Author

Topic: The NEM Project - The journey starts here (Read 814 times)

member
Activity: 75
Merit: 10
June 12, 2014, 10:59:03 PM
#10
Attention Nem Stakeholders:

TauMuon is hard at work on a new official btt thread with updated links and information. In the meantime, EFFV had created this thread for temporary discussion:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nem-official-non-moderated-thread-updates-discussion-650274

I encourage all faithful to the NEM community to join us there.

Thank you





hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 506
Some of the anti-NEM people acknowledged that NEM was too expensive for them, hence their prior attempts (before the UF thing) of FUD to drive down the stake prices.   That's crypto currencies in general, people always try to push the FUD to temporarily drive down prices so they can buy cheap and then sell high.

If you drive down the price of NEM stake then I'll buy a token, as would others.

full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
Looking for the next big thing
The developers are still really developers and still really writing an amazing code. 

When the price bottoms out, I will buy.
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0

This is a thoughtful post.  I tend to agree with it, but most of the leaders are going to be developers.  Who knows what reasons they have for being anonymous.  We can't really expect them to put their identity out there for the world to screw with.  It would be nice if there was more upside for a person than downside, but just look at how a team of trolls appeared and spent all day (June 12th) attacking UF and NEM.  Now in the case of UF, he somewhat deserved it, but it isn't necessarily that smart to have your identity tied to a project.  NXT, BTC, PPC and others have all be quite successful with anonymous leaders/devs.  

I am not sure about your last statement but I believe NXT is well represented and "identified". https://xrptalk.org/topic/3116-nxt-goes-mainstream-payexpo-sms-payments-atms-nxtcafe-and-market-gains/

Most "anonymous" coins after the first few coins tend to go into oblivion. A classic case of high visibility is ethereum. They have been upfront with all their cards opened in the first place. Look where they are now. Nevermind if it is vaporware or not. It has yet to be seen. Fact is, they have opened their cards and stripped themselves naked for all to see. What's more satisfying to know as a result of that is that you have a huge following of developers contributing.

Besides, if we have a face to a name, this can be promoted on the ground rather than purely virtual as is now. Further, in this game we are playing, there has been too many scams and therefore trust is of utmost importance. Whatever it is, our leader who resigned had not been forthcoming with his honesty. And that's when it is more important now than ever that we need to have a name to the face of the new leader and not just some pseudonym. That can only make matters worse.

It was my understanding that BCNext was and is anonymous.  Putting together enough donations to have a representative show up at a conference is not the same.

Ethereum isn't really valid since it isn't a product yet ?  Yes, they've marketed well.  I am not sure how they are funded, but not everything is equally possible given the limitations of the funding model.

I don't disagree with your general sentiment, I'm just telling you that the leader of all coins if pretty much the lead developer.  If you want top notch dev talent, you can't expect them to put their name out there so they can be swatted or worse.

I must say that NEM is well funded now given its value of about 20K NXT * 1,000 * 0.00012 BTC = 2,400BTC. That works out to be a hefty sum of $1.44M to do a lot more. Of course one can say that the core team should deserve the bulk of it. I am not disputing that. What I am merely saying is that there is enough to do a bit of promotional work with it.

I also agree with you that developers can hide behind, but there needs to be a leader among all. He or she does not need to be a developer, just an honest bloke who is willing to face the world. But still there needs to be some comfort at the end of the day that the development of the solution is not out to cheat. And that means open sourcing it to the world to prove that the codes are indeed safe.

Much need to be done to shape this. I like the professionalism and set up of ethereum. Nevermind if it is not rolled out yet. But have a look at their website and have a look at the contributors and advocates. They are all there for you to see.

Put it this way, I for one is willing to stick my neck out and champion this without any reservation if there is enough transparency in the game. Simple as that. And I don't even have a free NEM stake start with. I will if I am given enough visibility on the project. After all I have been through the dot com boom and I am willing to come out of my retirement to at least be part of another big thing that is going to change our lives.

I like that if Jaguar0625 - gimre -makoto or any other dev. taking over, he will stay open and non anonnymous.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
Earlier today, I send this message to utopianfuture:

Quote
Hi utopianfuture,

I wonder if you would read the following, and tell me if I am way out left field, or if you see some of these ideals possibly realizing in NEM?

I was wondering: how do we get a system of distribution, where the initial crowds are not necessarily getting all the benefits of the money, directly after it had been created?

I find myself chanting this mantra:  "Every human  -  One stake  -  One time  -  Any time."

I would like to see a system where my children would get their stake when they get old enough.
I would like to see a mechanism whereby every new account that is created for a person, comes with it's full stake of coins for that unique, adult, human being.

The mechanism to create a new account for a human, relies on a process that is initiated by lets say two or three mature accounts, Let's call them 'bankers'.
They have to verify that this is a live, unique human, with no other or no previous accounts.
This process of generating a new account, is where the forging or 'mining occurs and new coins are created.
The initiating accounts (bankers) get a reasonable fee for starting up the new account, but the majority of the newly forged money is residing in the new account.
(There is nothing preventing the new account holder enticing the bankers with some payments outside of the currency for the startup).
I think that any account should only be allowed to be a banker a certain amount of times. How about once for every finger(print) - ten times?

