NEM silver coin for all stakeholders?

Ideas
#81


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?

yes i think its the most egalitarian i can think of atleast.

what happens if nemsters say yes/no?

NEMsters who say no will not be given a coin, will not have their "share" of unclaimed coins (or their "share" of the coins that would go towards this if plan A goes ahead) and NEMsters who say yes will get a silver coin and their share will go towards coins

What they give and to whom/where?

and

What they receive? and from whom/where?

there are a number of unclaimed/sock stakes, and because this is a decentralised movement every participant should have a say in what happens to these stakes. we can know how many stakes would be in a participants "share" simply by dividing the number of stakes by the number of addresses in the nemesis block(thanks rigel) and the number is what we would "assign" to each user. this also eliminates the wealthy accounts having greater benefits or "more voting rights than others" by only basing it on addresses sent in apposed to stakes per account.

the stakes that get approved to be used for this purpose would be used to purchase solid silver coins [custom made] from the perth mint that will also contain some amounts of nem. these coins will then be distributed (or shares for them issued) to those who explicitly agreed for stakes to be used for this purpose. the [small amount] of profit made from the production of these coins would be used to fund altnemo.

in short,

nemsters agrees -> gets silver coin and their "share" goes to the cost of the coin + some profit to fund altnemo

nemsters who disagree/does not comment -> dont get silver coin, their share goes to community fund.

no one gets to say what happens to someone elses "share". no one is forced into an agreement with or without prior knowledge. those who consent can move forward with the deal even if everyone else disagrees. and no one can put any blame on anyone else but themselves if anything doesnt go to plan as they will have consented to the deal.

plus, how much of a fail would it be if 2500+ coins are minted and less than 500 get claimed? :/

#82



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?

yes i think its the most egalitarian i can think of atleast.

what happens if nemsters say yes/no?

NEMsters who say no will not be given a coin, will not have their "share" of unclaimed coins (or their "share" of the coins that would go towards this if plan A goes ahead) and NEMsters who say yes will get a silver coin and their share will go towards coins

What they give and to whom/where?

and

What they receive? and from whom/where?

there are a number of unclaimed/sock stakes, and because this is a decentralised movement every participant should have a say in what happens to these stakes. we can know how many stakes would be in a participants "share" simply by dividing the number of stakes by the number of addresses in the nemesis block(thanks rigel) and the number is what we would "assign" to each user. this also eliminates the wealthy accounts having greater benefits or "more voting rights than others" by only basing it on addresses sent in apposed to stakes per account.

the stakes that get approved to be used for this purpose would be used to purchase solid silver coins [custom made] from the perth mint that will also contain some amounts of nem. these coins will then be distributed (or shares for them issued) to those who explicitly agreed for stakes to be used for this purpose. the [small amount] of profit made from the production of these coins would be used to fund altnemo.

in short,

nemsters agrees -> gets silver coin and their "share" goes to the cost of the coin + some profit to fund altnemo

nemsters who disagree/does not comment -> dont get silver coin, their share goes to community fund.

no one gets to say what happens to someone elses "share". no one is forced into an agreement with or without prior knowledge. those who consent can move forward with the deal even if everyone else disagrees. and no one can put any blame on anyone else but themselves if anything doesnt go to plan as they will have consented to the deal.

plus, how much of a fail would it be if 2500+ coins are minted and less than 500 get claimed? :/


Looks too complicated with so many lines of text :)  Let's try a "picture"


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      NEMsters,                !    NEMsters,
                                      who say 'yes'          !    who say 'no'
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What they give                    their share          !  their share
and to whom/where            of the puppets'    !  of the puppets'
                                                stakes  to the    !  stakes to a fund
                                                silver project      !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What they receive                silver coin from    !        nothing
and from whom/where          the silver project  !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Could you correct that? :)

#83

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.


The stakeholders are only entitled to their own stakes and not to the unclaimed stakes or sock stakes taken from others. The unclaimed/sock stakes should be put into a community fund to help further NEM. NEM has to compete with other coins like maidsafe and ethereum that did huge IPOs and collected a lot of money. By comparison, NEM was not an IPO and gave stakes away or sold for a few dollars, so there are very few resources. Simply redistributing everything to the stakeholders means that NEM is just another pump and dump coin with no future (no resources for people to build things = no future).

However, many of the stakeholders want redistribution because they obviously only care about themselves and making a quick profit. Thus giving coins to everyone was proposed as a compromise solution: we give out coins to everyone, redistributing part of the wealth, and also buying the coins will help AltNemo's crowd sale that is ongoing, so that projects like mobile apps, etc, for NEM can get moving.

Despite a very few voices who continue to want money only for themselves, this poll has consistently shown a 70% share in favor of buying the coins and thus moving forward with the middle-road solution that both gives people something of lasting value and helps the NEM ecosystem.

Silver coin scarcity is not an issue, since mintage is already going to be fixed at the minimum quantity required by the mint.
#84

When the NEM asset exchange is launched, everyone will get an asset redeemable for a silver coin (sounds like the old US silver certificates, so in a way this is a second, silver-backed digital currency that is fully fungible; in essence everyone becomes a stakeholder in both currencies).

#85





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.


The stakeholders are only entitled to their own stakes and not to the unclaimed stakes or sock stakes taken from others.

Silver coin scarcity is not an issue, since mintage is already going to be fixed at the minimum quantity required by the mint.


I know no one can actually claim the coins. But everyone has a say in what happens to them I would hope…

What's the minimum and what happens to the remainder of coins if there are more coins than are claimed? We could end up spending thousands on coins that many of which don't get claimed…

#86





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.


The stakeholders are only entitled to their own stakes and not to the unclaimed stakes or sock stakes taken from others.

Silver coin scarcity is not an issue, since mintage is already going to be fixed at the minimum quantity required by the mint.


I know no one can actually claim the coins. But everyone has a say in what happens to them I would hope..

What's the minimum and what happens to the remainder of coins if there are more coins than are claimed? We could end up spending thousands on coins that many of which don't get claimed..


If we create an asset that is redeemable for silver, this is a silver-backed digital currency. In this case, we just hold on to the coins in a vault and give them when people redeem the tokens, just like the US used to do with its silver-backed dollars.

I can see the CoinDesk headline now: AltCoin NEM Announces Parallel Silver-Backed Digital Currency

:)

Regarding the funds, yes the community should have a say, which is why I created this poll as a referendum. Also, I will announce a proposal for the community fund today. It think it will be very exciting.
#87

...
The stakeholders are only entitled to their own stakes and not to the unclaimed stakes or sock stakes taken from others.


Looks like there are too many matters ...  so, it is better to solve one thing at a time :)

You are saying that sock puppets' stakes does not belong to stakeholders.
To whom those stakes belong?



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."

Three 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 [u]all [/u]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 [u]each got that 1 million[/u]).

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 [u]2000[/u] 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 [u]each got that 2 millions[/u]).

Example 3. The NEM announcement is ... 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 [u]100[/u] accepted stakeholders.
Then happens as it was planned in the original idea:
everyone of those 100 stakeholders will get an equal amount of NEMs (if the total amount was 4000000000, then [u]each got that 40 millions[/u]).


If there in the Example 3 would be used the method you just presented, what would be the distribution?
- each stakeholder would get 1 million,
- stakeholders' total share would be 100 millions
- community would get a sum of 3 900 000 000 NEMs and will decide with votes
  how to share it to different projects
Would it be like the above or what kind?



It is not a question of "want(ing) money only for themselves", but treating equally each individual's wish -  as in the January's announcement has been written.
#88









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.


The stakeholders are only entitled to their own stakes and not to the unclaimed stakes or sock stakes taken from others.

Silver coin scarcity is not an issue, since mintage is already going to be fixed at the minimum quantity required by the mint.


I know no one can actually claim the coins. But everyone has a say in what happens to them I would hope…

What's the minimum and what happens to the remainder of coins if there are more coins than are claimed? We could end up spending thousands on coins that many of which don't get claimed…


If we create an asset that is redeemable for silver, this is a silver-backed digital currency. In this case, we just hold on to the coins in a vault and give them when people redeem the tokens, just like the US used to do with its silver-backed dollars.

I can see the CoinDesk headline now: AltCoin NEM Announces Parallel Silver-Backed Digital Currency

:slight_smile:


Hmm ok now that sounds interesting…

What's the minimum order from the Perth mint?
#89









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.


The stakeholders are only entitled to their own stakes and not to the unclaimed stakes or sock stakes taken from others.

Silver coin scarcity is not an issue, since mintage is already going to be fixed at the minimum quantity required by the mint.


I know no one can actually claim the coins. But everyone has a say in what happens to them I would hope..

What's the minimum and what happens to the remainder of coins if there are more coins than are claimed? We could end up spending thousands on coins that many of which don't get claimed..


If we create an asset that is redeemable for silver, this is a silver-backed digital currency. In this case, we just hold on to the coins in a vault and give them when people redeem the tokens, just like the US used to do with its silver-backed dollars.

I can see the CoinDesk headline now: AltCoin NEM Announces Parallel Silver-Backed Digital Currency

:)


Hmm ok now that sounds interesting..

What's the minimum order from the Perth mint?


Silver is 3000 I think (can't remember, but around there) and gold is 300 for minimum orders. We will have to create a holding company in Singapore to handle the order, as the mint doesn't work with individuals.
#90

@nxkoil: It is very important to work as a community to adapt over time as things change. That being said, I think we should try hard to stay to our ideals that we started with. With that in mind, I am working on a proposal for a community-led fund that I think you will like a lot. Hopefully we can build a new economy where power is not centralized in the hands of a few, but rather, the individual is empowered and give tremendous freedom (and responsibility).

#91

We'll that's a handy minimum :slight_smile:

what happens if 100 stakes are assigned to this but then come launch those 100 stakes are worth enough to get 6000/9000 coins? would the difference between cost of 3000 silver coins and value of the 100 stakes be returned to community fund or go to altnemo? or is there a set percentage that will be taken as profit?

#92

We'll that's a handy minimum :)

what happens if 100 stakes are assigned to this but then come launch those 100 stakes are worth enough to get 6000/9000 coins? would the difference between cost of 3000 silver coins and value of the 100 stakes be returned to community fund or go to altnemo? or is there a set percentage that will be taken as profit?


It is hard to predict the price of NEM and it could go either way (that is, up too high or down too low to buy given the assigned stakes). I don't see why there could not be slight adjustments up or down as the situation requires.
#93

@nxkoil: It is very important to work as a community to adapt over time as things change. That being said, I think we should try hard to stay to our ideals that we started with. With that in mind, I am working on a proposal for a community-led fund that I think you will like a lot. Hopefully we can build a new economy where power is not centralized in the hands of a few, but rather, the individual is empowered and give tremendous freedom (and responsibility).



1. Your proposal in https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2686.msg9646#msg9646
  is quite fine, when browsed it lightly ...
  but will it help with the "ultimate" problem?

2. The "ultimate" problem is the one which will need a solution,
    a solution probably before all the other solutions (ofc that
    solution can be fixed later, but it would be very nice, if NEM is launched
    from the clean table).

  - to whom belong the stakes of sock puppets,
    who claimed their stakes against the rules ?

  - how the development stakes are divided between actual developers
    and "temporary helpers" ?

  (And no, this is not about greedyness, just requesting the fairness and openness. Similarly as I was one of the first in Dec/Jan, who questionized NXT's fairness.)




3. You have used lately "Tl;dr ".    What does it mean?  "too long, didn't read" ?


4. I have also earlier critized the forum's smite system. In this discussion it has also shown its ... or community's worse sides. When someone is writing down the facts and keeping the discussion in those (instead of going to personalities), it is not understood, but smited him. Very strange and unmotivating.
(Maybe members, who have not commented anything, should have no right to applaud/smite  https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2172.msg5070#msg5070 )
#94


@nxkoil: It is very important to work as a community to adapt over time as things change. That being said, I think we should try hard to stay to our ideals that we started with. With that in mind, I am working on a proposal for a community-led fund that I think you will like a lot. Hopefully we can build a new economy where power is not centralized in the hands of a few, but rather, the individual is empowered and give tremendous freedom (and responsibility).



1. Your proposal in https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2686.msg9646#msg9646
  is quite fine, when browsed it lightly ...
  but will it help with the "ultimate" problem?

Then you should comment in that thread :)

2. The "ultimate" problem is the one which will need a solution,
    a solution probably before all the other solutions (ofc that
    solution can be fixed later, but it would be very nice, if NEM is launched
    from the clean table).

  - to whom belong the stakes of sock puppets,
    who claimed their stakes against the rules ?

According to the initial announcement for NEM, people who send multiple transactions from the same account would not get multiple stakes, but that would just be counted as a donation to the dev fund. The initial 155 socks were then taken for the dev fund because those people broke the rules. Rather than doing the same thing a third time, we want to not centralize power in the dev team and instead put these into a community fund, buy silver bullion NEM coins for each stakeholder, and pay out to random nodes who support the network (these are the proposals).

  - how the development stakes are divided between actual developers
    and "temporary helpers" ?

Nothing has been decided, but it is up to Jaguar, the lead dev. According to the dev contract, the 10% of NEM reserved for the dev will not all be released until V1 is complete.


  (And no, this is not about greedyness, just requesting the fairness and openness. Similarly as I was one of the first in Dec/Jan, who questionized NXT's fairness.)




3. You have used lately "Tl;dr ".    What does it mean?  "too long, didn't read" ?

Yes, it is internet slang and typically people will write that to denote a summary of a long post.


4. I have also earlier critized the forum's smite system. In this discussion it has also shown its ... or community's worse sides. When someone is writing down the facts and keeping the discussion in those (instead of going to personalities), it is not understood, but smited him. Very strange and unmotivating.
(Maybe members, who have not commented anything, should have no right to applaud/smite  https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2172.msg5070#msg5070 )


The karma system is not perfect, but NXT has a similar system as well on their forums. I don't know if it can be made harder to spam or not.

#95



@nxkoil: It is very important to work as a community to adapt over time as things change. That being said, I think we should try hard to stay to our ideals that we started with. With that in mind, I am working on a proposal for a community-led fund that I think you will like a lot. Hopefully we can build a new economy where power is not centralized in the hands of a few, but rather, the individual is empowered and give tremendous freedom (and responsibility).



1. Your proposal in https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2686.msg9646#msg9646
  is quite fine, when browsed it lightly ...
  but will it help with the "ultimate" problem?

[u]makoto: [/u]Then you should comment in that thread :)



2. The "ultimate" problem is the one which will need a solution,
    a solution probably before all the other solutions (ofc that
    solution can be fixed later, but it would be very nice, if NEM is launched
    from the clean table).

  - to whom belong the stakes of sock puppets,
    who claimed their stakes against the rules ?

[u]makoto: [/u]According to the initial announcement for NEM, people who send multiple transactions from the same account would not get multiple stakes, but that would just be counted as a donation to the dev fund. The initial 155 socks were then taken for the dev fund because those people broke the rules. Rather than doing the same thing a third time, we want to not centralize power in the dev team and instead put these into a community fund, buy silver bullion NEM coins for each stakeholder, and pay out to random nodes who support the network (these are the proposals)

  - how the development stakes are divided between actual developers
    and "temporary helpers" ?

[u]makoto: [/u]Nothing has been decided, but it is up to Jaguar, the lead dev. According to the dev contract, the 10% of NEM reserved for the dev will not all be released until V1 is complete.


  (And no, this is not about greedyness, just requesting the fairness and openness. Similarly as I was one of the first in Dec/Jan, who questionized NXT's fairness.)




3. You have used lately "Tl;dr ".    What does it mean?  "too long, didn't read" ?

[u]makoto: [/u]Yes, it is internet slang and typically people will write that to denote a summary of a long post.


4. I have also earlier critized the forum's smite system. In this discussion it has also shown its ... or community's worse sides. When someone is writing down the facts and keeping the discussion in those (instead of going to personalities), it is not understood, but smited him. Very strange and unmotivating.
(Maybe members, who have not commented anything, should have no right to applaud/smite  https://forum.ournem.com/index.php?topic=2172.msg5070#msg5070 )


[u]makoto: [/u]The karma system is not perfect, but NXT has a similar system as well on their forums. I don't know if it can be made harder to spam or not.




1. ok

2. continues ...

  It was not written that the [u]stakes[/u] will be put to a fund, it was
"One Bitcointalk account is entitled one stake spot. If you send more than the required amount at one time or multiple times, we will consider it a donation to NEM."
  That was about [u]sending NXTs[/u] ... and those extra NXTs were put to the fund. Not the stakes, which sock puppets reserved from our heap of stakes.

So, actually those sock puppets' stakes does not even exist. They are only numbers (or a number - 155 ?).


3. ok 
  (noticed that you started the new thread with those - "too long, don't read" ? :)

4. ok




#96

Quote makoto


Actually, rockethead is the one who suggested a NEM silver for every nemster :)


I agree, rockethead suggested it, because i read it in a previous topic now, so i apologize for that.

People will trivially vote for themselves a raise, without thought about the future of NEM or other concerns, which is why we don't want to simply redistribute or burn.


So you sound like a social democrat who tries to change the parameters of an election when they think the people might vote for something other than what they think is best for them:) But that's not really democracy.

I agree, so people should run their assets through a tumbler or similar method before redeeming them. It would not be good to link accounts with people and I don't plan to keep those records.


