concept currency symbol
 |  |
Topic: Bitmark - page 168. (Read 622228 times)
vote 1 for BTM - Bitmark
concept currency symbol
concept currency symbol
I've decided on a name for the project and currency.
Bitmark
1 Bitmark, 3 Bitmarks.
1 Mark will equal 0.001 Bitmark.
Short Code: BTM or MRK undecided, feedback please
"Mark" Historical Usage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_(money)
"Bitmark" Historical Usage: bitly used it to refer to public bookmarks, this seems to have phased out over 2012/2013.
Rationale: Unambiguous throughout the web and history, sense of money, easily used in common language, historical references, term already available for growth in value, reasonable, distinct from ****coin.
Feedback?
Bitmark
1 Bitmark, 3 Bitmarks.
1 Mark will equal 0.001 Bitmark.
Short Code: BTM or MRK undecided, feedback please
"Mark" Historical Usage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_(money)
"Bitmark" Historical Usage: bitly used it to refer to public bookmarks, this seems to have phased out over 2012/2013.
Rationale: Unambiguous throughout the web and history, sense of money, easily used in common language, historical references, term already available for growth in value, reasonable, distinct from ****coin.
Feedback?
Care to say who the other members of the project are. You kept referencing "we".
Future proofing and to be inclusive to you all who are giving feedback.
For now it's just me coding and specifying. But I consider myself more of a lead developer managed and guided by the community, also with contributions from the community. So I'll just flip between saying I and we for a while I guess!
Does this mean these tasks are likely to be completed by next weekend and we can start testing the reference daemon on the testnet?
Yes, step one entails recreating litecoin from the latest stable bitcoin branch, adjusting as needed, renaming things, and putting in the block chain configuration. It isn't a major amount of work, but will need extensive testing to ensure no bugs have been introduced.
Any testing, feedback, bug reports during the week will be gratefully received.
Care to say who the other members of the project are. You kept referencing "we".
Does this mean these tasks are likely to be completed by next weekend and we can start testing the reference daemon on the testnet?
Yes, step one entails recreating litecoin from the latest stable bitcoin branch, adjusting as needed, renaming things, and putting in the block chain configuration. It isn't a major amount of work, but will need extensive testing to ensure no bugs have been introduced.
Any testing, feedback, bug reports during the week will be gratefully received.
Eta?
Uncertain.
Targets for this working week are to have:
- chosen & secured a name + domain
- base reference daemon ready for testing and running on the testnet
- developed and tested instamine prevention
Does this mean these tasks are likely to be completed by next weekend and we can start testing the reference daemon on the testnet?
Eta?
Uncertain.
Targets for this working week are to have:
- chosen & secured a name + domain
- base reference daemon ready for testing and running on the testnet
- developed and tested instamine prevention
Will be following
Start using Bitcoin instead of dreaming of getting rich and making something "new".
Clearly you've come to the wrong thread. If you have been following coinsolidation's ideas at all you would know that this is not about that at all.
Eta?
Uncertain.
Targets for this working week are to have:
- chosen & secured a name + domain
- base reference daemon ready for testing and running on the testnet
- developed and tested instamine prevention
Eta?
Start using Bitcoin instead of dreaming of getting rich and making something "new".
Please take the time to read the overview, I've taken every step I can to try and engage the community whilst making it clear that this isn't about getting rich.
It's a programming / standardization project, not an alt coin get rich quick scheme.
One I see a need for precisely because I have used Bitcoin extensively for a number of years.
I don't want your money, just some feedback or discussion, if you have the time to give it. Hopefully that's a reasonable request.
Start using Bitcoin instead of dreaming of getting rich and making something "new".
Wow! Respect for your ambition! Only one thing makes me sad: "I'm very keen to avoid any kind of IPO..." 
My answer: Shut up and take my money!
Good luck, watching closely!
My answer: Shut up and take my money!Good luck, watching closely!
Yeah I think it's almost always necessary to have at least some funds at the start so that there are enough resources to get the launch going properly.
if an IPO or similar is ever established, i would like to suggest a ROI over 12 or more months later to reduce investors dumping coins
I'm very keen to avoid any kind of IPO, debt, or false expectation. Some funds may be necessary for a dedicated server (development / website / resources / main node), domain names, some templates and graphic resources, and some leased mining for the testnet so we can switch between 10mh and 200mh. All of that together is probably only 1-2 BTC per month max.
This thread seems to have worked and attracted some good people to the discussion, so I'm confident that as a need for each resource arises we'll be able to come to a reasonable solution.
Since this is the opposite of new most coins in here (no rush to launch, inflate price, scam, dump on markets and so forth) the considerations are quite different, and also the problems. As an example you don't really see Bitcoin or Litecoin suffering from huge negative changes in difficulty due to multipools, or clambering to be added to an exchange or pool as soon as possible. This coin will be the same, if an exchange see's merit of adding it due to demand then so be it, if somebody wants to set up a pool, then great, but we won't be pushing for it.
Organic natural growth based on adoption and utility is the goal. I'm perfectly happy for the coin to have negligible value at the start.
