they dont want to make billions out of this project they just want a piece to get from it for their efforts
1 Like
The ICO space is not the same as last year, and it is nothing like what it was in 2014.
The regulatory hurdles are a nightmare now, you have to budget about 500K to 1M dollars to get a competent legal team to set up a compliant ICO. Amateur time is over.
On the other hand you can avoid the nightmare of a public ICO if you raise privately funds from accredited investors. Either by offering tokens or equity.
@Antifragile 's idea is very smart btw, by selling rights or pre-selling some services would avoid dilution.
2 Likes
I know MaidSafe might have solutions.
I know they are focusing as it is right now.
Maybe everything is perfectly fine as it is. But I don’t think MaidSafe will ask the community to step in. MaidSafe will not ask this sacrifice of the community. I think that is a decision the community has to make, as a gift and encouragement and reward to the company for their tireless efforts and continued will to sacrifice for US so that we can have this network. To take some weight off their shoulders.
I just see the possibility to make their work so much easier, by just letting those imaginary numbers of all our holdings temporarily show something else than they did before. And I don’t think it is a good risk to take, to count on MaidSafe to sort everything out without support from investors and community. I don’t say they can’t do it, but all risks decrease if they have the voluntary community support financially as well.
How many supporters are not long time HODLers at this point? What difference does it even make when you’re not going to withdraw anytime soon?
If you need that value now, you have been very careless with your funds.
That’s how I see it.
There are technical solutions to bring in more funds this way, and we could make that happen if we accept some sacrifice.
For sure. But a good start is to open up for the possibility. All options on the table. All hands on deck.
Edit: It’s so much focus on what MaidSafe should do, what they did well or did not do well.
How many here consider what WE can do?
They are jumping through hoops to make everything we want to happen come true. Let’s put in some of our sweat and blood as well. You might count your tears as the coin valuation dropped (or never reached what it should have) as plenty of sacrifice. Maybe it is a sacrifice as well, but all of that is for nothing if we don’t follow through.
Did anyone consider that maybe the ICO sold the coins too cheap? Maybe that was a real bargain, at the project’s cost. If it would have happened a couple o years later, you would have paid a lot more.
Maybe it’s OK to say “Hey, that ICO was too cheap, let’s collectively take responsibility for that, and boost it by receding some of our current holding’s value.”
I’m trying to say that it’s possible to be a lot more pro-active than we are now. If we have been prepared to stick with the team and vision through a 90% drop (outside of our control), why would we not be able to voluntarily take a 10-20% hit that actually means something?
Who is “we”? I was a strong proponent of converting MAID to ERC-20, but many raised the point that it would be difficult to alert and give voice to all stakeholders (I.e. coin holders). For example, I’m a British citizen but never had the opportunity to vote in the Brexit referendum, and that still rubs me the wrong way.
“We” has to be everyone that holds MAID. Even if a significant majority of everyone that currently holds MAID agrees to inflating current supply, there are still potentially negative economic impacts—which many have highlighted here—plus the risk that project leadership ends up looking like the (scammy) folks behind XRP.
Also, how do the economics shift should Fleming deliver (hopefully) in the next several weeks? Market price for an asset is how the market provides feedback on progress. Alpha 2 has been in flight for 2 years, and the market price of MAID reflects that. Delivery of Fleming, which we’ve been told is a matter of when not if, should positively impact the price. If it doesn’t then either marketing (e.g. effective communication of value to the broader market, increased access to MAID, etc.) didn’t set it up to do so or the market is showing that they don’t value the underlying capability (which I’d find very hard to believe). Should the price of MAID rise, so too does MaidSafe’s funding naturally rise. At the end of the day, I think MaidSafe is taking the wisest choices to put themselves in a better financial position—reorganizing to more quickly deliver realizable value to the market.
4 Likes
“We” is in this case anyone that has any value to lose on dilution. Any coin holder.
(Btw. that objection you received I would count as faulty. In case of ERC-20 conversion, it is naturally optional. Anyone not participating in conversion would be completely unaffected, and can just as well as before exchange their MAID for Safecoin, when time comes.)
Yeah, so those potentially negative economic impacts. Many have as well highlighted that they are grossly overplayed. More like imagined negative outcomes.
If we’re being serious, we should then discuss that deeper and get to the bottom with it.
No, if we demand of MaidSafe to take our contribution, to take our sacrifice, there is no way in hell that anyone would look down on MaidSafe. On the contrary, they would see that only a very honest and honourable company would have such a support from their community (investors).
Then wouldn’t it be better for those who want to make that sacrifice to simply pay a premium on existing coins, donate or lend their coins, engage in fundraising like you would for any NPO, or truly internalize the cost in some manner rather than trying to distribute it across others who didn’t elect to do that? Obviously, I and others in this community choose to financially support the SAFE cause beyond simply holding MAID—but that’s a choice that we made and shouldn’t foist on others.
2 Likes
Yeah, because they are too decent to ask that of us. It is only something we ourselves can do.
I don’t think it is enough. I’m trying to get everyone to feel responsible for the outcome, to get everyone to participate. That would for sure make a difference. Me or you donating half or all of our coins or funds will not make that difference.
It’s not about forcing, it is about getting everyone onboard on the idea that it is worth it.
Why wouldn’t supporters of this project have the fundamental incline to help out?
I am saying that those who don’t care to help, do not actually care for the project, and if they get pissed, so be it. The project is certainly more important than them.
Even so, as the project continues, those only looking for profit will come back. After all, all that matters to them is profit, and when our sacrifice pays off, they’ll come back to ride that wave. Don’t you worry about that 
Unless you surprise everyone with new coins, it is likely that people will sell and wait for the inflation to drop the price. They may or may not buy in again later.
1 Like
Could you please clarify what you mean with surprise with new coins?
Mm, perhaps. I don’t think it’s that simple. Now sure there will be demand to scoop that up, as it drives price down when they start selling. This is part of the entire downwards effect on price all of this would have.
Then comes the actual dilution, and price drops even more. That is the completion of the downwards push.
After that you have a funded project with substantial progress, and a grossly undervalued coin. It’s only upwards from there.
What I’m hearing you say is “it will be such a deep dip”. Yeah. But man up dude. That is very temporary.
If it isn’t a surprise, people will plan accordingly. If you announce that in a date in the near future, the coins in circulation will start to double, it is a sign for traders and hodlers to short/sell, so they can buy back once the supply is diluted.
It would be a great, signalled, opportunity to double your coinage for the same price.
The supply would be guaranteed to double, but a successful delivery is would not be.
If you are arguing that the project may fail unless people take this risk, perhaps they would prefer to bail and wait and see. Personally, I think few would great the fresh coins with optimism.
The only relevant supply would be MAID, current and total supply. As the total future Safecoin supply won’t change and the rational market allready have discounted the price for future total supply than the price should not be affected much at all. Because markets don’t like uncertainty the price might for a few weeks suffer from greater than 5-10% percent, but that is not a rational argument for not adding new funds by a small dilution “if needed”. The market should recover when they realise that their are future big gains to make and that drop in price should not be larger than as the small dilution. A few weeks of shorting by day-traders is not a rational argument to jeopardize the project (if it would come to that critical decision for future survival).
1 Like
It’s not really my argument. Sure, it may or may not, but it’s not the point. The community can do it without being requested. If they are fine without it, then so be it. That could still make a difference.
MaidSafe speeding up is a good thing, but it is also a compromise in a way I would say. Not a bad compromise, a good one. But everything we do to help them, could still make some of those easier to handle.
We can sit on our hands and think that it’s their fight. I think that is so wrong of an approach. Some of us can fight every day by engaging in the community, write code or discuss RFCs. The rest can engage by allowing MaidSafe to raise more funds - in case they ever needed it - while also accepting a temporary drop in value of their holdings. I mean to say that the community actively gives the company a carter blanche, well ahead of any need of it.
What is it that makes us covet so for every cent of our coin value, that we could not voluntarily offer some of it?
Isn’t it enough to see the extra push they make, to feel that we could chip in as well, and make the life easier for everyone?
We can say: if you would so like at any moment, go ahead and issue more MAID (or MAID_2 or whatever, the tech is not a problem) and raise more funds, we as investors won’t oppose, in fact we want you to do it, so that you can continue this remarkable course that you have now begun, and deliver what we so dearly want.
The truly amazing community does that voluntarily.
Why don’t we step up and be that amazing community? My thinking goes along these lines: we don’t know before-hand how things we did or did not do could have altered the course of things in the future. We can be pro-active, meaning that we consider this even before there is a reason to need it. It’s like an extra boost, just to give it all.
@oetyng, I think that you have made your position known. Repeating yourself ad infinitum will not further your cause.
@tjf, I’m happy that you have registered my position, and feel that you know all you need to know from what I have to say. 
I am in conversation with others though, and will continue doing that, thanks.
1 Like
Great and good for you.
Yep, and maybe even for others as well. But I think they can be judges of that themselves.
Let’s Keep some of the powder dry. I think the hand will be much stronger to leverage when Fleming is released and if it gets closer to real danger, than people will wake up and make the necessary decisions, hopefully.
Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a move that comes in a very bullish time, after a great announcement for example.
This here is just preparations.
You got to fill the barrels with powder, to actually have some powder to keep dry.
1 Like
I don’t think that fear of losing money is the main reason people are opposed to diluting MAID. At least for me it isn’t. I believe it’s mostly about trust, as @neo pointed out. @sotros25’s question “Who is ‘we’?” is also very relevant.
4 Likes
Are there examples of other proxy tokens who did something similar? How did that go?
I understand the spirit, but I don’t know if that is a good idea: legal consequences, how will the exchanges react etc…
You can’t poll to see if a majority of the coin holders agree. You need only a couple to start a legal case, although I don’t know if they would have anything to start (and win) such case.
3 Likes