This doesn't address the issue since a person with malicious intent would be aware that almost all accounts hold 1 million NEM. What is the point tumbling to disguise the amounts, when we already know the amount in practically every NEM account.

NEMstake has had the most volume on the NXT asset exchange, so I expect there will be enough daily volume once we hit exchanges to slowly sell off enough stakes to pay for the coins being minted. This should be done over several months.


I doubt that. You are talking about a lot of silver, which is 10 x overpriced at over 100 dollars an oz by the way. Nomatter how slowly you sell it, it will decline the market and punish every NEMholder.

0.1 stake will get an asset token for 0.1 NEM silver, not a full coin. If someone has 10 NEMstake assets, they will get 10 coin asset tokens. Fractional tokens cannot be redeemed, but people can buy/sell on the open market until they get full stakes.

OK
#97


I don't mind the idea of silver coins in general, it is good publicity and they are cool and i have a new world order one from a while back which is quite rare now and valuable, so i dont mind another. BUT.

1. It does seem a bit like this silver thing got pushed on us like remember the time makoto also tried to push his logo on us  ;D even though i think he is not a bad guy really in his heart.

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

3. The address thing is a problem because honestly if someone holds 1 million nem and those become valuable, it might be a real danger to some nemster for criminals to know their address. They can send to a PO Box, but that is hassle for the nemster to make it.

4. selling nemstakes by devs will create a crash even if done slowly (how slowly to buy 3000 silver oz!) maybe taking more away from original stakeholders than 1 silver coin is worth. so penalizing nemsters.

5. Why is some dude who only bought 0.1 stake on the NXT AE allowed to get the same silver coin as an investor who has a full stake from the early days? Surely a full stake holder shall get 10 coins then  ;D


1. Push? I thought it is being voted now.

2. I am not sure about being ignored but there are close to 1000 views and people who cared would vote. For those who viewed and did not bother, they should be prepared for either way.

3. The address thing is not published. Privacy should be adhered to.

4. DEVS don't own and sell Silvers. Please don't presume DEVs are the ones doing this. They are NOT INVOLVED. A concerted sell by anyone will also crash. Exercised with caution and responsibility should not rock the price too hard. At least it is better than handing it all out and everyone selling them just the same. I don't understand the logic. And if you say that not everyone will sell, I don't buy that either because no one can  guarantee that claim.

5. Yes, if the guy who bought 0.1 stake gets a silver, the guy who GOT the full stake for free will get 10 Silvers, in that proportion. But we are only giving out 1 silver  for 1 stake. If you have got 0.1 stake you need to buy 0.9 silvers from the AE to make up that 1 stake to claim a silver.


1. You pushed the two solutions you wanted without giving the option for a third one which was equal distribution among nemsters.

2. The cannot vote for the third option which is to distribute nemstakes among nemsters. And you ignored those voices.

3. we have to take your word for that. But that is not the point of decentralized pseudonomous cryptocurrency,,,to take the word of developers about knowing identity.

4. Then who is selling these stakes if not Devs?

5. Fair enough
#98

Rockethead quote

Can you not interpret $120 as not expensive when compared to buying coins from elsewhere and have them shipped to you?

This is a blatant falsehood. 1 0z silver is max 20 dollars US and international shipping about 20 bucks or so. Can be much cheaper from some place. If you want to make profit to benefit NEM fine, but don't try to say this is cheap price for silver because it is not. It is very expensive.

#99

It seems to me NEMsters have been given two options.

1. Send stakes to be sold for the community fund. Price of all NEM will drop when dumping so many stakes, devs will gain control of funds from sales to do with as they see fit. All other nemsters will suffer due to decline in the price of their NEM.

2. Agree to silver coin. Price of all NEM will drop when dumping so many stakes to buy coins, devs will gain control of funds from sales of overpriced silver to do with as they see fit. Devs will also gain many unclaimed silver coins to do with as they see fit because many nemsters wont give up their identity and address for only $20 silver coin, so coins will be unclaimed for dev to horde. All other nemsters will suffer due to decline in the price of their NEM.

#100



I don't mind the idea of silver coins in general, it is good publicity and they are cool and i have a new world order one from a while back which is quite rare now and valuable, so i dont mind another. BUT.

1. It does seem a bit like this silver thing got pushed on us like remember the time makoto also tried to push his logo on us  ;D even though i think he is not a bad guy really in his heart.

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

3. The address thing is a problem because honestly if someone holds 1 million nem and those become valuable, it might be a real danger to some nemster for criminals to know their address. They can send to a PO Box, but that is hassle for the nemster to make it.

