It served a purpose, but we've decided to use the NXT voting system to decide issues.
For more up to date information look in my signature for links to other ORA threads
Topic: Kora:: What should we do with left over stakes? (Read 5598 times)
I'm going to lock this thread now.
It served a purpose, but we've decided to use the NXT voting system to decide issues.
For more up to date information look in my signature for links to other ORA threads
It served a purpose, but we've decided to use the NXT voting system to decide issues.
For more up to date information look in my signature for links to other ORA threads
maybe do a new distribute is a good idea.
Poll verdict speaks for itself, should be implemented. But distribute only to those existing holders who did not dumped their stakes. The remaining for bounties and future development.
I would vote for this.
Sofar only a fraction has been distributed to stake holders, plenty of room for some more...
Poll verdict speaks for itself, should be implemented. But distribute only to those existing holders who did not dumped their stakes. The remaining for bounties and future development.
I would say use for bounties and developments as people who work for the coin should also be rewarded.. . We shouldn't be too greedy.
. We shouldn't be too greedy.I agree too , and there should be enough amount for Developers time and coins promotion.
how about
70% for existing stakeholder
20% for developer
10% for a giveway
70% for existing stakeholder
20% for developer
10% for a giveway
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
early in the morning?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4-ytFOS9TI
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
early in the morning?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4-ytFOS9TI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVlVyi9rKDo
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
early in the morning?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4-ytFOS9TI
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
what shall we do with the drunken sailor,
early in the morning?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4-ytFOS9TI
I think we're getting some well considered sincere opinions on this issue, and that's very encouraging, thanks everyone!
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
nice decision
+1
I think, that it does not really matter if there are 1000 or 3000 stakeholders. Maybe 10000 or 100000 would change a little.
There are Billions of people out there.
You can compare that maybe a little to microsoft having 2 offers for a marketing campaign.
One costs 1000. The other one 3000 $. Peanuts either the case.
I think it depends on the company, not on how much they want.
Also with the community its depending on the individuals not on the amount of people.
I prefer 1000 people, that care about there stake, to 3000 people that don't or lets say 1000 that care and 2000 that don't and dump...
I think we're getting some well considered sincere opinions on this issue, and that's very encouraging, thanks everyone!
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
nice decision
I think we're getting some well considered sincere opinions on this issue, and that's very encouraging, thanks everyone!
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
nice decision
I think we're getting some well considered sincere opinions on this issue, and that's very encouraging, thanks everyone!
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
I had a brain storm the other night that might give us a workable approach to resolve the situation. I've made my opinion known previously that my preference is to keep the remaining stakes in reserve for distribution later. The final number of stakeholders isn't known precisely, but we know it'll be ~1000 (maybe a bit under, maybe a bit over). That's enough to start building a community, so we *could* distribute ALL the left over stakes to the existing stake holders and do very well in the longer term. On the other hand, there are a lot of advantages to keeping at least some stakes in reserve for distribution later on.
What about this for a workable compromise, We distribute stakes to the ~1000 existing stakeholders based on the original calculation (i.e. 50% of total stakes to 3K stakeholders), and within the first week we use the NXT voting system to determine *exactly* what our community wants. In essence we resolve the matter using a democratic process based on one stake one vote. I really think this could be great test case for how we run (k)Ora in a decentralised fashion. Even the most cohesive communities will have issues that divide and cause deadlocks & gridlock with key decisions. We have a decentralised mechanism to deal with this, how fantastic!!
I know we already had a poll, but I don't feel that was truly representative. Only ~150 votes came in, and maybe some of those people weren't even stakeholders. I know I'm biased because the poll result was in favour of distributing left over stakes to the ~1K existing community, but this issue really is super critical, and using the NXT voting system we will know *exactly* what the WHOLE community feeling on this is once and for all. If we get the same result so be it, but one other problem with the forum poll was it didn't offer mixed combination option (e.g. 50% to existing stakeholders and 50% in reserve for future stakeholders OR 33% each for existing stakeholders, future stakeholders & bounties).
The NXT voting system can be 'per asset', so only Kora token holders would be eligible to vote, and I think having a voting system to help decide things is revolutionary for a leaderless decentralised starfish community like (k)Ora.
Later on we could attempt to design a set of rules to govern how our 'direct democracy' voting system would work long term, but for now we could experiment and use the left over stake issue to test the water a bit (and have some fun!).
What do people think?
1. I really do not get it with some of your argument with stakeholders being greedy. Now tell me what difference does it make between 1000 stake holders and 3000 stakeholders. I will tell you what will happen, with 3000 stakeholders, i can say 95% is going to just hold their coim due to number of coin they are going to receive. If kora decides the total amount of coin is 100,000,000 then you divide them by half and them divide again with 3000. What do you think you will receive and honestly how many is even going to make any contribution towards the development instead of TOTALLY depending on dev funds? Honest answers here? You have openend the thread for registration for quite some time plus the extension. Why dont just get on with it and lets continue with the next step.
2. Can all those registered be a little patient. Mac red is going through the whole list. Give the man some time. Its not like you are going to get the coins tomorrow. There are still so many things to be done. Relax.
