@Nxkoil: I didnt get the point here. I think its good for every stake holder this decisions in order to make Nem more 'atractif' to investitors. Its good for everyone, except for those whith a lot of ACCs. [emoji6]
Android tapatalk =)
nxkoil:
Nobody thought about sock puppet stakes 1 year ago. Yes, that was a mistake. But that's how it is.
I don't really understand your problem. For the single stakeholder it doesn't change anything if all stakeholders get 1 million or 1.5 million or 2 million or whatever. The main goal MUST be to maximize the distrubtion of NEM. If the silver coin idea could help, then this is a good thing for every single stakeholder.
So its the wrong question if you ask: "Is there such an element as 'sock puppet stakes'?"
The right question is: "What is best for the future of NEM?"
Get this. Fast. Its annyoing (no offence).
...that last line sounds bullying, arrogant one ... why fast? What happens if I am not fast enough?
It is annoying that the facts are overlooked and they are replaced with pure opinions.
Like you just did: you overlooked the facts of the 1st post, and set new "facts" ("wrong question" and "right question").
[u]How that is possible in this community of equality and intelligence?[/u]
In certain situation must be taken risks and making changes to the rules, but is the moment now, that cannot be sure.
"maximize the distrubtion of NEM. If "
- yes: "If" - that you got right there.
But that is not the issue of this thread.
I still think that now is tried to use wrong arguments to cut a small or a medium slice from each stakeholder's share ... that is basically wrong.
Individuals are not respected. (Your last line underlines that)
@Nxkoil: I didnt get the point here. I think its good for every stake holder this decisions in order to make Nem more 'atractif' to investitors. Its good for everyone, except for those whith a lot of ACCs. [emoji6]
Android tapatalk =)
An example about some coins announcement.
It proceeds as follows:
- 1000 accounts reserved a stake
- 1000 sock puppets reserved a stake
After reservation period has ended, it is informed that they have 2000 stakes, because it is not yet known that there are sock puppets. So it is said that everyone will get 1 million coins.
When 1 month is passed, they notice that there are 1000 sock puppets.
Then is invented that the sock puppets' stakes is used to a fund.
And they say that hey everyone is still getting 1 million coins and the coin has a great fund that will make it even better and getting greater distribution.
People believe it and give a half of their original share to the common wealth, whose future is a quite open question mark.
@Nxkoil: I didnt get the point here. I think its good for every stake holder this decisions in order to make Nem more 'atractif' to investitors. Its good for everyone, except for those whith a lot of ACCs. [emoji6]
Android tapatalk =)
An example about some coins announcement.
It proceeds as follows:
- 1000 accounts reserved a stake
- 1000 sock puppets reserved a stake
After reservation period has ended, it is informed that they have 2000 stakes, because it is not yet known that there are sock puppets. So it is said that everyone will get 1 million coins.
When 1 month is passed, they notice that there are 1000 sock puppets.
Then is invented that the sock puppets' stakes is used to a fund.
And they say that hey everyone is still getting 1 million coins and the coin has a great fund that will make it even better and getting greater distribution.
People believe it and give a half of their original share to the common wealth, which future is a quite open question mark.
Was the logic whatever, it is best to distribute nem to as many people as possible, and/or put some of it to common use. It is the original value of nem to have as many shareholders as possible, not pile the money to few and selected. Not even if they were the original stakeholders. What do we achieve in giving more nem to those who already have it? Isn't the goal to have as many people on earth owning nem as possible, and how would giving more nem to the stakeholders make it better?
@Nxkoil: I didnt get the point here. I think its good for every stake holder this decisions in order to make Nem more 'atractif' to investitors. Its good for everyone, except for those whith a lot of ACCs. [emoji6]
Android tapatalk =)
An example about some coins announcement.
It proceeds as follows:
- 1000 accounts reserved a stake
- 1000 sock puppets reserved a stake
After reservation period has ended, it is informed that they have 2000 stakes, because it is not yet known that there are sock puppets. So it is said that everyone will get 1 million coins.
When 1 month is passed, they notice that there are 1000 sock puppets.
Then is invented that the sock puppets' stakes is used to a fund.
And they say that hey everyone is still getting 1 million coins and the coin has a great fund that will make it even better and getting greater distribution.
People believe it and give a half of their original share to the common wealth, which future is a quite open question mark.
They are not "giving half their original share" because the stakes didn't just become yours once they were taken away from sock puppets. everyone who was not found to be a sock Is still getting exactly the same share As they were before the socks were caught.
If you had your way what would you do?
I agree with iaz too..
@Nxkoil: I didnt get the point here. I think its good for every stake holder this decisions in order to make Nem more 'atractif' to investitors. Its good for everyone, except for those whith a lot of ACCs. [emoji6]
Android tapatalk =)
An example about some coins announcement.
It proceeds as follows:
- 1000 accounts reserved a stake
- 1000 sock puppets reserved a stake
After reservation period has ended, it is informed that they have 2000 stakes, because it is not yet known that there are sock puppets. So it is said that everyone will get 1 million coins.
When 1 month is passed, they notice that there are 1000 sock puppets.
Then is invented that the sock puppets' stakes is used to a fund.
And they say that hey everyone is still getting 1 million coins and the coin has a great fund that will make it even better and getting greater distribution.
People believe it and give a half of their original share to the common wealth, which future is a quite open question mark.
They are not "giving half their original share" because the stakes didn't just become yours once they were taken away from sock puppets. everyone who was not found to be a sock Is still getting exactly the same share As they were before the socks were caught.
If you had your way what would you do?
I agree with iaz too..
:) that is the magic trick :)
The trick was there that actually the sock puppets had no stakes. There were only reservations. When correct reservations are counted afterwards, there is those 1000 accounts.
I agree too with laz ... in the silver coin vote I voted "Put the money in with the unclaimed stakes for a community fund". It is better of those 2 choices.
But that thread is another case ... though that case caused the creation of this thread :) because this is the basic question: why we discuss about sockpuppets' stakes, when they actually have 0 stakes. They just made 150 ... 1000 reservations, which were caught and ignored.
...that last line sounds bullying, arrogant one ... why fast? What happens if I am not fast enough?
I apologize for that. Its just... you are telling the same thing over and over again and this is a bit annoying for me.
What I meant:
I have a very high interest in NEM being distributed as wide as possible.
I have a very low interest on stakes getting bigger.
You are debating about questions which in my opinion are just irrelevant. I don't care if (considering whatever definition) sock puppet accounts exist or not.
To be clear: I did not say that the silver coin idea is the best solution or a good solution at all. I am just saying: Your discussion about what was said back in January or the existence of sock puppet accounts is distracting the community from thinking about what is best for NEM.
Please focus on the effects of that silver coin idea and other ideas.
Being one of the unclaimed stake owners, but also a complete newb, my input is only marginally valuable.
Unfortunately, I missed the window to redeem my token. While I understand I will have an opportunity to claim it later, I may also receive less. This may be a good idea in that people who are more active within the community may be rewarded with a larger share. But while 1 month may seem like a long time, those with careers and families know how easily it is for a month to sneak by. Also, health issues like cancer can knock someone out for a month. I would hope the community still values wide distribution rather than increasing individual share amount or recouping shares to line a community fund.
Does anyone have a rough idea of the quantity of unclaimed and fake stakes? If it is not too great, I think distribution should proceed as planned of about 1 mil/share. Then, unclaimed shares reserved for at least 6 months. After 6 months, those shares would be given away via X method. Are the unclaimed stakes so great that this would be a big deal? What is the advantage of quickly distributing the shares?
...that last line sounds bullying, arrogant one ... why fast? What happens if I am not fast enough?
I apologize for that. Its just... you are telling the same thing over and over again and this is a bit annoying for me.
Ok ...
I start being little bit tired about this whole thing too.
I kept on repeating, coz it just looked so that the key point has been missed. Maybe NEM does not need it...
In the last month I have started feeling that NEM is going on the road, which is made of tiles. But there are tiles only here and there. That's why I liked to "put all the tiles on their places" - starting from the beginning of the road.
But obviously that has no order ...
...
Minority rights issues coming. They claim that sock puppet should not be common wealth, but should be treated as private properties and distributed to all stackholders as part of our NEM value. And thus, they don't think the silver coin vote is a fair vote, for no options like that.
...
Unfortunately in the crypto world is no Minority rights. That is how it looks now.
There is only :
- votes: "majority wins"
- shout louder than your opponent - and win (you can get your friends shouts too)
Mock the opponent by "down votes", not with arguments.
- richer wins. Similarly as in politics the richer has clearly better chances
- good talk and positive attitude with great visions win facts. Good talk gathers always "party" along and again majority wins.
Minority wins only if the issue is not important to the "politicians" or
the issue is 100% proven to be the better alternative.
I think i still don't get the point of this thread 
...
Minority rights issues coming. They claim that sock puppet should not be common wealth, but should be treated as private properties and distributed to all stackholders as part of our NEM value. And thus, they don't think the silver coin vote is a fair vote, for no options like that.
...
Unfortunately in the crypto world is no Minority rights. That is how it looks now.
There is only :
- votes: "majority wins"
- shout louder than your opponent - and win (you can get your friends shouts too)
Mock the opponent by "down votes", not with arguments.
- richer wins. Similarly as in politics the richer has clearly better chances
- good talk and positive attitude with great visions win facts. Good talk gathers always "party" along and again majority wins.
Minority wins only if the issue is not important to the "politicians" or
the issue is 100% proven to be the better alternative.
this has nothing to do with that the "parties up for election" are doing but it has everything to do with what the "public" are not doing. which is voting.
non-participation in a vote/referendum etc is ALWAYS taken as acceptance of either option as we cannot force people to vote and we cant just not do anything until everyone votes because nothing would be done.. ever.. so the best, and only thing we can do is put it to vote and go by the majority of votes. beyond that there isnt much we can do unless you want to hack every users computer and go knock on their door and ask them however im sure that wouldnt fly either so all we can do is "make do with what we have".
...
non-participation in a vote/referendum etc is ALWAYS taken as acceptance of either option
...
Not always. Maybe in NEM it is always taken so.
http://www.people-press.org/2014/10/31/the-party-of-nonvoters-2/
For Nonvoting there are many reasons. In NEM there is never thought any other reason than "their are lazy" or "they accept the decision whatever it is".
Well, that how it goes.
I think i still don't get the point of this thread :(
Did you read this example:
An example about some coins announcement.
It proceeds as follows:
- 1000 accounts reserved a stake
- 1000 sock puppets reserved a stake
After reservation period has ended, it is informed that they have 2000 stakes, because it is not yet known that there are sock puppets. So it is said that everyone will get 1 million coins.
When 1 month is passed, they notice that there are 1000 sock puppets.
Then is invented that the sock puppets' stakes is used to a fund.
And they say that hey everyone is still getting 1 million coins and the coin has a great fund that will make it even better and getting greater distribution.
People believe it and give a half of their original share to the common wealth, which future is a quite open question mark.
At least someone in this thread has now got the point that with sock puppets' stakes has been made a mistake.
The other question is how to solve it - but I am out of it.
There was no mistake. We all new there were going to be puppets. Of course we didn't go around shouting telling it to everyone.
I'm sorry but the only one that seems to have a problem with this is you.
How about you make a proposal for a solution. Maybe then I understand what is bothering you so much.
There was no mistake. We all new there were going to be puppets. Of course we didn't go around shouting telling it to everyone.
I'm sorry but the only one that seems to have a problem with this is you.
How about you make a proposal for a solution. Maybe then I understand what is bothering you so much.
So, I was the only one who voted against the current proposal for the silver coin process? ...
What are the numbers:
- how many accounts have claimed the stake?
- how many accounts are still unclaimed? (estimation for unclaimed)
- how many sock puppets have been caught?
There was no mistake. We all new there were going to be puppets. Of course we didn't go around shouting telling it to everyone.
I'm sorry but the only one that seems to have a problem with this is you.
How about you make a proposal for a solution. Maybe then I understand what is bothering you so much.
So, I was the only one who voted against the current proposal for the silver coin process? ...
What are the numbers:
- how many accounts have claimed the stake?
- how many accounts are still unclaimed? (estimation for unclaimed)
- how many sock puppets have been caught?
No, I voted against it too. Just because one proposal doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean you need to say there was a mistake in declaring sock stakes all together.
I can tell final numbers once remdeption is over. All of those can still change quite a bit.
There was no mistake. We all new there were going to be puppets. Of course we didn't go around shouting telling it to everyone.
I'm sorry but the only one that seems to have a problem with this is you.
How about you make a proposal for a solution. Maybe then I understand what is bothering you so much.
So, I was the only one who voted against the current proposal for the silver coin process? ...
What are the numbers:
- how many accounts have claimed the stake?
- how many accounts are still unclaimed? (estimation for unclaimed)
- how many sock puppets have been caught?
No, I voted against it too. Just because one proposal doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean you need to say there was a mistake in declaring sock stakes all together.
I can tell final numbers once remdeption is over. All of those can still change quite a bit.
"mistake" - I just referred mixmaster ...
nxkoil:
Nobody thought about sock puppet stakes 1 year ago. Yes, that was a mistake. But that's how it is.
If you (NEM team) knew that there will be sock puppets, then ...
why this "rule" ("sock puppets' stakes will be put to a fund, under different votes")
was not published after it was announced that NEM has a sock puppet problem?
I guess the reason to not publish was:
NEM team had no such rule, coz it was going on with the plan,
which was literally described in the January's Announcement.
I was hoping that you could give some numbers, even not so accurate numbers, if really wanting any proposals.
It seems that the 5 examples with example numbers are not so convinceable...
it is better use concrete, quite real numbers.... (also someone had written that the quantity matters, so some people may behave differently, if there was 10 puppets or 200).
You still haven't clarified what it is you want. All I understand is you don't like something and it has something to do witch socks and a fund.
Make a proposal on how to proceed. Maybe that'll shed some light on your intentions.
You still haven't clarified what it is you want. All I understand is you don't like something and it has something to do witch socks and a fund.
Make a proposal on how to proceed. Maybe that'll shed some light on your intentions.
My intentions are pure and honest ...
This discussion is a jump from the silver coin thread, coz it looked that the "ultimate" problem has not been solved properly.
The "ultimate" means that the intial plan of making equal and fair distribution has been changed without any specification.
Now it looks like that there is no definition for such as 'sock puppets' stakes'. And that tells us that it is too early to create any fund based on "puppets" or even planning to use the fund's money.
You again repeated only what you already said and did not explain what you want to happen now.