4. selling nemstakes by devs will create a crash even if done slowly (how slowly to buy 3000 silver oz!) maybe taking more away from original stakeholders than 1 silver coin is worth. so penalizing nemsters.

5. Why is some dude who only bought 0.1 stake on the NXT AE allowed to get the same silver coin as an investor who has a full stake from the early days? Surely a full stake holder shall get 10 coins then  ;D


1. Push? I thought it is being voted now.

2. I am not sure about being ignored but there are close to 1000 views and people who cared would vote. For those who viewed and did not bother, they should be prepared for either way.

3. The address thing is not published. Privacy should be adhered to.

4. DEVS don't own and sell Silvers. Please don't presume DEVs are the ones doing this. They are NOT INVOLVED. A concerted sell by anyone will also crash. Exercised with caution and responsibility should not rock the price too hard. At least it is better than handing it all out and everyone selling them just the same. I don't understand the logic. And if you say that not everyone will sell, I don't buy that either because no one can  guarantee that claim.

5. Yes, if the guy who bought 0.1 stake gets a silver, the guy who GOT the full stake for free will get 10 Silvers, in that proportion. But we are only giving out 1 silver  for 1 stake. If you have got 0.1 stake you need to buy 0.9 silvers from the AE to make up that 1 stake to claim a silver.


1. You pushed the two solutions you wanted without giving the option for a third one which was equal distribution among nemsters.

2. The cannot vote for the third option which is to distribute nemstakes among nemsters. And you ignored those voices.

3. we have to take your word for that. But that is not the point of decentralized pseudonomous cryptocurrency,,,to take the word of developers about knowing identity.

4. Then who is selling these stakes if not Devs?

5. Fair enough


1 & 2. If you open up the 3rd. choice, there is more than a 3rd. choice. What about those who bought their stakes from the AE at $600-$1000 per stake? Wouldn't they fight for a more egalitarian distribution vs. those who got them for free? And if you put that to vote as a fourth option, I can tell you these people may outnumber those who got it for free. Besides, we are also talking about wider distribution.  My estimation is that there are probably 1000-1200 unique owners. Do we want wealth to be distributed to these owners instead of spreading it further? Redistributing this internally will only concentrate ownership to those few owners.

3. I have nothing to add here. Absolute anonymity cannot simply happen in thin air. The very existence of a being makes everyone not anonymous. Hence, this can only be an ideal situation and does not happen in a real world.

4. Devs buy the silvers from AltNemo and AltNemo is selling the stakes. Whilst we are at it, do note that the first round of 155 stakes (taken from socks) that were meant to be auctioned off belongs to the devs as bonus if they did not use it. This second round is a continuation of the first round as we have better means of checking socks, thereby increasing the sock stakes by another 250 or so stakes. We are only requesting that the devs look at the possibility of redistributing this 250 or so stakes to a wider ownership by way of buying silvers rather than to control it and pocket it for themselves. The devs did not want to auction off the initial batch because it may fall into the hands of a big whale.  Further, if we can use the stakes to buy silvers, it serves two purpose. One is such the AltNemo can help further build the ecosystem and two that the stakeholders get to own a silver round for every NEM Stake they own. It is a two prong effect for the benefit of the ecosystem as well as the community.

I only have this to say if option 3 or 4 or 5 goes out to vote. Many will just vote for it and there will be more chaos. People are selfish and they only want transient gains to  move on. Nothing's left for the furtherance of NEM. I'd rather support the devs and ask them to keep it than to go for this vote. Afterall, whether we vote or not, the stakes belong to them if they choose too.

And Makoto will be a beneficiary of this development bonus too. And he is selfless enough to promote something else. I will also gain some trickles too if it is being distributed. But I am not here to gain those stakes. It serves no purpose to a greater agenda.

And to think that we will earn like a million bucks from the sale of silver is a misnomer as well. And to think that it cost $20 for each silver is also shallow thinking. One is obviously either a young men just out of school or never been in business. There is cost of minting, logistics and management, freight and everything else that is all part of it. And this can cost 3 to 4 times that of the cost of a silver.

Come to think of it, if I am selfish, we won't even talk about this and let the spoils come to me instead. I think I may stand to gain more from that and have less responsibility in managing the delivery of the silvers.

Anyway, it is all pointless to talk about this and I believe it is a waste of time on my part. I have other more important things to attend to. You guys can go on and bicker about this. I am out of this topic.