Proposed usage for unclaimed / socks

General Discussion
#41

as long as we dont do the "silver coin thing" im ok...

-how help physical silver coins the nem ecosystem?
-the nem-fiat change to buy the coins will drop the price. everybody who says it will not simply ignores trading rules.
-who controlls the real costs for buying the silver coins compared to the fiat exchanged? will this be documented transparent online?

regards

1)
Giving each stakeholder a real silver coin could increase NEM's popularity a lot because this was never done before and therefore a lot of blogs/news will talk about it.

2)
This has to be done slowly of course. But yes, this can't be foreseen. My hope is that it will be used as a method to prevent a pump phase. A pump phase is only useful for speculators and speculators aren't really helpful for NEM as a whole.

3)
Good question. I already asked what happens to the fiat money. Especially in the case when NEM price falls so that the needed amount of fiat can't be achieved (see here: https://forum.ournem.com/general-discussion/proposed-usage-for-unclaimed-socks/msg11753/#msg11753).
#42


as long as we dont do the "silver coin thing" im ok...

-how help physical silver coins the nem ecosystem?
-the nem-fiat change to buy the coins will drop the price. everybody who says it will not simply ignores trading rules.
-who controlls the real costs for buying the silver coins compared to the fiat exchanged? will this be documented transparent online?

regards

1)
Giving each stakeholder a real silver coin could increase NEM's popularity a lot because this was never done before and therefore a lot of blogs/news will talk about it.

2)
This has to be done slowly of course. But yes, this can't be foreseen. My hope is that it will be used as a method to prevent a pump phase. A pump phase is only useful for speculators and speculators aren't really helpful for NEM as a whole.

3)
Good question. I already asked what happens to the fiat money. Especially in the case when NEM price falls so that the needed amount of fiat can't be achieved (see here: https://forum.ournem.com/general-discussion/proposed-usage-for-unclaimed-socks/msg11753/#msg11753).


If the needed amount in fiat can't be achieved with the allocated amount of stakes then we won't do it.
#43

So it is out of the question that other funds could be used to finish the silver coin idea?

If so, you buy NEM again? And do what with that NEM?
Or it stays fiat -> and then?

#44

1)
Giving each stakeholder a real silver coin could increase NEM's popularity a lot because this was never done before and therefore a lot of blogs/news will talk about it.

2)
This has to be done slowly of course. But yes, this can't be foreseen. My hope is that it will be used as a method to prevent a pump phase. A pump phase is only useful for speculators and speculators aren't really helpful for NEM as a whole.

3)
Good question. I already asked what happens to the fiat money. Especially in the case when NEM price falls so that the needed amount of fiat can't be achieved (see here: https://forum.ournem.com/general-discussion/proposed-usage-for-unclaimed-socks/msg11753/#msg11753).

1) i dont think, that this helps in any way. only invests in functionality or "closed nem circles without fiat involment" helps the ecosystem. physical silver is useless.
3) Especially in the case if nem price raises and it is much more. i ask again: will the fiat amount after change be public as well as the cost for buying the silver?
#45


1)
Giving each stakeholder a real silver coin could increase NEM's popularity a lot because this was never done before and therefore a lot of blogs/news will talk about it.

2)
This has to be done slowly of course. But yes, this can't be foreseen. My hope is that it will be used as a method to prevent a pump phase. A pump phase is only useful for speculators and speculators aren't really helpful for NEM as a whole.

3)
Good question. I already asked what happens to the fiat money. Especially in the case when NEM price falls so that the needed amount of fiat can't be achieved (see here: https://forum.ournem.com/general-discussion/proposed-usage-for-unclaimed-socks/msg11753/#msg11753).

1) i dont think, that this helps in any way. only invests in functionality or "closed nem circles without fiat involment" helps the ecosystem. physical silver is useless.
3) Especially in the case if nem price raises and it is much more. i ask again: will the fiat amount after change be public as well as the cost for buying the silver?


You fellas need to understand that these were proposals and all details haven't been worked out yet. We will look at how NEM performs and then make a decision. We were transparent about everything so I see no reason why we wouldn't be transparent in this regard. No need to worry about this. It's controversial among the core team and obivously also controversial among the community.

An imho much more important discussion would be how the community fund is supposed to be governed.
#46


You fellas need to understand that these were proposals and all details haven't been worked out yet. We will look at how NEM performs and then make a decision. We were transparent about everything so I see no reason why we wouldn't be transparent in this regard. No need to worry about this. It's controversial among the core team and obivously also controversial among the community.

