Topic: NEM (XEM) Official Thread - 100% New Code - Easy To Use APIs - page 1346. (Read 2985503 times)

mixmaster, my post : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10742881

We need systems of vote.

I'll leave you guys too it.

+1

But thanks to it we came to the new facts. We need system of vote for cosigners exception!

Daedelus:
Congratulations! You are the first person on my ignore list.

The majority don't give the report to the actions and acts. From here and blind vote goes. There is no responsibility at most of people for their acts. And when there will be specific people, 10 people who at the head, they will bear the head all responsibility for that what they make decisions for the people. So these 10 people who will be chosen from the people, they will bear full responsibility for the made actions and acts. And furthermore for votes.

Now you are in semantics (from past form, most likely wilful obfuscation from the main piont but...)

The devs are 'getting' 65% of the stakes as they will hold the keys to those stakes (presumably, I have asked twice to confirm). Are they being awarded 65% for themselves? No. Are they in effect holding control of 65% of all NEM?  Yes, most certainly.  Unless someone can say who else would be after launch.

Hardly an assertion, more a logical follow through of the facts we know  

And as I have pointed out 4-5 times, it is the percentage that concerns people.

Daedelus

So, time the speech went about management of NEM fund by means of multi-signatures we have to as this moment to work community till the end and to consider all moments.

So, we were already defined that the wisest people from the people who have the highest merits will govern and there is a successful experience in an administrative position. In management of people. 10 their people will be only. 9 people contact to the people and one main (10th) renders the main verdict. This the tenth gets out of a 10 and becomes unanimously the leader that 9 people recognized him as the leader and it didn't doubt. This management on the basis of the Kopny right, the dreena Slavic and more fair than modern democracy where the power is given to the majority and nobody bears responsibility for the voice before all people. Such at our international community of nemster shouldn't be.

So, concerning management of method of the Kopny right we were already defined, further it is necessary to work the moment with multi-signatures.

We will allow at us 10 people who solve everything as to all of us further to live and be. They at the head of a community. All of them geographically far apart are and in different corners of the planet. At us all decisions will be accepted only on the basis of a full collective consent on the basis of multi-signatures.

And so such scenario :

It is necessary to allocate for something funds from NEM fund and suddenly one of members of ten got sick, or suddenly he suddenly dies or disappears. How to us to be in that case? After all multi-signature transactions from fund can be carried out only at a full consent and confirmation of all cosigners. If such case, it is necessary to take vote for an exception of this person of signers as the NEM fund becomes immobilized if though one cosigner can't sign.

As already earlier I spoke, the threshold of vote begins from 75% - 80% for an exception someone from cosigners. In our case it is 7 - 8 people can vote for an exception someone and then about re-election for its place of other cosigner in NEM fund.

From here follows: NEM isn't ready for start yet! We need to make system of vote for that that by method of vote it was possible to exclude cosigners and to re-elect at their position of other people differently we risk to lose completely NEM fund for the reason that anything can happen to cosigners who are responsible together with the collective right to sign for NEM fund.

We need systems of vote. Until we make them it isn't necessary to start at all!

You made an assertion:  That the developers are getting 65%.  Prove it.  Do not shift the burden of proof and claim that is evidence.

You're dodging. As usual.

What was my assertion?  It is a direct question, asked 3 times now.

Now you are engaging in a straw man argument by distorting what I have said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

You made an assertion: prove it.   Shifting the burden of proof and demanding evidence to the contrary is not proof for your original assertion.   Waiting for you to provide evidence that the developers are getting 65%. 

Could work, if the majority want it, for management of the funds but 65% in the hands of a handful of devs or others is still damaging. It is the percentage that causes concern. 

Still not answering direct questions UP 

What are the assertions I have to prove? I didn't think I had made any. Are you also arguing the 65% of NEM development funds won't be held by the devs?

So it sounds like I was asleep at the wheel by not reading everything written on the topic of NEM and have had my stake diluted as a result. Fair enough. What percentage of the stakeholders approved the 25% dev fund, out of interest? It must be a matter of historical record.

Doesn't work that way.  You cannot keep shifting the burden of proof on other people, that's why you get ignored everywhere, as you're breaking about 3000 years of logic and nobody wants to waste their time arguing with a 'tard on the internet.  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

It's up to you to prove your claim that the developers are getting 65%.  A burden of proof or shifting the burden of evidence on to somebody else is not proof of your assertion. 

Daedelus read about the Kopny right of management of Slavic communities : http://vk.cc/3uEA0O
Everything to it comes back again. Before I wrote requirements to candidates. After start of NEM we will define leaders and the most adequate people from the people.

What assertions have I made? Are you also arguing the 65% of NEM development funds won't be held by the devs? In not them, then who?


Where in these two thread OPs does it say 25% will be set aside for development? This is where everyone signed up for NEM afterall so this is the basis of our little social contract. That is a pretty significant change, I would expect people would have been told about it when they were signing up if it was there 'since day one'.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-nem-4-billions-coins-part-1-this-thread-is-no-longer-used-422129
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nem-xem-official-thread-100-new-code-easy-to-use-apis-654845

I control+f' for a couple of terms but couldn't see it.

TaunSew, please have some common sense and quit spaming/trolling this thread with nonsense.

But right now only about 40% will be distributed to stakeholders.

but if NEM never launch then Igor will never be able to release his Jinn and forever will beautiful Svetlana be plowed by hairy Boris truck driver, this is hairy slavic love story at stake.  Proof of Stake.      

Is this a Nxt party now? Come on guys, we are trying to sort things out, make some decisions and clear out confusion.

Please refrain from creating a Nxt - NEM fight again. We have enough things to discuss and sort out right now.

Waiting for Daedalus to prove his assertions in the first place.  It was only ever 1000/4000 for development (please read the god damn word, development =/= developers) and the socks / failed redeems are going to the community (silver coins and community ran fund, which even Daedalus can request funding from if he has an interesting project).