Wow, @anon28980808 you’re showing a really unflattering side here. So arguing for a course where a certain action can be taken, makes you feel that you need to insult me?
The only part when I’m being rough towards others, is where I say that if you are not willing to give up some value of your holdings, to the benefit of the project, then you don’t really care about it anyway. I called those persons gold-diggers and said more or less that the project is more important than them.
If you feel hurt by that, maybe you should try to address that specifically.
Just coming up with random abuse only makes you look like a troll.
This here is the sticking out the neck part, expressing a strong opinion, arguing for it. It risks calling forth people who either lack the skills of civilised discussion, people who misrepresent your words to torpedo the discussion, or enjoy being abusive online. And then it’s full on internet style.
Haven’t seen much of your type here before. But this is the internet so…
Anyway, you don’t need to feel that you have to say things to me because I really have no reason to listen to your abuse. I think it actually has no place in this forum.
Cool it please or else we may have to close the conversation for a while till people spend a bit of time thinking about the proposals and suggestions. I gather there is some knee jerk reactions also.
Please - I don’t want to close the topic or suggest it be closed.
Some things are very difficult to discuss. Many seem to prefer to not touch the sensitive subjects. Internet is notoriously bad for such, as the whisper game starts.
This topic isn’t really a good one to write in.
But If we were to just argue about the concrete specifics on how we could do something like this - theoretically - that would be better.
You are opposed to the idea of dilution, it is no surprise you don’t want to see that discussion.
I would hope there is room here to discuss anyway.
Edit: This topic actually shows how well the community can handle difficult questions, conflicting ideas and so on. There will surely be more of those in the future. Every day is a good day to practice handling that gracefully.
Well, I’m starting to believe this is actually a cultural thing. Why would a person opposed to something mind discussing it, when it in fact provides him with an opportunity to explain his stance?
I’m pretty certain he advised to close it simply because it has left a bitter taste in many mouths. And the reason is not the topic, but the way people (including you) go about it.
Stating opinions as facts and writing manifestos is not a discussion. Neither is backhand slapping, OK, but it’s fair to acknowledge the cause-consequence order.
The amount of energy that has been spent on this topic over the last few days is quite eye-opening for me also. It’s almost as if Maidsafe is about to shut up shop next week! I am sure that @dirvine & co will let the community know in good time if things look a bit hairy in future.
Speculations on dilution, community boundaries for engagement, and other things.
I never got to respond to the most elaborate of posts in the recently closed topic.
I was on foot and the last posts of mine were unfortunately too focused on someone looking for conflict.
This here though merits a response:
Hmm. This doesn’t strike me as neither very clear of an argument nor founded in evidence. I mean to say that since I have been asked for evidence.
This thing about ‘not creating value’, I think is just very airy. It’s not about creating value.
Issuing extra coins that are sold, do bring in money, (given that their maid holdings are not big and that the drop in valuation would be eating it up). That money is needed for regular stuff that requires money.
I mean it’s obvious that getting the network up and running depends on so much more than that.
There is a day after it as well, and the only problems I think can be solved with money, are problems caused by money. They also exist from time to time. Some day ahead for example.
You’re talking about buying it all at once?
David said they are already trickling out the excess from the ICO. That is done and hence it can be done.
See above.
You are stating this chain of events as a matter of fact. As if it can only happen that way. That’s not how I see it.
Confidence, trust and the social side - that comes from investors/community.
I have all the time said that when it’s voluntarily requested by those, then there is no broad loss of confidence or trust. I also said that naturally not everyone can be onboard, it will not be possible. It’s unavoidable.
Not the way you propose it no, but that wasn’t the way I suggested it.
I have nowhere said that they need immediate financial support. That is not what the question is about. I think I have been pretty clear about that.
Also I have been very clearly stating that there IMO is a strong positive progress.
‘Evidence that action is required now or soon’, is the wrong level of abstraction.
Some things don’t have evidence, certainly not with business decisions. I’d say for this thing we can say that now or later may be a more or less good time for something. The answer is probably more like ‘before it is really needed’. When that exactly happens is difficult to know.
I am talking about that it might be needed in the future, and that waiting for other solutions has their costs as well. Costs in an equation that can possibly be moved around.
Up for discussion. I’m here to try the limits of the community dedication (and IMO found it, rather soon). It’s not like I sit with all the answers. Such a thing is a process, where people get on board and start working out the details. If all answers were required before ever raising questions or beginning a task, then pretty much nothing would be done.
But I agree that a specific model is required, costs and benefits estimated to the best of efforts, and that is regardless of if action is organic or not.
Good questions, and up for discussion. I would say there is no exact number there either. It depends.
Yeah you are kind of saying it yourself. Adding value is not the problem. A ton of value is being added. It doesn’t reflect.
I don’t think issuing coins has a single dimension impact (maybe if doing it the way you said) which would remove value and that’s it.
It is a multifaceted action that can play out in various ways depending on how it is done.
And the goal is mundane. It’s simply about cashflow.
You deny it when not even David Irvine denies it.
