Topic: [ANN] ORA :: NXT 'monetary system' currency - page 27. (Read 181202 times)

totally agreed.sell their stakes may isn't a mistake and buy stakes at low price  may be have some purpose!Free market.Free choice!

Great news. You can now buy btc/ora in www.secureae.com its very user friendly and easy. Its a web based platform.

@ Kora, please update this information in OP under how you can purchase Ora with Btc.

Please, an information: if I d like to buy some Ora, will there be a BTC/ORA exchange or do I need the NXT wallet ( and I don t like it)? Thanks

  nice idea. Hows the development taking shape so far man?

ORA distribution option: Chaos514

Just sit on the remaining ORA for the moment.

I don't think we should burn the remaining stake as it would lower the number of coin in existence. Distributing the extra stakes to the current stakeholder is great, but nothing stop them to dump everything afterward. I do think that in the end, we should give more ORA to the people who keeps their ORA for a while, but I think it should be done once the coin as been released and over a certain period of time. For example, we could split 33% of the remaining stakes between the stakeholders that kept their balance above X ORA for at least 3 months. And do this 3 time over 9 months or 12 times over 12 months or any other combination (we would need to find a combination that would be resilient to dumping).

Anyway, my point is that we should kept the stakes and use them for promotion, bounty and maybe even find new stakeholders and then use the remaining stakes to create value by giving incentive to people to kept their stakes.

OK, so I've been reading the debate about what to do with remaining coins.

My first inclination is to save the coins for a rainy day, even at risk of being called a scam coin.  Yes, the premine issue is real, but anyone reading this forum will know that there is in fact no premine: for all intents and purposes, on release day when the coin actually becomes "real" and not just an NXT asset, we could match the total # of coins minted with the total # distributed.  Problem solved, entirely.  Then, any future coin creation would come from the staking mechanism.  Or, we could have a nominal premine, and release the total # of coins with that in mind.  Nothing says we have to release Ora with an unspent 50% or some such thing.

As for the heated issue of whether or not the next distribution should or should not include those who dumped their stakes, I would like to point out that this is a global system, and in the global economy, some ppl live in desperate circumstances.  I won't begrudge anyone who dumped, because 50 USD might feed them for a month.  Even if they dumped out of greed, I still wouldn't begrudge them, because I believe in free choice in free markets.  Anything else produces mischief that is far worse than the original greed that prompted the economic controls.

I'm not sure that the buyer is more angelic than the seller here, or more or less of a devil.  I could make the argument that those who bought from the dumpers are at fault, because they encouraged the dumpers to dump!  Should we penalize them?  But what of it?  That's the free market at work.  And I don't like this backdoor threat that "we know who the dumpers are, and can prevent them from getting a new stake".  Wow.  Listen to us.  That sounds ominous, and Orwellian.  Were that list in my hands, I would destroy it - without hesitation or remorse - before it destroyed me.

To me, there are no dumpers, only sellers.  And buyers.


Nevertheless, for the sake of peace, here are two ideas:

Idea #1:

Give the dumpers a future installment, and give the current Ora holders (even if they bought from a dumper and didn't have an original stake) their choice of a future installment or an instant payment.

This only penalizes the dumpers on a timescale, meaning you dumped your coins, so for the next distribution you won't get them until the coin releases, or until some strategic happenstance.  BUT you will still get them.  Meanwhile, those who didn't dump are free to participate in the free market as they see fit.  My expectation is if they didn't dump already, they are holders, but that might be proved wrong.

If it bothers ppl that stakeholders sell, then prevent them from selling at this point in time by restricting their ownership of the asset.

Idea #2:

Offer ALL stakeholders, original and current, their choice of:

a) 100k ora now, OR
b)  100k ora plus 50% simple interest at some point in the future.

Voila.  Those who want to hold get an incentive to take the "annuity" at "b".  Those who want to dump (or just want the Ora in their hands) can choose a, and get less Ora.
This could be done with any combination of reward amounts, such as half of 166k now OR the entire 166k in the future.



kind regards,
nio

now I understand. Thanks for the infos.

For now until Ora client is released, ora will be in the form of nxt asset.

THanks. so Oras only exist as assets by now?

Transfer means that if you have another NXT account, you could simply transfer your ORA assets to another account, what i did with mine. In other words, you can transfer your asset to another account, only paying 1 NXT fee for that.

so I see Oras in "my assets" in next account. are those mine? and what does "transfer" mean?

Dont be confused. Msg Mac Red and find out. Also you can check in your nxt account for Ora assets.

I'm still confused with this coin, sorry

I'm on the list. Do my coins allready exist or not?

New feature is being rolled out in block 213,000. You should be able to trade if you are using 1.6 version. best to update to 1.2.3 or 1.2.4 (will be released later). There will be a fork.

What if someone does not update? Will they no longer be able to trade on the distributed asset exchange?

Darkhorse has expressed *exactly* what I'm thinking about ORA. There is no leader, so those involved in ORA so far are trying their best to communicate what they're thinking as best they can. That includes you to megashira1, you're having your say and that's more than cool

The point is we reached ~880 stakeholders using the registration webapp I commissioned from Mac, but it was obvious we weren't going to reach 3K users using that method alone. So what did we do? At that stage ORA was Mac & I, and nio had agreed to join us as our core dev. We could have brainstormed ways to get more stakeholders, or decide to give the existing ~880 a bigger stake, but at that stage ORA was just a couple of guys (and nio off doing his dev thing on the side).

For me a big issue was I had to decide that even though the original bounty Mac and I agreed on was for a stakeholder list of 3K, it was obvious the webapp had served its purpose, and Mac had completed the commissioned task, so we both happily agreed to set a deadline for the webapp process and finish it. I had to finish the first stakeholder registration process, so Mac and I could work as equals, not one guy paying the other. That was important for the Starfish!

At that point (after Mac had been paid his bounty) ORA was three  guys, and we had a list of ~880 people. So who decides what to do next? Given that from  day 1 I've made it clear ORA is leaderless, and my goal was only to be the 'catalyst'  for this decentralized community based on 'Starfish' principles, the answer was obvious, get more people involved.

I enlisted the help of three other people who showed spontaneous interest and/or support in ORA that wasn't motivated by mere bounty hunting, people who were interested in the 'idea' and 'concept' of ORA. That was Darkhorse, fragORA & Pentamon. With their help we created the asset & did the distribution, and we're working on Logo & branding ideas, and general community building.

I think what's happened so far has gone pretty well, and now we're into the nitty gritty of how a decentralized community makes decisions. We can use the NXT voting system, or some other method. We have options.

The point is I'm not the leader of ORA, and neither is Mac or nio, or Darkhorse or fragORA or Pentamon. None of us are, but we all have opinions, and we can use some democratic ideas here, and we have some useful tools. The sensible thing to do was include everybody in the decision making process asap, and that's what we're doing.

I will point out that as far as I know using valarmg's dividend script, it's possible to reconstruct the ORA stakeholder list from any date in the past, so all the data is available. If the ORA community reaches a consensus and wants to give existing stakeholders a top-up, we can base that on any day we like. We just need to formulate specific options from everyone's opinions, then we decide what method of voting we use (i.e. NXT voting system, or forum post etc) then we vote. Then ~880 people decide, rather than Mac & I & nio, or Mac, nio, Darkhorse, fragORA, Pentamon and I.

A benevolent dictator who makes effective decisions can sometimes be very efficient & responsive, but ORA doesn't have a leader (benevolent or otherwise), so our process is slow, and maybe a bit messy too. But it's decentralized, and resilient to attack. If I fell under a bus today ORA could go on no problem. Same for all the people doing things so far.

That is the point, that is what ORA is about, at least as far as I'm concerned. ORA is decentralized from birth! And above all else, ORA is an experiment, and I don't know what will happen, none of us do.

Anyone who invests in ORA and buys ORA tokens needs to understand this situation. It's been discussed previously many times, but it can't hurt to reiterate it  again from time to time. ORA has an uncertain future, and there are risks involved, but it just might turn out to be something very special, if the 'collective' input from the people involved makes it 'work' then it might be very profitable, and very influential too.

Pos block rewards is that the seem as Pos interest?
thanks.

Maybe and maybe not.

No prob. A rough estimation, another 4 days to go.

We are still waiting Qora code?