Topic: [ANN] SuperNET NXT asset 12071612744977229797, SUPERNET KMD assetchain in summer - page 76. (Read 736806 times)

Ad hominem attacks are the modus operandi of trolls. You are falling on your own petard.

So those "bonus price points" are like dumping points?   Investors have to dump before them or get dumped on?  

If you believe what I'm doing is trolling, then you are hopeless. Again, if you don't like the conversation don't join. jl777 is a big boy. He can handle himself.

I divided the 17000 number by 90% of outstanding assets. The method has been agreed to and voted on, so really a moot point to debate.

Anyway, in the unlikely event the 0.234 threshold is hit, I am giving it out as holiday bonus to the SuperNET contributors.

The allocation will use a decentralized process. First round of voting to determine each person's "weight" and then a second round where each person allocates the portion of the bonus (calculated by their weight) to 3 to 5 people. The process itself will be finalized via community consensus, or lacking that even another vote to determine what method to use to do the allocation. I do not want to do any arbitrary bonusing as with 300 people in the slack now I dont know the exact level of contribution from most of them as I am spending most of my time coding and answering questions. I am not a micromanager.

So investors should be happy that the key contributors as determined by the community will be getting the largest bonuses

I believe this makes for a happy community, which in turn will create a better SuperNET

James

P.S. I do not want to do premature marketing as that could just create some hype. Since SuperNET's tech goals are quite unique and never done before, it is best to be totally ready before doing the big marketing thing. And I already have some budget for this anyway, I just feel getting 100+ people more vested with SuperNET will help the project more at this stage than premature marketing

I do not like the conversation. It is bordering on trolling.

All the  "mud" you are attempting to stir up now was exhaustively presented to the community from JL in the run up to the ICO. There was a lot of back and forth about the percentages and the sizes etc.

If you are pretending that this sort of dialogue never took place you were either not there at the time, or you are being disingenuous now.

In any case, your attempts to stir things up probably won't meet with much luck.

If you don't like the conversation feel free not to join it. This is a legitimate line of questions. How could investors do their due diligence if this information was not made clear before, during or after the ICO even up until now. It seemed to be clear. But now that the moment is potentially upon us things are seeming quite muddy.

Bud, give it a rest. James has been transparent the whole time. ICO investors did their due diligence, they do not need babysitting at this point.

You were compensated how many 10's of thousands UNITY for those assets? And still more meaningless saying you "gave" them for free or below market value when they are fantastically shallow markets on totally unproven assets. I think you are doing good work, but lets not be silly James. You created a bunch of assets that had and still have no present function, make a bunch of promises about them, toss them onto an ICO that investors piled 6k BTC into and take a sweet piece of the pie. Additionally, the non-dilutive aspect of your bonuses makes this piece of the pie much, much larger. And now we are going to play with numbers and say 2.34x is 3x. On top of this, you continuously remind us that you are becoming everyday diminishingly important to the process, progress and future success of this whole thing. Please do not take my words to be cynical. I am just calling something what it is in a blunt way. You are a visionary and prolific coder and laying a foundation for something amazing. If this all actually works out it will be a monumental feat. To repeat, I think you are doing good work if it all works, but lets not be silly and play games with the numbers.

Could you please show us how you came to the calculation of 0.0234 BTC/UNITY.

problem solved then i couldn't think of a better way to deal with this. apart from cash out some to fund professional media/advertising

Super idea. You continue to impress.

Thanks for your support and very good suggestion!

Hopefully my post above will clarify things

James

you are partially correct. I put in a lot of assets at below market and so I shouldnt have to triple the value of what I essentially donated, but the divisor is 90% of the total.

My calculation shows 0.0234 as the threshold and really, not much chance of this happening at this point so no sense in getting all worked up about it.

However on the off chance that it happens, I would like to share the bonus with everyone that has helped SuperNET to get to where it is. There are 300+ people in the SuperNET slack now, a large number of them working really hard and while I was critical to get the SuperNET started, already I am becoming a small part of the big picture.

I expect some large controversy over how it will be split up, but I think giving everyone in Slack the ability to allocate some part of the bonus would be a decent way.

Something like, we rank everyone's contribution according to a sliding scale. Maybe simply the number of posts in Slack, or hours worked, or servers contributed, etc. So, maybe 5 categories of people, each with a different wt and they can allocate a proportional amount of the bonus to 3 to 5 people, using open voting.

Tally it up and distribute out the SuperNET.

What do you think?

James

Well, seems to me there is not much point talking about how much %  it should be. A deal was made, that is that.

What is important is to get out in front of the upcoming deadline with clear communication about what the exact threshold is. The market is looking good right now; it would be a shame if this sort of uncertainty begins to affect that. Jmho.

and i support the project. but 5% at 3x would equate to 330k usd, and 5% @ 10x would be 2.5million dollars USD, now i believe in it and all. but i believe 2.83 million USD is an absolute absurd amount of money as a bonus. 1% would be enough. considering he already owns a huge portion of supernet and btcd. 10% is way over the top, what if we give him 1% and the other 9% can be spent where it is needed, like graphic designing of websites and GUI's and marketing. as all those areas are severely lacking.

a strong marketing plan is needed, this is looking like a 50grand project not a multi-million dollar asset.


like technically right now if james was that way inclined he could grab 30btc and boost up UNITY on bter to above 3x levels, its not hard, then collect 330k usd. now im not implying at all that he would do that, im just stating. what are the rules, does unity have to be stable @ 3x levels or just hit it and dump?

To be fair, this project is truly ground breaking.  This isn't your typical bitcointalk shitcoin clone pump and dump garbage.

a bonus of 5% .. am i missing something? thats $250,000 USD of todays market price, then another one in 2015 is another $250k.. half a million dollars.. thats 10% of the entire supply. should be more like 1%

I think this would be appropriate & timely.

Okay. So 573715.89 UNITY were bought/created during ICO @ 0.01 btc per. That puts the initial market cap at 5737.1589 BTC. Then there is the 10% non dilutive incentive bonus for jl777 (5% for each goal, x3 this 2014 and x10 2015). Now if these extra 10% get counted to the initial marketcap (actually 8160.61 BTC) then they of course must be counted to the goal marketcap, which means the x3 goal is 24481.83 BTC.

Then logic clearly follows if these 10% UNITY do not count in the initial market cap, they don't count in the 3x calculation either. This puts the initial marketcap at 5737.1589 BTC and the goal marketcap at  17211.4767 BTC.

What does not get done is: Calculating the 10% UNITY for the initial marketcap, but then do not calculate them for the goal marketcap. Clearly it is obvious why this makes no sense. It is just padding the starting cap and reducing the goal cap with no actual progress. It's a trick.

The price started at 0.01, so logic follows that a tripling of marketcap means a tripling of price, as Supernet does not have an inflating share supply.

Now the above comments I'm responding to are not from jl777. So, I think we need an official statement from jl777 as to how this gets calculated and a justification for that. This should corroborate what was stated at the beginning of the IPO & not include any "funny" accounting like outlined above.

for nxt, big buy order at 290,
move on and good price.

I would also expect a dump after Jan 1 when the bonus has been secured.