An imho much more important discussion would be how the community fund is supposed to be governed.

i understand, that the silver thing is a proposal. i dont think that it is a good idea because of reasons i wrote. but we cant decide/vote about something if not all questions are solved. so now is the time for inconvenient questions.

yes i agree, goverment of community fund is importand and hard to define.
#47



You fellas need to understand that these were proposals and all details haven't been worked out yet. We will look at how NEM performs and then make a decision. We were transparent about everything so I see no reason why we wouldn't be transparent in this regard. No need to worry about this. It's controversial among the core team and obivously also controversial among the community.

An imho much more important discussion would be how the community fund is supposed to be governed.

i understand, that the silver thing is a proposal. i dont think that it is a good idea because of reasons i wrote. but we cant decide/vote about something if not all questions are solved. so now is the time for inconvenient questions.

...


Absolutely. All i wanted to say is that we don't have those answers either at this point.
#48

@alkaline:
Do you really think "only invests in functionality or "closed nem circles without fiat involment" helps the ecosystem"? You don't think a more popular system/coin/idea has a bigger chance to "survive" than a less known system/coin/idea?

#49

@alkaline:
Do you really think "only invests in functionality or "closed nem circles without fiat involment" helps the ecosystem"? You don't think a more popular system/coin/idea has a bigger chance to "survive" than a less known system/coin/idea?

i have to qualify my statement. popularity is very important, but physical silver is the opposit from many aspects these new crypto technologies stand for. so i dont think its the right sign. i as an investor for example dont want physical silver - i invested in crypto because of the fascinating tech possibilities. physical silver is from the last century and if i want silver -> i buy silver. and very certain to a much better rate than this nem silver coin.

selling nemstakes or better pay direct with nem for e.g. mobile development is the right way (of course only in my opinion). i think it would even be better to sell the stakes and invest in advertising than investing in physical silver.
#50


@alkaline:
Do you really think "only invests in functionality or "closed nem circles without fiat involment" helps the ecosystem"? You don't think a more popular system/coin/idea has a bigger chance to "survive" than a less known system/coin/idea?

i have to qualify my statement. popularity is very important, but physical silver is the opposit from many aspects these new crypto technologies stand for. so i dont think its the right sign. i as an investor for example dont want physical silver - i invested in crypto because of the fascinating tech possibilities. physical silver is from the last century and if i want silver -> i buy silver. and very certain to a much better rate than this nem silver coin.

selling nemstakes or better pay direct with nem for e.g. mobile development is the right way (of course only in my opinion). i think it would even be better to sell the stakes and invest in advertising than investing in physical silver.


You do realize that the silver isn't forced on you ?
They are issued as assets and if you don't feel like getting silver you can sell that asset on the AE for beloved crypto.
#51

a non provocant question: what do you think will one silver coin assed be worth compared to the amount of nemstakes sold for the asset if i trade it back to nem. 1:1?

i feel like i will lose alot compared to receiving nem instaed of silver asset directly. so why dont distribute this amount directly to nem stakeholder and if someone wants silver he can buy. i think the majority wont buy silver.

edit: and the rate of the silver asset will drop hardly, because many will sell their asset. but who will buy? everybody who wants silver has already. i will either have a hughe lost by selling the asset or have a silver coin i dont want to have (and have to give my real name and adress) :frowning:

#52

a non provocant question: what do you think will one silver coin assed be worth compared to the amount of nemstakes sold for the asset if i trade it back to nem. 1:1?

i feel like i will lose alot compared to receiving nem instaed of silver asset directly. so why dont distribute this amount directly to nem stakeholder and if someone wants silver he can buy. i think the majority wont buy silver.

edit: and the rate of the silver asset will drop hardly, because many will sell their asset. but who will buy? everybody who wants silver has already. i will either have a hughe lost by selling the asset or have a silver coin i dont want to have (and have to give my real name and adress) :-(


no idea how much such an asset could be worth.
The point was not to give the stakeholder more but to give them something tangible and do something that stands out.
#53

First of all: Your concerns and questions are very interesting. It probably helps the community a lot because then we know how we have to explain the whole idea without risking big misunderstandings. Thank you for that.

Here some ideas:
- A NEM silver coin is not just silver. It could become very valuable in the future if NEM is a successful project.
- Of course silver is kind of an "old" investment and not modern like a crypto system like NEM. But still it is something with accepted value and therefor stands for something "real". Since there are a lot of scam projects at the crypto world, this is an interesting signal for the public.
- How much will one silver coin asset be worth? Nobody knows, the market will tell us…

Another question for the core team:
What happens with the real silver coins which aren't bought by stakeholders? Or will you just order as much as people want? (Which would mean that people have to order firmly before you order the coins…)

#54

Here some ideas:
- A NEM silver coin is not just silver. It could become very valuable in the future if NEM is a successful project.
- Of course silver is kind of an "old" investment and not modern like a crypto system like NEM. But still it is something with accepted value and therefor stands for something "real". Since there are a lot of scam projects at the crypto world, this is an interesting signal for the public.
- How much will one silver coin asset be worth? Nobody knows, the market will tell us...