The process for a new account to mature into a 'procreating banker' can be linked to certain economic activity - some proof of work or proof of stake, or proof of participation in the economy.

The main arguments for such a system would be:
The creation of money is not only favoring the initial group that get exposed to it early on, because it is created as people enter the currency.
The ratio of coins to humans stays the same, even generations from now.

The main argument against such a system is that nobody here in cryptoland likes the idea of uniquely identifying a human.
(And that would be an important part in any system that wants to give each human one, and only one stake.)
And, let's not forget our greed: many are wondering at how can I leverage things in my favor?

Nevertheless, I wonder, is it possible to incorporate something like this into the block-chain algorithm of a crypto currency?

Maybe I see things too simplistic. That could be.  I see some parallels to the biologic world. Well, I have no economic training, working in the health care field.

Anyways, thanks for your time.

Pentamon
legendary
Activity: 1059
Merit: 1016

This is a thoughtful post.  I tend to agree with it, but most of the leaders are going to be developers.  Who knows what reasons they have for being anonymous.  We can't really expect them to put their identity out there for the world to screw with.  It would be nice if there was more upside for a person than downside, but just look at how a team of trolls appeared and spent all day (June 12th) attacking UF and NEM.  Now in the case of UF, he somewhat deserved it, but it isn't necessarily that smart to have your identity tied to a project.  NXT, BTC, PPC and others have all be quite successful with anonymous leaders/devs.  

I am not sure about your last statement but I believe NXT is well represented and "identified". https://xrptalk.org/topic/3116-nxt-goes-mainstream-payexpo-sms-payments-atms-nxtcafe-and-market-gains/

Most "anonymous" coins after the first few coins tend to go into oblivion. A classic case of high visibility is ethereum. They have been upfront with all their cards opened in the first place. Look where they are now. Nevermind if it is vaporware or not. It has yet to be seen. Fact is, they have opened their cards and stripped themselves naked for all to see. What's more satisfying to know as a result of that is that you have a huge following of developers contributing.

Besides, if we have a face to a name, this can be promoted on the ground rather than purely virtual as is now. Further, in this game we are playing, there has been too many scams and therefore trust is of utmost importance. Whatever it is, our leader who resigned had not been forthcoming with his honesty. And that's when it is more important now than ever that we need to have a name to the face of the new leader and not just some pseudonym. That can only make matters worse.

It was my understanding that BCNext was and is anonymous.  Putting together enough donations to have a representative show up at a conference is not the same.

Ethereum isn't really valid since it isn't a product yet ?  Yes, they've marketed well.  I am not sure how they are funded, but not everything is equally possible given the limitations of the funding model.

I don't disagree with your general sentiment, I'm just telling you that the leader of all coins if pretty much the lead developer.  If you want top notch dev talent, you can't expect them to put their name out there so they can be swatted or worse.

I must say that NEM is well funded now given its value of about 20K NXT * 1,000 * 0.00012 BTC = 2,400BTC. That works out to be a hefty sum of $1.44M to do a lot more. Of course one can say that the core team should deserve the bulk of it. I am not disputing that. What I am merely saying is that there is enough to do a bit of promotional work with it.

I also agree with you that developers can hide behind, but there needs to be a leader among all. He or she does not need to be a developer, just an honest bloke who is willing to face the world. But still there needs to be some comfort at the end of the day that the development of the solution is not out to cheat. And that means open sourcing it to the world to prove that the codes are indeed safe.

Much need to be done to shape this. I like the professionalism and set up of ethereum. Nevermind if it is not rolled out yet. But have a look at their website and have a look at the contributors and advocates. They are all there for you to see.

Put it this way, I for one is willing to stick my neck out and champion this without any reservation if there is enough transparency in the game. Simple as that. And I don't even have a free NEM stake start with. I will if I am given enough visibility on the project. After all I have been through the dot com boom and I am willing to come out of my retirement to at least be part of another big thing that is going to change our lives.
sr. member
Activity: 405
Merit: 250

This is a thoughtful post.  I tend to agree with it, but most of the leaders are going to be developers.  Who knows what reasons they have for being anonymous.  We can't really expect them to put their identity out there for the world to screw with.  It would be nice if there was more upside for a person than downside, but just look at how a team of trolls appeared and spent all day (June 12th) attacking UF and NEM.  Now in the case of UF, he somewhat deserved it, but it isn't necessarily that smart to have your identity tied to a project.  NXT, BTC, PPC and others have all be quite successful with anonymous leaders/devs.  

I am not sure about your last statement but I believe NXT is well represented and "identified". https://xrptalk.org/topic/3116-nxt-goes-mainstream-payexpo-sms-payments-atms-nxtcafe-and-market-gains/

Most "anonymous" coins after the first few coins tend to go into oblivion. A classic case of high visibility is ethereum. They have been upfront with all their cards opened in the first place. Look where they are now. Nevermind if it is vaporware or not. It has yet to be seen. Fact is, they have opened their cards and stripped themselves naked for all to see. What's more satisfying to know as a result of that is that you have a huge following of developers contributing.

Besides, if we have a face to a name, this can be promoted on the ground rather than purely virtual as is now. Further, in this game we are playing, there has been too many scams and therefore trust is of utmost importance. Whatever it is, our leader who resigned had not been forthcoming with his honesty. And that's when it is more important now than ever that we need to have a name to the face of the new leader and not just some pseudonym. That can only make matters worse.

It was my understanding that BCNext was and is anonymous.  Putting together enough donations to have a representative show up at a conference is not the same.

Ethereum isn't really valid since it isn't a product yet ?  Yes, they've marketed well.  I am not sure how they are funded, but not everything is equally possible given the limitations of the funding model.

I don't disagree with your general sentiment, I'm just telling you that the leader of all coins if pretty much the lead developer.  If you want top notch dev talent, you can't expect them to put their name out there so they can be swatted or worse.
legendary
Activity: 1059
Merit: 1016

This is a thoughtful post.  I tend to agree with it, but most of the leaders are going to be developers.  Who knows what reasons they have for being anonymous.  We can't really expect them to put their identity out there for the world to screw with.  It would be nice if there was more upside for a person than downside, but just look at how a team of trolls appeared and spent all day (June 12th) attacking UF and NEM.  Now in the case of UF, he somewhat deserved it, but it isn't necessarily that smart to have your identity tied to a project.  NXT, BTC, PPC and others have all be quite successful with anonymous leaders/devs.  

I am not sure about your last statement but I believe NXT is well represented and "identified". https://xrptalk.org/topic/3116-nxt-goes-mainstream-payexpo-sms-payments-atms-nxtcafe-and-market-gains/

Most "anonymous" coins after the first few coins tend to go into oblivion. A classic case of high visibility is ethereum. They have been upfront with all their cards opened in the first place. Look where they are now. Nevermind if it is vaporware or not. It has yet to be seen. Fact is, they have opened their cards and stripped themselves naked for all to see. What's more satisfying to know as a result of that is that you have a huge following of developers contributing.

Besides, if we have a face to a name, this can be promoted on the ground rather than purely virtual as is now. Further, in this game we are playing, there has been too many scams and therefore trust is of utmost importance. Whatever it is, our leader who resigned had not been forthcoming with his honesty. And that's when it is more important now than ever that we need to have a name to the face of the new leader and not just some pseudonym. That can only make matters worse.
sr. member
Activity: 405
Merit: 250

This is a thoughtful post.  I tend to agree with it, but most of the leaders are going to be developers.  Who knows what reasons they have for being anonymous.  We can't really expect them to put their identity out there for the world to screw with.  It would be nice if there was more upside for a person than downside, but just look at how a team of trolls appeared and spent all day (June 12th) attacking UF and NEM.  Now in the case of UF, he somewhat deserved it, but it isn't necessarily that smart to have your identity tied to a project.  NXT, BTC, PPC and others have all be quite successful with anonymous leaders/devs. 
legendary
Activity: 1059
Merit: 1016
The main site for information has been taken offline for whatever reason.

As we soldier on, I have taken the liberty to continue with a new thread here for all of us to continue on with our desire to make this thing happen. Whatever happened in the past is history and what needs to be done now is to see things moving forward to achieve the greater objective.

I must say that I have only been involved in this project in the very periphery of it since end of May.

I only have this to say. In all my years as a technopreneur (yes, I am not young!), I have seen enough of these types of episodes. The greatest problem with most of us is greed. Greed blinds a person. Greed takes away all rationality of a person. Many refuse to accept the truth but choose to believe what they want to believe in. And that's where failure comes about.

I am addressing this to all sides of the situation we are in. You have the fervent followers who believe in it without rationality. You have the elements of greed trying to profit from this project, you have distrusting people always being negative about the project, you have elements of people who are trying to destroy this project, you have true and rational followers and finally you have a core team working tirelessly trying to get this out. You have both the rational and the irrational. And that's the reality.

I must say that what is most important now in moving forward is solidarity, as defined in the charter of this project. There is too much anonymity in this project. But it should have been exemplary of a leader to reveal his or her identity so that we all can put a face to it. But that is water under the bridge now.

I would suggest that whoever that takes the new leadership role in steering this should now identify himself or herself and if the nominated person is not comfortable with that, I would suggest he or she should step aside and get someone who is willing to do it.

That has to be the case as we move forward to clear the name of the project.

For the short time that I have been trying to give my 2 cents worth in this project , I sense some sincerity in a few of the development team members whom I have been interacting with and I am of the opinion that this project will survive.

I believe the  core development team will work unabated towards rolling out this great project.
Jump to: