Dear Mark, thank you for the suggestion on the re-structure,
we may use solution 5, the "radical change" as a base with modification. Modifications will be as below:
1.) ora development should come out from overall portion - 1,000,000,000 - (allocated development fund) = MS Pot. This is to develop the overall ORA not just a certain community. Makes sense? Suggested amount around 25,000,000 overall. So the balance MS pot = 975,000,000.
2.) 1st percentage will be allocated to the ORA stake holders. Percentage will be confirmed after discussion with the team members.
Dear all, the above will be a total restructure to the previous known distribution. I suggest to those that believe in the ORA and its team (the whole Ora community) to add to your stakes with at least 200,000 ora coins minimum in your account. The above structure will reduce the percentage of your holding drastically and we feel it is needed to give value to the coins of your holding. Holding hundreds of coin with less value vs holding small portion of high value coins is your decision making process here.
With this move, we are expecting to bring in more techs and community into the ORA structure with more case uses for its users. More updates will be coming soon.
P.S We are expecting to test the MS system next week in the testnet.
Thanks Darkhorse! The changes we are proposing WILL reduce each original ORA stakeholders share of the final MS currency we launch. IMO the change (letting people 'burn' coins currently on crypto 'life-support' in exchange for coins in ORA2) should increase the ORA community and user-base significantly, and thus the potential & viability of ORA. While the original ORA1 stakeholders will obviously end up with a smaller % of the ORA2 'pie', bringing in extra people and talent from other coins on the brink of failure will INCREASE the size of the ORA2 'pie' significantly, so I'm confident the original ORA stakeholders will end up being a LOT better off.
Which would you rather - X% of AltaVista, or 0.X% of Google - Y% of MySpace, or 0.Y% of Facebook?
I like the change in direction suggested by coinsolidation (Mark), and I think it can make ORA a lot stronger, and help us reach 'critical mass' in terms of adoption a lot quicker than expected, but maybe some ORA stakeholders don't ... if you don't like this plan, or you have some suggestions for modifications to the basic idea we're proposing, SPEAK NOW! We're listening