Another question for the core team:
What happens with the real silver coins which aren't bought by stakeholders? Or will you just order as much as people want? (Which would mean that people have to order firmly before you order the coins...)

thank you for the constructive discussion...
the only way that the silver coins can get real value in the future is that they are limited. so if we decide to produce special 4000 limited silver coins for initial distribution it could be another story. if they are not limited they will never be worth more than the silver price.

it has to be clear when the coins will be ordered and what happens with the unclaimed coins or unclaimed silver assets. and what happens with the unclaimed fiat. that all has to be very transparent. so the person who is responsible for the coins has to show the invoices after he bought coins and it has to be transparent how much fiat is changed. i dont think that this all will happen and so the door i open for misuse.

edit: if we could find a VC investor who buys the nem stakes NOT over an exchange but directly, we could sell stakse without dropping the price. Maybe something simular GEMs did with the 400k VC deal. But managing such a deal would be  the task of the community fund management.
#55


Here some ideas:
- A NEM silver coin is not just silver. It could become very valuable in the future if NEM is a successful project.
- Of course silver is kind of an "old" investment and not modern like a crypto system like NEM. But still it is something with accepted value and therefor stands for something "real". Since there are a lot of scam projects at the crypto world, this is an interesting signal for the public.
- How much will one silver coin asset be worth? Nobody knows, the market will tell us...

Another question for the core team:
What happens with the real silver coins which aren't bought by stakeholders? Or will you just order as much as people want? (Which would mean that people have to order firmly before you order the coins...)

thank you for the constructive discussion...
the only way that the silver coins can get real value in the future is that they are limited. so if we decide to produce special 4000 limited silver coins for initial distribution it could be another story. if they are not limited they will never be worth more than the silver price.

it has to be clear when the coins will be ordered and what happens with the unclaimed coins or unclaimed silver assets. and what happens with the unclaimed fiat. that all has to be very transparent. so the person who is responsible for the coins has to show the invoices after he bought coins and it has to be transparent how much fiat is changed. i dont think that this all will happen and so the door i open for misuse.

edit: if we could find a VC investor who buys the nem stakes NOT over an exchange but directly, we could sell stakse without dropping the price. Maybe something simular GEMs did with the 400k VC deal. But managing such a deal would be  the task of the community fund management.


Of course they are limited. There is a finite amount of stakeholders so there is a finite amount of silver coins.
The coins that are not claimed will prob go to AltNemo who will continue to sell them so they don't go to waste.
We were always transparent and quite frankly I don't care what you think as you're postings seem to be based purely on FUD.

Personal opinion follows, watch out  ;) !

I'll be blunt here. The team imho doesn't owe anyone any disclosure about anything other than the core development of NEM. We were always and will always be transparent but saying that we have to disclose invoices and what not is a little nuts. We have done nothing but what we thought was in the best interest of NEM and we will continue todo so. Either trust us or not.

All funds we hold after launch will be in accounts that can be viewed on the blockchain. Every tx out of those accounts can be viewed on the blockchain. None of the funds can be accessed by only a single person (multi-sig).
That's about as transparent as it gets. We won't waste time and warrant everything we do.

Obviously if a tx of 2 stakes goes out and some asks what it was for, then we'll gladly tell them but constantly warranting everything we do just isn't necessary or fair.
#56

i dont say that the nem core team IS doing anything near a scam at the moment, i say that everything that opens the door for misuse like buying silver for many thousand coins without making the cost for this transparent WOULD smell. it would be very easy then to buy the silver coins for e.g. 200k including transport but "selling" them for 400k. so my point is: it will be very important to make the returns as transparent as the expenses (e.g. with invoice for buying coins). why such a statement is FUD for you is not understandable for me…

edit: i told this in another thread before. i own many nem stakes so spreading fud without reason is not in my interest. if it would be my intend to FUD i would do this at BTT and not here.

btw "either trust us or not" is not a really good argument… especially because you jailed all my nemstakes at the moment.

#57

i dont say that the nem core team IS doing anything near a scam at the moment, i say that everything that opens the door for misuse like buying silver for many thousand coins without making the cost for this transparent WOULD smell. it would be very easy then to buy the silver coins for e.g. 200k including transport but "selling" them for 400k. so my point is: it will be very important to make the returns as transparent as the expenses (e.g. with invoice for buying coins). why such a statement is FUD for you is not understandable for me...

edit: i told this in another thread before. i own many nem stakes so spreading fud without reason is not in my interest. if it would be my intend to FUD i would do this at BTT and not here.

btw "either trust us or not" is not a really good argument... especially because you jailed all my nemstakes at the moment.


If we can sell those coins for a profit then we're sure as hell going to do it. And you know what will happen with that profit ? It will be invested in NEM - as always.


btw...What i meant by FUD was this:


so the person who is responsible for the coins has to show the invoices after he bought coins and it has to be transparent how much fiat is changed. i dont think that this all will happen and so the door i open for misuse.


It's doubt so it fit's the D in FUD :)

#58

i dont say that the nem core team IS doing anything near a scam at the moment, i say that everything that opens the door for misuse like buying silver for many thousand coins without making the cost for this transparent WOULD smell. it would be very easy then to buy the silver coins for e.g. 200k including transport but "selling" them for 400k. so my point is: it will be very important to make the returns as transparent as the expenses (e.g. with invoice for buying coins). why such a statement is FUD for you is not understandable for me...

edit: i told this in another thread before. i own many nem stakes so spreading fud without reason is not in my interest. if it would be my intend to FUD i would do this at BTT and not here.

btw "either trust us or not" is not a really good argument... especially because you jailed all my nemstakes at the moment.

I can see where your coming from actually.. And I think you make a valid point but about knowing the cost of the coins. The silver coins is a brilliant yet very risky endeavour.

Like patmas3r said the team has always been as transparent as reasonably possible. So I don't think the silver coins will be handled in any other way. Of course the total cost of the coins should be released and also what happens to remaining unclaimed silver coins(which I think pat just did).

As for selling on exchanges, we are already going to extreme lengths to try to circumvent the need to sell anything one exchanges or to private investors however it is still unknown if that project can be put into action in time or if it will be successful - it may only reduce the amount we need to sell.

When it comes to posting an invoice as proof of how much was paid for silver coins, in some ways I agree as I don't see it being any different to posting the receipt of a plane ticket paid for out of market funds for people going to conferences. Private details can of course be hidden but as a whole I think this would be an important move to thwart any potential accusations of misconduct.

When it comes to transparency there are limits as to when requests for information become unfair so a line must be drawn. Most, if not all information can be found on the blockchain but other information cannot. If no proof what so ever is given to back up claims that involve dealings off blockchain in the fiat realm where misconduct is much easier to get away with, such as silver coins, it understandably begs the question: why not? So I do think that something like an invoice should be posted minus the private details. However I would draw the line at that. Other information such as how much btc/nem was provided is easily verifiable.

If this kind of information isn't provided, the PR back lash once all focus is squarely on nem, could be disastrous and fairly likely to happen. If something as simple as posting an invoice can prevent such a backlash, then I think it is advisable, if not a requirement, that an invoice be provided. The community should not be kept in the dark about a transaction of that scale and I would be quite disappointed if it was.

That's just my point of view as a very cautious member of this community. From working with the team for a long time I know they only have what's best for nem at heart so this information is not so important to me. But if I had not been working with the team and I was not 100% sure about the teams intentions I would probably damn near demand the proof about such a transaction - with all the scams in crypto I would think that most feel the same, and rightfully so.
#59

thank you kodtycoon, i agree with your much better explenation…

but i think that the people who manage the community fund should be public with real name, since this is not a trustless job. if someone wants to be hidden -> not part of comm fund management. and this management should track all investments including potential silver coins…

#60




thank you kodtycoon, i agree with your much better explenation…

but i think that the people who manage the community fund should be public with real name, since this is not a trustless job. if someone wants to be hidden -> not part of comm fund management. and this management should track all investments including potential silver coins…


Erm… No… I completely disagree with people having to be public. Multisig makes that not necessary. Multisig means that there is no need to trust one person. Only that you need to trust that say, 3 out of 5, do not collaborate to steal funds. Even if two are bad, it does not matter. This removes the need for anyone to be public.

And just because someone is public it does not mean they become honest because their ID is known. Take John manglaviti for instance. Very much public, but yet he pulled off a whopper scam and got away with it.

Requiring that personal information be known for anyone involved with the running of the fund will only result in lessor qualified, lessor known and even lessor trustworthy individuals, managing the fund.

The notion that being public makes for a more trust worthy person is very far from the truth, and history has shown that in crypto even publicly known individuals get away with monstrous scams with out ever being confronted about the incident by any authority any where in the world.

I say put those who have worked the hardest, longest and have the most to lose if nem goes under uncharted of the fund and then use multisig to require at minimum 3 of  5 signatures, if not more, for the release of any funds. Also segregate the control of various funds to various groups of people so even if one fund is compromised the others are not. This can be done by not having the same 3 people in control of more than one fund. Segregation and mitigation of risk is easier using multisig so knowing real id's just isn't needed.

I hope you  can see how this can work better now even while people stay pseudonymous thanks to the hard work of the development team which of course couldn't have been made possible with out the continued support of the community.