's publicity, and that it would be good to take some of the sock stakes, from the people that stole from NEM and everyone, and redistribute to everyone by giving them something of lasting, physical value. I hope that you can think about this some more and try to think about how this is a radical and new idea and that it might be worth trying. No other crypto has even come close to trying something like this.



from BTT:
These coins are going to be really worth quite a lot in the future I think. This is truly historical.



I am not sure, if you should anymore write those statements ...
people may start believing in those :)

Well, it is interesting ... but in principle there are those "buts" ...


TL;dr: ride the NEM silver train to unspeakable riches! :D
#76

Divide the number of unclaimed(or the number that would be used for this if it goes ahead) by (number of btt stake holders + (number of AE stake holders who have sent in a nem address + the number of remaining AE stake holders who havnt redeemed)), (result = x), then request that users who want a silver coin make contact  via btt account they use to claim or via nxt account. For every user who says yes they want a coin, x stakes get put in the altnemo pot for silver coins. This separates the yes people from the no/no contact people and only people who want a coin can designate their "share" of unclaimed.

Only those who explicitly
Say they want a coin and are ok with "their share" going to this will be included and the "no/no response" people's "share" of unclaimed will go back to community fund.

The silver coins will be more scarce and there will be far less unclaimed silver coins. No one is forced in/out of the deal and altnemo will get as much funding as the community explicitly agrees with and no one will be "speaking for others" or "making decisions for others". It puts the onus on the community to do this or not.

Also with the original plan its all get a coin or none. With this method those who want one will get one and those who don't won't.

#77

I like kodtycoon proposal but asking people via btt account and other means can be a mess… We can simply use NEM messages after launch.

#78

Divide the number of unclaimed(or the number that would be used for this if it goes ahead) by (number of btt stake holders + (number of AE stake holders who have sent in a nem address + the number of remaining AE stake holders who havnt redeemed)), (result = x), then request that users who want a silver coin make contact  via btt account they use to claim or via nxt account. For every user who says yes they want a coin, x stakes get put in the altnemo pot for silver coins. This separates the yes people from the no/no contact people and only people who want a coin can designate their "share" of unclaimed.

Only those who explicitly
Say they want a coin and are ok with "their share" going to this will be included and the "no/no response" people's "share" of unclaimed will go back to community fund.

The silver coins will be more scarce and there will be far less unclaimed silver coins. No one is forced in/out of the deal and altnemo will get as much funding as the community explicitly agrees with and no one will be "speaking for others" or "making decisions for others". It puts the onus on the community to do this or not.

Also with the original plan its all get a coin or none. With this method those who want one will get one and those who don't won't.


If people agree to carry on with this, I think Kod's is a good point to take into consideration.
#79

I like kodtycoon proposal but asking people via btt account and other means can be a mess... We can simply use NEM messages after launch.

Very good point.. Didn't think of that lol
#80

Divide the number of unclaimed(or the number that would be used for this if it goes ahead) by (number of btt stake holders + (number of AE stake holders who have sent in a nem address + the number of remaining AE stake holders who havnt redeemed)), (result = x), then request that users who want a silver coin make contact  via btt account they use to claim or via nxt account. For every user who says yes they want a coin, x stakes get put in the altnemo pot for silver coins. This separates the yes people from the no/no contact people and only people who want a coin can designate their "share" of unclaimed.

Only those who explicitly
Say they want a coin and are ok with "their share" going to this will be included and the "no/no response" people's "share" of unclaimed will go back to community fund.

The silver coins will be more scarce and there will be far less unclaimed silver coins. No one is forced in/out of the deal and altnemo will get as much funding as the community explicitly agrees with and no one will be "speaking for others" or "making decisions for others". It puts the onus on the community to do this or not.

Also with the original plan its all get a coin or none. With this method those who want one will get one and those who don't won't.


Is this an egalitarian process?
Could you fill the table below?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      NEMsters,                !  NEMsters,
                                      who say 'yes'          !          who say 'no'
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What they give                                              !
and to whom/where                                        !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What they receive                                          !
and from whom/where                                    !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------