He said in this topic that these have been tough times for him. Now the reasons for those are some of what we’ve seen, he talks about it. To me that is pure strength. He is open and natural about it.
I think it is kind of ridiculous (I want to use a less pointy word, but that’s what came to mind, sorry) trying to pretend that this major shift in company management has not
A. Come for a reason
B. Been tough
I am not painting a negative image. These are just simple facts that the company talks openly about.
I don’t imply anything negative about the team because of it. It’s simply a matter of fact. Of course it is though for a company, for leadership. It actually mostly is and sometimes more so. So, I am saying that right now yeah a bit more so. But the only reason I say that, is because I want to try the idea that the community can do more, in ways it has not yet been prepared to consider.
This is tough. I never said it is not expected. It is simply tough. For various reasons.
No, not very slow now. At times things might have been slow. It would have its explanations, which is another topic, and it also contributes to general difficulties in ways. But it is not what I was referring to.
Deadlines, no. I don’t even think estimates can be done. And so seems MaidSafe think as well (the Gant chart is without time, as it properly should). Deadlines has nothing to do with this. Well, unless you call the end of runway a deadline, but that’s not an interpretation I do.
No, never thought anyone is close. But you never know what might come up when some big player wants to play this game. They don’t even need to have a better product, just be better at reaching people, and that is a sport with many big competitors. (The game they are good at is getting enough users with what to the users seems to be a good enough product. Not having the best product.)
Impossible is such an exaggeration of a word.
It’s plenty enough to say ‘feasible’, I think you know that. And what is feasible is something that fluctuates from time to time, it all depends on the situations of the moment. You yourself have started a topic on unsolved problems, and those are not small ones.
Yet this is not what I was referring to. It does contribute to general difficulties, but it is not something I have had any intention to emphasize here.
What do you mean with financial problems?
I don’t think there are ‘financial problems’. Let me be very clear with that.
I think MaidSafe has been very open when they declared estimated runway, and later also said that the downturns in markets have had effect on that (and vice versa). There were approximate months, there have been mentions of holding distributions, and then we have the market history. Quite simple maths for a rough estimate. That is not financial problems, it’s simply a reality to face. Any finite thing has a beginning, a middle and an end, and this specific thing is at about yay distance from either. It’s not controversial. It’s not a crisis. It’s not a taboo to talk about. It’s simple reality.
Then of course, skittish investors may flame and hush until their faces turn red and eyes pop out (which - ironically - is the actual FUD that then ripples out among all others) since they are scared the talk of it will tank their holding values. Yeah, I know… this is crypto so there’s a big number of these people. Probably always will, just about anywhere. So, there’s that.
And they will hate me for painting that picture (mind you, it’s an exagerrated caricature). I knew that already when starting this discussion, and I was prepared to take that, so I’m not complaining.
I don’t assume that, I don’t think I said it anywhere either. But low demand for the coin is a contributing factor to any difficulties. Hardly controversial.
Did not mean this, when saying times are tough.
Do you mean what I said about consequences of including VC or be bought by other companies? Well, that is not really a controversy is it? MaidSafe themselves have been very clear that they have avoided VC as to not compromise the vision. And so, they have lately been talking of different ways, that they are looking into options. That’s all good. But if VC or merger is considered, it does mean time and energy goes in to finding good enough candidates. That is not going to be easy. Simply put: it is a cost in the equation. When I try investigate how we can decrease such costs, move them around in the equation, I suggest for example that community takes a cost. (What kind that is and how, is the next step of that discussion.)
Never stated this anywhere. I said the complete opposite in fact. Clearly.
‘Impassioned call’ and ‘suddenly pushed so strongly’, that’s what it looks like when you’re traveling and bored and have time to write in you phone.
I happened to ‘suddenly’ be on a long boring trip, with none of the tools I usually have for the work I do with SAFENetwork.
With that I mean to say, don’t make hastened conclusions based on that.
Summary
To FUD or not to FUD
Many people have made the interpretation that I somehow feel there is a crisis of sorts now. No, I believe the company is in a great momentum, things look really good given the conditions.
I think I took it for granted that the company, the fundamentals and everything, are so strong that it is not hurt by a discussion of dilution for example.
In my view, everyone is signalling fear that the company or product is not strong enough to handle such a discussion, when they say that it is damaging to do so. They lack the confidence to speak freely of difficult issues. Now, it turns into a self fulfilling prophecy, so when enough people believe this, then it’s true. So I conclude, it is damaging, but not for the reasons stated…
I just felt so sure that the company is strong, the team is dedicated and the product awesome, that it can withstand community members discussing for example dilution, or what ever other ways of contribution there might be.
But money and people’s economy is a very very strong influence in this thing. The fear (from the community) that this will have a negative impact leads to a lot of push back, even straight out harassment.
The negative responses doesn’t bother me really, on a personal level. (And anyone thinking that I would continue pushing through with questions like these, if I only cared about looking good, well then you are obviously blind or just trying to torpedo the discussion, considering the responses it gets.)
Gauging the sentiments
It’s an interesting gauge though of where the community stands. What kind of community this is. What can be discussed, what can be done.
You don’t really know until you try.
I think these were interesting reactions.
I wasn’t convinced or even very much having an opinion on whether “dilution” was good or feasible. I just wanted to go full steam ahead on that road to see what we found, since I had earlier heard much hushing and shooting down the topic with arguments like “impossible” - which didn’t hold to scrutiny IMO.
So, I tend to do like that when I want to explore a question. I don’t necessarily support any view at that moment, but sometimes it can be quite revealing to assume the role of a die hard believer in the idea, fight it and see what comes out. It’s like those debates at rhetoric classes at uni you know.
And of course every outcome depends on the initial parameters. Me saying things like ‘people not caring to help are only in it for themselves’ (or to the tone of that), would certainly hit some people who would not feel very happy about that. And that risks derailing any discussion.
I still think it’s true though. But, there’s too much of people’s money involved, personal stakes high. The tone gets nasty really quick when people get nervous about their money.
I’m actually travelling right now. That’s why I can spend time thinking about this.
The idea is to be pro-active, discuss things before the need is imminent. And additionally, the whole idea is that the community spend time, effort and so on, so that the company does not have to. Did you guys read what I was saying?
It’s actually totally misrepresenting that this would be taking time from them to work on the network.
Sure - I think it makes a lot of sense to not blindly wait for the bang - but David stated that they were 1. Not planning on doing an additional crowdsale but checking options and 2. They don’t even seem to hesitate to use the excess coin that exists - so that’s quite some additional money anyway
They grew the team to 200% the size it was 2 years ago or so (side note that isn’t meant as criticism but just as observation - I didn’t have the feeling development increased that much in the meantime… Which is obvious because new people need to get up to speed and just slow down everyone at first… ) - burn rate probably increased accordingly - if money would be a problem it would make sense to reduce the burn rate first a bit and coming up with a plan on how to handle the situation…
We should not feel liable to solve any issues of maidsafe the company from outside (with only the information an outsider can have) as long as they don’t even ask for it
Just my thoughts on this - always good to throw in ideas and thoughts - but since David clearly stated they want to take care of this themselves I don’t see why we should fight here for the best solution that might not be what they want anyway…
About 12 months ago they stated, that they are running out of fundings in next 24 months. At that time the Bitcoin was at $8k and MAID at $0,30. Because of price drop during last year the estimated time to deal with running funding move backwards. With price going up again we can guess, that it is few more months better than when was created this topic. As price can not be predicted MaidSafe have really plenty of time to deal whit it, before it will be for sure real issue.
Next year Bitcoin halving, MAID MVP or beta and there is not issue till start of the SafeNetwork.
That’s not how I remember it. I remember David writing the project is well-funded for at least 24 months within which he expects the project to become profitable, or something along these lines.
Is it not like so if Maidsafe delivers a MVP the coins in reserve will increase in value and the funding problem is solved? If we all assume MVP will increase the price of the coin…
This is the facts. And it was a bit more than 12 months. More like 16 I think. Well, it’s up there in the thread, the exact date isn’t important.
It might be the case that the recent changes (which were good IMO) and the consolidated forces, did not have to do with the runway. I think it was quite clearly communicated that it was though?
So, I don’t see controversy there.
Many here express that there is no need to do anything before MaidSafe asks us of help.
That is one way of looking at it.
It would not be wrong to help out before it is asked for, if it indeed would give a positive contribution.
So the discussion can be about if it actually is a positive contribution.
And naturally also about how to actually do it.
Could be, maybe even very likely. It would be a good moment to actually launch a dilution if that was decided on, since ithe chock would be better absorbed.
In best case scenario it could be so. But it depends on how low the level of reserves gets before Fleming is released, if it gets to low it might not make a large difference.
There is no way for us to know the answer until we get there and get confirmation on what the status is.
As I can extract from the last updates fleming is very close. So if Maidsafe is able to deliver in the next few months there should be no problem. It is in their own interest to deliver and they have a timeline set what I think is not the worst, because you could work on a far less complicated project forever and never finish it.
I understand why you edited it. What I don’t understand is not tagging me in again after editing it, because how am I supposed to know you have changed the message that’s addressed to me.
To prevent further misunderstanding, imagine this:
Sheena: @Teena you suck!
Teena: @Sheena I hate you!
Both posts get flagged. But then, Sheena goes back and edits her post to:
@Teena I find you slightly odd.
But she does not bother tagging Teena in through something like EDIT: @Theena. So Teena does not know. And she has no chance to react.
Do you understand now? Or you keep having no idea.
In my culture, it’s slightly odd, to use Sheena’s words, to go back, edit what has already been said and not letting know the people it has been said to – especially after they had replied to it.
“So if Maidsafe is able to deliver in the next few months there should be no problem.”
As either you or I know what the current levels of reserves are, the burn rate, then there is no way to have an aswer until we know how it is.
If you sneak into the office and grab the balance, results and liquidity sheet while David walk the dogs than we could have an answer.
I think it is best for us to wait and see until the right time comes. From history I have observed David and Nick think more steps ahead than most people, It makes me calm and confident that there is a grand plan and that they will notify us when the time is right to do so (if it becomes necessary).