2. Can all those registered be a little patient. Mac red is going through the whole list. Give the man some time. Its not like you are going to get the coins tomorrow. There are still so many things to be done. Relax.
is here a final decision about the left stakes?
it seems the register is over and the first round will be out soon.
it seems the register is over and the first round will be out soon.
One of the reasons that I am attracted to the (k)Ora project, is that the initiator, Kora, actually suggests option 3: distribute later to others.
It just feels right to me.
(This idealism of Kora reminds me a little of the altruistic enthusiasm of UtopianFuture, another impressive Project Manager.)
That the majority of this 'community' here voted in favor of personal greed, can be seen as somewhat disappointing, but maybe it is the best approach to acknowledge that we will have to somehow deal with that motivator, and that it can also propel the disciples to take ownership of this project. We want it to succeed. Others will be envious of us, but that is ok, because we will be rich.
I have full confidence that Kora will navigate these coral reefs with skill, and hopefully not lose his idealism, because right now, that is really the most important reason why this community has gathered here. (disclaimer: one person's opinion)
Pentamon
It just feels right to me.
(This idealism of Kora reminds me a little of the altruistic enthusiasm of UtopianFuture, another impressive Project Manager.)
That the majority of this 'community' here voted in favor of personal greed, can be seen as somewhat disappointing, but maybe it is the best approach to acknowledge that we will have to somehow deal with that motivator, and that it can also propel the disciples to take ownership of this project. We want it to succeed. Others will be envious of us, but that is ok, because we will be rich.
I have full confidence that Kora will navigate these coral reefs with skill, and hopefully not lose his idealism, because right now, that is really the most important reason why this community has gathered here. (disclaimer: one person's opinion)
Pentamon
I voted for option 2 because the DEV Team are the ones working hardest to create and make the coin..One share is enough for us lot, let's be nice and give the DEVS some goodies they deserve.Without them we would have squat just my 2 KORAS.. 
I would say use for bounties and developments as people who work for the coin should also be rewarded.. . We shouldn't be too greedy.
. We shouldn't be too greedy. 
I made my thoughts known at the start of the poll, but the result of the poll is clear, and people prefer to distribute left over stakes to existing Kora community members. I can live with that!
IMO it is obvious that a smaller slice from a bigger pie is *probably* going to be larger than a bigger slice from a smaller pie. A larger pie is best achieved by:
1- increasing the number of stakeholders by keeping left over stakes in trust for distribution at a later date
2- using the left over stakes to pay for development bounties
But that's just my opinion, and most people clearly think differently.
IMO it is obvious that a smaller slice from a bigger pie is *probably* going to be larger than a bigger slice from a smaller pie. A larger pie is best achieved by:
1- increasing the number of stakeholders by keeping left over stakes in trust for distribution at a later date
2- using the left over stakes to pay for development bounties
But that's just my opinion, and most people clearly think differently.
One's answer to the poll may be different depending on one's strategy for accumulating wealth.
If one wishes to get most profit in the quickest way possible (dump), then option 1 would be best as it would give one more to sell at once.
If one wishes to grow their wealth (hold), either of two or three would be best as they would allow for meeting challenges as they arise.
Sadly the current poll result just indicates that most existing shareholders want quick profits. Distributing them more coins will kill Kora for sure
I myself already made registration too, but I still strongly recommend Option 3. Distribute the wealth more evenly and you get more chance to reach longer-term holders at least
The choice is very obvious now
So what is your proposal to distribute the coins in a way that is not exploitable.
I believe we should accept that there is already a good distribution, this has nothing to do with quick profits.
Remember how nxt succeeded with very few stake holders. Remember another thing as well, not all community projects or dev projects will get the approval dev or marketing bounty. In some areas, stack holders need to step up and make that decision. That being said, the dev or community fund cannot be spending overly for every project. So there should be an equal or fair number between dev bounty and stake holders.
I made my thoughts known at the start of the poll, but the result of the poll is clear, and people prefer to distribute left over stakes to existing Kora community members. I can live with that!
IMO it is obvious that a smaller slice from a bigger pie is *probably* going to be larger than a bigger slice from a smaller pie. A larger pie is best achieved by:
1- increasing the number of stakeholders by keeping left over stakes in trust for distribution at a later date
2- using the left over stakes to pay for development bounties
But that's just my opinion, and most people clearly think differently.
IMO it is obvious that a smaller slice from a bigger pie is *probably* going to be larger than a bigger slice from a smaller pie. A larger pie is best achieved by:
1- increasing the number of stakeholders by keeping left over stakes in trust for distribution at a later date
2- using the left over stakes to pay for development bounties
But that's just my opinion, and most people clearly think differently.
One's answer to the poll may be different depending on one's strategy for accumulating wealth.
If one wishes to get most profit in the quickest way possible (dump), then option 1 would be best as it would give one more to sell at once.
If one wishes to grow their wealth (hold), either of two or three would be best as they would allow for meeting challenges as they arise.
Sadly the current poll result just indicates that most existing shareholders want quick profits. Distributing them more coins will kill Kora for sure
I myself already made registration too, but I still strongly recommend Option 3. Distribute the wealth more evenly and you get more chance to reach longer-term holders at least
The choice is very obvious now
Jump to: