Topic: Bitmark - page 147. (Read 622228 times)

consolidation - Bitmark is caught between polarised mindsets; short term profit - long term reward. I am stating the obvious, but the first may be necessary to support the second - I am not entirely certain. Perhaps there is a natural and unavoidable evolution from one to the other?


Absolutely - and when bitmark.co is ready, hopefully it will strike that exact chord.

Of course people have running costs - but it is their call how they control and direct these in proportion to their mining efforts and 'perceived' value. I have certainly mined coins that I was 100% convinced would do well only to be left with a bag of useless 'dust'... my call.

EDIT: Just to add - I have considerable fiat investment that absolutely needs to ROI - but I split my mining between daily BTC returns and long-term goals over short-term profit.

You cannot hold the hands of others.

I think many supporters want instant gratification, especially the miners. Its difficult to mine something where you have no idea what its value is, especially when there are costs.

Exchanges give people the satisfaction that mining is "profitable" or not and they can make the decision to mine or support the community in other ways. With so many alt coins out there and new ones released every day its hard to keep people's attention. Seeing Bitmark on an exchange or other high trafficked place can keep people interested.

Setting up an exchange could have negative consequences as miners could choose to dump coins, but ultimately I think it creates significant exposure for the community. We don't need fancy graphics to get people here, we need accessibility and exposure.

The project has progressed well since the OP was created, all I have done is update it since then. It would be reasonable to rewrite some sections so that they are more applicable to the current status.

Our OP must be crafted in a way that inspires people like you who all ready here, not marketed to everybody with hype and speculation.

Between the lines of these posts I see a message coming through: many want to support the project and mine to keep some bitmarks, but often people have running costs and unless they are supported in their running costs they cannot support bitmark.

Something could be crafted so those with money could support those with hashing power, and the proceeds split between them. Maybe this feels centralized and is not so open to the wider community, or maybe it is fair.

Or perhaps exchanges of some kind are a necessary part of the organic growth.

A fair balance must be struck while we earn our value.

Is this the area which we need to address first as a community? I feel it is becoming important.

I thought I would right now just re-read the ANN and in doing so, answered my own question; "What made me stop and read all 10 pages (at that time) about Bitmark, whilst skimming through all the X11, Scrypt-N, X13, Hybrid PoW/PoS, Save the World, Blah Blah Blah, ANNs?"



I will not be selling any BTM, period..! Certainly not until the foundation has grown some roots, branches, leaves, flowers... and, above all else, fruit!

I agree, the OP needs a bit of refreshment and I am not selling a single bitmark for less than 150k sats.

It is quite a bit different than the average ANN page on this forum, but to me the straight up facts no nonsense approach is inspiring.

The tl;dr at the top there sums it up quite nicely I think.

I'm not against marketing or anything. I just think it's easy to come off the wrong way in the altcoin world and sometimes things can just speak for themselves.

And I can't see anyone making any sort of argument that it could be a stealth launch considering discussion has been going on here for weeks spanning multiple threads.

+1 re stealth launch response

I agree that the original ANN could benefit from a little aesthetic attention - but there have been a stack of coins launched with superbly wordy OPs peppered with exciting graphics - have they faired any better for this?

I certainly agree in terms of the 'direction Bitmark is going' but feel that this 'direction' does not require getting Bitmark onto an exchange any time soon. In fact, IMHO, the longer it is before it gets on an exchange the better...

I don't see how it could be a stealth launch. It was announced here 3 weeks before launch.  I do think the OP need a rework though to grab some attention.  It's really uninspiring.  I'm not suggesting bullshit just for the sake of it but first impressions are important.  Maybe someone here with some marketing experience could help the dev with it. Just a suggestion.

I feel we need to spread the Bitmark name some more and we need to get onto an exchange.

I do like the direction Bitmark is going, but we need to get a better idea where we stand in the market.  I also feel by not getting the word out Bitmark will be labeled an ninja launch and stealth / instamine.  These labels can cause volatility in the coins market.

errare humanum est ! 

Difficulty has dropped to 28.15

I have made a mistake.

The wallet controlling the bitmark foundation had two accounts, one with just under 60 BTM left from the first blocks solo mined, and the other with the Bitmark Foundation funds, 1001 BTM.

I sent Allow 50 BTM to thank him for his efforts on the project, however it came out of the foundation account instead of the surplus.

I have rectified the situation by sending the full amount in the wallet to the Bitmark Foundation address, which now has a balance of 1010 BTM.

The concerned transaction is c9d1f2740de46701d642da0b05dd95914dc6e5ca360bb978371cc6c7141369f2

The block explorer now shows that 2011 BTM has been received, for this reason, the true figure will always be 1001 less.

