Topic: CryptoKingdom Uncensored - page 34. (Read 69560 times)

This is from Bittrex's coin submission page:

"A logo for your coin - png format with a transparent background.  The logo should be square with dimensions of 1000x1000 pixels with no white space on its border and no taglines.  It should only be a logo and expect it to show up in multiple spots in the Bittrex UI."

So Town is offering 1 Billion M for CK logo that's original, meets with the community's approval and the stipulations from Bittrex's guidelines.

Gringotts Update
Good news, things are progressing very well with Gringotts depository!

We hope to open XMR deposits soon! (later this week, or early next)

As much as possible we will continue with saddam's policies & procedures.

See details of early bird Phoenix Trust share bonuses below!

PJ added a Development Roadmap: https://cryptokingdom.me/dev-roadmap

PM me your email and I'll invite you to the slack

Nice bounty!

Where is best to contact PJ?

20 Billion M Bounty

Step 1: Create specs for a CK money asset. This will include things like type of blockchain, emission (if any), how it will be distributed to players, etc....

Stipulations are that the name of the asset is CK, Town gets 10% for development purposes, the development plan is complete to the point where the Board only needs to do a yes/no vote, and that you've coordinated your efforts with PJ so there aren't any unforeseen technical issues.

Step 2: Create and distribute CK to players.

Step 3: Get CK listed on an exchange that averages more than a million dollars daily in transactions.

PLEASE NOTE: This will be changing M into CK, so your Bounty will be effected if you change the supply above or below the current 4 Trillion. For example if you doubled it to 8 Trillion, your Bounty would be 40 Billion; and if you halved the current supply to 2 Trillion, your Bounty would be 10 Billion.

Without a way for new players to deposit the game is obviously less active, but that'll change if/when the new depository opens. When the depo opens transaction volume will increase with new players, and then incentive to follow through on smooth's suggestion to split current M into game and ownership tokens kicks in, and then hopefully the game token gets listed on some exchanges.

I don't think anyone underestimates the damage CK suffered recently, but the potential is still good, and if the community keeps working together to fix the problems, then the future can still be positive for CK.

I was not at all suggesting an ICO (as you say, different question). I was merely pointing out some conceptual similarities and also some ecosystem realities. Exchanges are doing (at least minimal) legal due diligence on new tokens before listing them. They are more likely to balk at a token that represents ownership of the game than a token that is purely a use/currency token.

As far as the current state of the game being nearly-dead right now, that speaks to the importance of setting up the right set of incentives for people to invest in (re)growing it. I think my suggestions do that, but I'm sure they are not the only possible way.

On the matter of complexity, this seems like a complete non-issue to me. My suggestion of separating ownership from the currency token is exactly the same as nearly every other game in the world with in-game currency. e.g. Linden Dollars are not ownership in Linden Labs. Game players need only be concerned with the currency token.

Defining the game as a community project without ownership (and therefore no need for a token, though it is also certainly possible to have ownership without a token) is okay but it means that things like funding and paying of real world expenses like servers, salaries, marketing costs, etc. will need to be done via donations (which could include in-game players and organizations). That's more like a club or open source project. Even then it still needs some sort of governance rules, treasury, etc. Recognizing tokenized ownership seems a more direct continuity from the previous structure, but then again that may not matter since the previous structure ended up going nowhere good.

not sure if having a separate governance token would create 'politics' in CK exactly,  but it would allow decision making when required, which is essential now that risto is not leading CK project anymore. I'm much less comfortable investing in a project that can't resolve deadlocks, and recent bitcoin cash fork shows what can happen when strong opposing views cause gridlock, and bitcoin does have miners at least who can indicate preferences for big strategic decisions. If CK doesn't have a (benevolent) dictator running things anymore, it needs a governance system in place even if it rarely gets used, which is what I think will happen. I just want to play the game, and would delegate my voting tokens to those in official positions, but I wouldn't sell them in case I needed to vote on an important issue that I felt was important to keep CK functioning.

This is how the world works, rich people like Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffet, Bezos etc own big stakes of the economy but don't have direct control of government policy, then there are politicians like Obama who get to control the levers of government without having much money but get paid wages and other perks, and then some guys like Trump who have both. Adding politics to the CK landscape makes things far more interesting, I like it!

CK could attract SEC attention one day, it might not seem likely today, but when bitcoin started it was just satoshi and Hal Finney bouncing coins between themselves, and we all know regulators are watching today.

Better to be safe than sorry, retrofitting a split later involving 1000's of people would be much harder, so best to do it now while it's still manageable.

This could be the start of something beautiful!

Edit, IMHO the real ownership of the game is based on the currency token, the other token should be used for 'governance'. I actually prefer a model where the game doesn't pay dividends, all money just keeps circulating through the economic systems of the game, and the game controlled accounts just exist as they are, and any obvious surpluses go back into marketing and dev expenses, so the governance token is just for decision making. I think this would keep things simple, and if people wanted to trade the governance token they could do it all OTC outside the game.

Your assurances mean nothing to me (or matter to a regulatory agency), I'll ere on the side of caution and implore others to do the same.

I can 100% guarantee without a sliver of a doubt that the SEC has absolutely no interest, concern, or care for CK.

If you start seeing them go through the capitalization list and causing problems for ETH down to cuntcoin.com (real upcoming ICO...ROFL), then we can talk.

Of course, they would probably hit PEPE first before getting down to the absolute shitcoin levels housed by CK and HoboNickles. Hell, HBN will be hit first, giving CK plenty of time to prepare

TBH, this was the only thing on my mind.

To a degree I understand the rationale, but all this extra complexity seems pointless to me.

For one, there is almost no transactional volume in the game, nor will this be something that tries to compete with Bitcoin, so the distinction is moot. Let's be blunt: for all intents and purposes the game is pretty much dead.  

Additionally, people or the game management can electively burn M/CK, as has been done in every other "game" crypto token: PEPE, BTS, and others. So say town makes 10mil M, 10% or 1mil can be sent to a burn address, with a check each game year. This is sort of like a proxy dividend via outstanding float cancellation. Really, I don't think this is necessary to consider now, but I am sure it has helped something like PEPE in a fashion which has gone from 1bil issuance to 700mil as a result of burns by the community and the "PEPE foundation."  

Also, we do not have to run an ICO to have a crypto token. That would be a separate topic entirely. I just think it has now reached the point of pure idiocy that a game called "Crypto Kingdom" has absolutely nothing to do with crypto and we need a token.

Anyway on the topic of a fund raise, eventually people will realize we need money in some fashion as PJ isn't going to do shit (he has had a year and was paid well in XMR to do nothing) and we need other developers. And even if we make a crypto token, we will still have a broken spreadsheet game. Unless you find someone who will work for free, that will take some form of compensation to fix.

Now, just for ease, you can look and see that no other "game token" even cares about the ownership vs currency distinction. I think just the one token is enough. However, if it is such an issue why not do this:

We currently have 4tril M. I say move it to a # everyone is comfortable with. 5tril, 10tril, 100tril, whatever. We then take that token and issue CKM and CKO in the same amounts. M is then removed. So say you own 100bil M after we "lock" a # of M outstanding value, you will now own 100bil CKM and 100bil CKO. The M version is money/currency and the O version is ownership. CKO can just stay on Ultima, CKM we try to make the token off of.

In regards to the game, about 50% of M and numerous game items are Zech-related. The game will own 50% CKM and 50% CKO to do what they wish with as well as all the game items. So you could raise funds off that CKM/CKO and then have all the items for market making by the game (sort of like Coinshop used to do).

Personally, I think it's piss that Zech invested so much in the game (thousands of BTC and tens of thousands of XMR) and then everyone expects him to spend even more money and then the game is no better off as those additional payments are only for debts that Zech himself created. But you've locked his shit for months and it doesn't make economic sense for him to pay anything off, so either just give the shit back or do something, anything, else.

So that CKM/CKO thing should make everyone happy. I still think it's pointless complexity, but just do something...



 

I mostly agree as far as branding. I also agree as far as buying the token and wanting to use it. That's consistent with the broader trend of many ICOs for 'use tokens'.

Where I don't agree is viewing the currency or use token as ownership of the game, or voting on its management. It makes little sense. When decisions are made on how to run a company, it is the stockholders who vote (directly or via a board), not the gift card holders. The lack of dividends or buybacks mean that that such ownership would have little economic purpose.

M has, in its most recent incarnation, been both ownership and currency. The two are a poor mix in the same token. Previously we had separate ownership (CKG) and currency (M) tokens. Switching away from XMR (equal to 1 million M for those who may not have been around) as the currency (whether or not that was actually needed or a good idea, let's leave that aside) did not require merging the roles of currency and ownership, and doing so was not a good idea.

So my suggestion would be:

1. Split the current M in two, a currency unit and and ownership unit
2. Rename M (currency unit) to CK for branding and call the ownership unit something else.
3. The ownership unit doesn't have to trade on traditional exchanges^*. It can be quite obscure; people looking to invest in owning the game (as opposed to playing the game or speculating in-game on assets and tokens) can seek it out (probably on some asset platform such as Ardor or Bitshares). These support dividends and various other rules (such as restrictions on transferability, etc.) that make sense for ownership tokens but not for use tokens or currency.
4. As with most ICOs, the game organization itself can start out owning some "premine" share of the currency unit and can benefit economically from the gain in value of the use token from greater use and speculation. If it is not the case that the current treasury owns a lot of M (I don't know), then perhaps a better approach is rather than splitting, declare M, likely renamed, to the be the ownership token (like the old CKG) and create a new use and currency token (called CK, for the above branding reasons) with some reasonable "premine" initially held by the game treasury.

^* In fact given the recent opinion from the SEC, traditional exchanges may be less willing to list anything that isn't a pure use or game currency token and carries ownership rights.