Further to my earlier point about OTC auctions as a further funding possibility, I said I don’t necessarily recommend this approach. I’d like to explain why:
- Exec summary: Invest your time and money in the project, not the company. Credit to David for the idea, but consider any further funding to likely be a loss.*
Switching Omni to ERC20 is honestly pretty easy. MaidSafe is an ICO funded project, and ICO issuers necessarily believe in markets - I’m not sure why David describes delisting & ERC20 switch as a distraction. Markets are the only reason the project has continued because David wants or needs a team, and his team only work for a salary. The company was on the point of bankruptcy until the recent loan which bought some runway. We just lost 30% of that runway. Selling the loaned coins, as is the plan, will continue to suppress the price unless buyers increase too, unlikely in current environment. That just leaves the people who made the loan with enough of a vested interest to support which means buying the coins back - which means double funding the project (buy them once, give them back and buy again). There isn’t much point in using exchanges for this process, a monthly auction (potentially even fixed price) would suffice. Keep in mind there is little accountability in a loan, much more in equity.
MaidSafe could issue tokens on Liquid, Stellar and many other platforms fairly easily too, and all in parallel without too much overhead. As many others have said the real issue facing this project is no timelines and a long term lack of product which has worn down the population of interested parties to a small group. If I were David I would launch at least one new token type and get it on to as many exchanges a possible and I would delay work for this because work only continues when fed with money, in the current corporate model.
I don’t know what “big guys would like us dead”, what “William Wallace” has to do with MaidSafe’s situation or why David thinks there are those “who seek to harm us”. MaidSafe is not competing with or undermining anyone else and has no enemies. Poloniex and others delist coins that aren’t making them money anymore or have some legal concerns to them. They are at worst indifferent to MaidSafe - so there is no need to form a belief around a malicious and unseen ‘other’. Why would David be nonchalant on the very practical concerns of the markets yet strident in the construction of a narrative against some unnamed enemy? Also be cautious of his statement that, “We have another couple of options in play, more soon ”. In the old thread about “Funding for MaidSafe” this is exactly the kind of management style I was arguing against and raising awareness of. A few months after I was raising those concerns the massive layoffs, downsizing, and recapitalisation occurred. Things weren’t as in hand as David liked to convey.
I still have these concerns and do not encourage anyone to further finance MaidSafe either through loans, auctions or indirect auctions via exchange order books, unless you are expecting to lose the money. The SAFENetwork idea is a great one and well worth working on and investing in. David and associates deserve credit for trying to enhance the concepts of Kademlia and I hope this work continues but I urge anyone considering further financing to consider the very great risks and instead invest their time or money in the project rather than the company. David has been given many lifelines and also tells us he is fine and in control so I’d imagine he would support my list of recommendations here:
Invest your time and money in:
- Storing archives of the GitHub repos
- Host mirrors of this forum
- Launch new independent forums around the ideas of an autonomous and perpetual Kademlia
- Read up on the design ideas
- Contribute to the R&D discussions
- Draft documentation
- If you have dev staff pay them to work on SAFENetwork ideas 20% of the time.
It pains me to say negative things about MaidSafe and its team as I’d really like the whole story to be a success but I can only see that happening if we allocate recsources to a fully open source movement rather than a company.