An amount of 0.9996 BTM was sent as change to the address bYwiBH1v7gF6sxgX26rR5CumWHQSnwNX98, this has now been lost forever.

The Bitmark Foundation key is securely stored offline, the wallet file has been removed to ensure that no foundation funds can be touched, accidentally or otherwise.

Sent 50 BTM to the Bitmark Foundation, wallet just hit the 1001 BTM mark!

cheerio

Thank you for your support and for taking the time to offer considered feedback as you see fit, that is invaluable to the project.

Your donation to the Bitmark Foundation, it puts us ahead of schedule with a total of 951 BTM donated so far, thank you.

I believe in the fundamental principles and vision that created this project. I am new to the community however, when I feel that I have something to contribute, I shall provide support that is constructive and beneficial.

Luckily I learned about the project prior to launch and I have been mining Bitmark since the diff = 1.

I have sent 250 BTM to the Bitmark Foundation.

Keep up the great work

Cheers,
Medic

Personally I hope that by the time next year rolls around that we will have worked out a generous compensation scheme for coinsolidation considering he's putting a lot on the line here.

As Bitmark grows hopefully the Foundation funds will hit the target amount. And as I expect the technology to grow over the next year I also expect the value of a Bitmark to grow as the technology grows.

The dollar(or BTC) value on the amount of work that coinsolidation has put in thus far has been quite high. So I hope we can all agree and continue to contribute what we can to provide the maximum incentive for all people who end up working on the project.

The Bitmark Foundation is currently a concept which has a BTM address for donations. The real Bitmark Foundation will be created by everybody here over the next year. During this time I am holding the private key to that address until we have agreed what to do.

Our goal is for the created Bitmark Foundation to be a decentralized autonomous non profit corporation powered by the community, to hire resources and staff and pay for units of work with the BTM under it's control.

Over the next year I am working voluntarily in the hope that this creates an avenue of work for many people including myself.  I am not rich, I have lowered my standard of living to the minimum acceptable by my family, a little too low if I am honest. I am living on a small finely balanced income during this process.

This is a community effort, if you all want to hire people, by attaching BTC or BTM bounties to units of work over the next year you can. Or you can sponsor work, or donate to those who commit time to the project. You can also commit some of your own time and effort. You can also leave things as they are, I am already committed.

I resisted the methods other projects have adopted to do this ethically and fairly, so that value is earned.

If our work is good, our ethics are fair, and our reasoning sound, it should pay fair dividends to those involved at each stage.

Follow up question. If it were not to be coinsolidation to control / have access to foundation coins then who?

Someone or some group needs to be trusted in order to have a Bitmark foundation at all and unless a better suggestion is put forward I vote for the someone to be Coinsolidation.

But generally I agree, transparency is the key.

More than one IPM pool could exist, for example two independent IPM pools with 17.5% maximum each. It can be distributed.

Initially I will control both the IPM Pool and the Bitmark Foundation, the Bitmark Foundation funds are considered locked until after 2015-07-13. This is to give us time to create a community and have the foundation controlled in a decentralized way, similar to a DAC. Consider me a central point of failure to the entire project at this time as I am leading it on all fronts, in the case of death I hope that enough has been published in documentation and posts so that others could continue the process.

The Bitmark Foundation is currently a concept which has a BTM address for donations. The real Bitmark Foundation will be created by everybody here over the next year.

I try to engage the community and people are already committing valuable time to the project, the IPM Pool proposal was reviewed and had input from 4 people before being published.

For the Bitmark Foundation, I envision that bugs, feature requests, and units of work will be democratically selected, bounties assigned to them, and then proposed units of work completed by anybody. Once a unit of work is marked as complete, it will be accepted by the community and the bounty released. The exact specifics of the system to do this have not been defined, but we have a year to create such a system and examples already exist. We can use githubs pull requests and issues to create the units of work and track them, then a BTM payment system which attaches a bounty to the issue or pull request.

The IPM Pool will be completely transparent, each day a report will be generated which shows the rigs hired, the price of those rigs, the bitmarks generated, the btc donations and the bitmark payouts.  It will always mint blocks to the same bitmark address, and the foundation address will not change. Public block chains ensure a level of transparency.

I hope to automate the IPM pool as much as is feasible, otherwise there is a time based maintenance cost associated with it.

Discussion about ideas as to how we can ensure transparency, oversight, and move to a democratic management system are gratefully received.

Thank you Chronikka for the more useful and rational input this time, I am glad you have taken the time to get to know the project.