Developer Earnings Calculation
---------------------
If we pin a milestone target of $ parity on the value of the coin, and assume no coins are touched, then after a year the developer will have ~$6500-$13000 worth of coin from block rewards.
Assuming a 100 hour per month commitment to the project, that equates to an hourly rate of $5.5-$11 per hour of work.
---------------------
If we pin a milestone target of $ parity on the value of the coin, and assume no coins are touched, then after a year the developer will have ~$6500-$13000 worth of coin from block rewards.
Assuming a 100 hour per month commitment to the project, that equates to an hourly rate of $5.5-$11 per hour of work.
This seems really low to me. But I'd like to hear what other people think.
There is potential for higher rewards but dollar parity after a year would be a 5.25 million dollar market cap(if I calculated that right) which wouldn't be a failure at all and I would think the devs would deserve more than that.
It's all relative. If the project picks up to an $84m cap instead, and the developer has earned $200k worth of coins, without transaction fees, and with the assumption that they'll mine or buy a few hours worth of blocks themselves over the year. Then people may feel that's high.
I'd like to avoid being in a position where people feel those working on the project are excessively remunerated.. complaints of "not enough" are far nicer to deal with than complaints of "too much!".
This would be a very healthy experiment. I still consider the IPO model (paying the developer up-front) to be fair still. This would be a lot more fair than that.
I have an alternative to the IPO model and donation model which I may need to turn to in order to buy some resources for the project (templates, servers, leased rigs for testnet).
If we follow the notion that the developer is hired by the community, then developer days (monthly developer reward / 25) = ~52.5 coins could be auctioned or sold in advance at an agreed rate, and only for a reasonable amount of time, say an "advance" of "next weeks wages" at an agreed amount in return for ~250 coins.
It seems a reasonable approach to funding the early stage resources. Not quite as nice as blind donations, and not as risky as IPO.
Yeah I think it's almost always necessary to have at least some funds at the start so that there are enough resources to get the launch going properly.
Developer Earnings Calculation
---------------------
If we pin a milestone target of $ parity on the value of the coin, and assume no coins are touched, then after a year the developer will have ~$6500-$13000 worth of coin from block rewards.
Assuming a 100 hour per month commitment to the project, that equates to an hourly rate of $5.5-$11 per hour of work.
---------------------
If we pin a milestone target of $ parity on the value of the coin, and assume no coins are touched, then after a year the developer will have ~$6500-$13000 worth of coin from block rewards.
Assuming a 100 hour per month commitment to the project, that equates to an hourly rate of $5.5-$11 per hour of work.
This seems really low to me. But I'd like to hear what other people think.
There is potential for higher rewards but dollar parity after a year would be a 5.25 million dollar market cap(if I calculated that right) which wouldn't be a failure at all and I would think the devs would deserve more than that.
It's all relative. If the project picks up to an $84m cap instead, and the developer has earned $200k worth of coins, without transaction fees, and with the assumption that they'll mine or buy a few hours worth of blocks themselves over the year. Then people may feel that's high.
I'd like to avoid being in a position where people feel those working on the project are excessively remunerated.. complaints of "not enough" are far nicer to deal with than complaints of "too much!".
This would be a very healthy experiment. I still consider the IPO model (paying the developer up-front) to be fair still. This would be a lot more fair than that.
I have an alternative to the IPO model and donation model which I may need to turn to in order to buy some resources for the project (templates, servers, leased rigs for testnet).
If we follow the notion that the developer is hired by the community, then developer days (monthly developer reward / 25) = ~52.5 coins could be auctioned or sold in advance at an agreed rate, and only for a reasonable amount of time, say an "advance" of "next weeks wages" at an agreed amount in return for ~250 coins.
It seems a reasonable approach to funding the early stage resources. Not quite as nice as blind donations, and not as risky as IPO.
This would be a very healthy experiment. I still consider the IPO model (paying the developer up-front) to be fair still. This would be a lot more fair than that.
Bookmarked. And the best of luck with realizing your ideas.
Bookmarked. And the best of luck with realizing your ideas.
I think the overview looks good.
Does anyone know if there have been coins with similar releases before? Any live coins with a similar philosophy?
Does anyone know if there have been coins with similar releases before? Any live coins with a similar philosophy?
Developer Earnings Calculation
---------------------
If we pin a milestone target of $ parity on the value of the coin, and assume no coins are touched, then after a year the developer will have ~$6500-$13000 worth of coin from block rewards.
Assuming a 100 hour per month commitment to the project, that equates to an hourly rate of $5.5-$11 per hour of work.
It's fair to presume I'm hoping the coin achieves a bit higher than $ parity over time, and the incentive is there. If $9 is achieved by ethical growth of the user base then this project becomes a successful full time job, or a small organization with paid staff.
Sorry for being so verbose, I just want it to be clear.
This seems really low to me. But I'd like to hear what other people think.
There is potential for higher rewards but dollar parity after a year would be a 5.25 million dollar market cap(if I calculated that right) which wouldn't be a failure at all and I would think the devs would deserve more than that.
Jump to: