[PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details

crowetic

@hatich

it's the fact that he's brand new, hasn't been around but a few days, and is launching the asset with no funding.

Things have changed with BURST, it is getting bigger, and the only way that will be able to continue, is to have a fully trustworthy community.

If the dude had been around longer, had some communications, explained how things are with his investment in BURST, THEN decided to release an asset, it would have gone over a lot better, but still, no investment into an asset on your own, before release, isn't an asset...

Even if the investment is time, and the person spent time developing a pool, or something else, then released an asset, with the promise to use some of the funding to get the asset larger.... fine.

But still, the fact is, coming in as a newbie, and launching an asset with nothing, is a red flag, and will ruin BURST credibility...

I'm not sure the assets you're not mentioning... but if you're talking about any of mine... 90% of the time, even if I said I was going to use the funding for purchase of hardware, I ended up using my own personal credit or cash to do so.

Also, I never did it from the first release, and always had a substantial investment into the asset before releasing. Not to mention the fact that I built my reputation up for months before allowing someone else I trusted to start the first asset I was involved in, that person also had a substantial amount of trust.

So the situation here cannot be compared to anything I've done, not sure if that was what you weren't mentioning, but I'll be the first to admit that yes, I've done second or third releases of my assets with the public announcement they'd be used to fund furthering the asset's growth, but every time I've launched an asset, I've had a substantial amount of time into both my reputation in the community, and investing into the asset BEFORE doing anything like that.

again, not sure if you were not mentioning something relating to my assets, but I figured I would explain that in case someone wanted to bring it up, because I don't have a problem with using the asset releases to help further the asset, it's the fact that it is a brand new member coming in and using the FIRST release to fund the START of the asset, while having very few other posts in the community at all.

socal

I will happily wait and build up some more TB on my own dime and try again later if that is what the consensus is, I apologize for any issues caused by this thread, I was unaware that utilizing Assets as an IPO vehicle was frowned upon within Burst so I will work with haitch and we will get this Asset, with miners already backing it from my personal funds, up and running (provided there is interest in another mining asset at that time)

haitch

@crowetic

Yes new, but willing to go further THAN ANY OTHER asset issuer to protect investors.
We've been scammed by established members, and rewarded by new ones. Newbieness to the forums shouldn't be a factor. The viability and plan of the asset should be what it's judged on - and I find this viable.
The pools are pretty much established, and there's not a lot of movement. I've advised a couple of the people I'm hosting pools for, to not launch a pool based asset until they get a significant mining base. I'm skeptical of those assets ever being launched.
It's not the first asset to use the asset funds to fund the mining hardware.

I posted here what an asset issuer should do to increase trust - Socal is the first and only one willing to do both steps.

haitch

@Focus said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

@haitch said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

@Focus A crowdfund means you give to the person for a project, and get nothing back.

This asset invests into hardware and pays back to it's investors.

It's not the first, won't be the last to use this model.

I'll back people trying to expand the Burst ecosystem, and I'll put my TB where my mouth is. When Socal launches his asset, I'll put 95TB of mining to fund it while he's getting off the ground. It will be mined to a wallet I control, and paid out by me to the shareholders.

wow, you would really go out of your way that much for someone else just to prove a point?

If this is the case, then why don't you start an asset with that 95TB and offer it to the community thereby showing the correct example of what an asset should be...

If I wanted I could start a mining asset with more capacity than Adam - I already have the capacity and have it plotted under several separate accounts, I could combine it to an asset dividend and be the biggest mining asset - instead I prefer to mine for myself, and to use it to help others get started in Burst.

Who decides what is the "correct" example of an asset is? There are other assets following this model, there are other assets by people new to the community that are doing great, there are "assets" issued by established members that turned out to be scams, there are non rock-star assets's that just provide a steady revenue stream. My own asset got screwed when Google cut us off, but have found ways to keep paying my investors.

If you don't like Socal's Asset model, don't invest - but leave others to make their own mind up.

MikeMike

@socal said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

I will happily wait and build up some more TB on my own dime and try again later if that is what the consensus is, I apologize for any issues caused by this thread, I was unaware that utilizing Assets as an IPO vehicle was frowned upon within Burst so I will work with haitch and we will get this Asset, with miners already backing it from my personal funds, up and running (provided there is interest in another mining asset at that time)

@crowetic
What I see here is @socal guy has just about met his goals which was figuring out his proposed asset if it could be acceptable and what would need to be tweaked to make it acceptable.
I apologize for any seemingly over reactions on the part of the BURST Community. This just happened to be a very sensitive topic recently discussed that needed to be addressed and it seems to have gone well in the end and frankly I am of the sort that "All is well that ends well"... @Focus stepped up to the plate and offered a sincere apology which in my book goes a long way. I myself have this same difficulty at times and it is because I also want the best for BURST.
There is enough info in the above posts to near completely remedy this entire situation including @socal to be able to start his asset in the way that could satisfy all concerned and actually be the "test case" that could end up being the BURST guideline designed at protecting the Community while growing it. We ALL want BURST to be a widely used successful trusted platform besides it being a currency while protecting the Community and BURST reputation. What I would call this is "growing pains" and frankly, they should be welcomed. It means progress.

@socal You said you had enough money to start off your mining farm with enough TB to add to your 3TB that could be used as the start for an asset, going through suggested verification and willing to hand over full control to @haitch till it is well established and you have proven yourself. Seems to me to buy just two more drives this wont break you for the Holidays and you can always sell them and refund the asset holders or yourself if nobody invests in it.
My only suggestions would be to rework your asset as Crow suggested. Start off small and scale it up by small issues of shares along the way. In fact it could even be scalable rather than holding to certain numbers etc.
My other suggestion would be for us all to continue to work as a brainstorming Team to figure this all out best suited for BURST, the Community and settle on a final outcome that is acceptable to meet these goals. Seems everyone is willing to compromise as long as these important guidelines of principle are met.
@socal
Could you please stick around and work with us to figure this all out?

On a side note:
I like the idea of an having any Asset hardware be the Communities and when closed etc the hardware be divested and sent out to the asset holders. Not sure if this could be another option issuers could choose.

socal

Oh I'm still interested in doing this project, with the requisite tweaks of course and you are correct I can and will get a few extra HDDs myself and THEN issue the asset with the express purpose of sustained growth and expansion via Asset Distribution Rounds and I will even include the option for share holders to turn in their shares for HDDs paid for from share funds (not my personal funds) in the event of an asset closure

MikeMike

@socal said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

Oh I'm still interested in doing this project, with the requisite tweaks of course and you are correct I can and will get a few extra HDDs myself and THEN issue the asset with the express purpose of sustained growth and expansion via Asset Distribution Rounds and I will even include the option for share holders to turn in their shares for HDDs paid for from share funds (not my personal funds) in the event of an asset closure

@crowetic Has offered to give you a helping hand to make it a winner. Please take advantage of this offer. He is a stand-up guy and won't steer you wrong. Maybe send him a PM so you can work it all out.
One problem I see about having the HDDs sent back to the asset holders is you cant divvy up a HD, lol. So maybe an option for large holders and divest the rest....?

socal

@MikeMike I plan on tapping both croetic and haitch to make sure this gets done right and in a way that is beneficial for all involved, including the Burst ecosystem

haitch

@MikeMike I'm still not 100%, so Ill try and keep this brief:

yes, this is absolutely the way assets should be launched - a pre-announcement with plans on how the asset will function, and community feedback/discussion to moderate it.
Socal is the FIRST and ONLY asset issuer willing to comply with both my guidelines I posted here - At the time it was congratulated as a great initiative to build trust in an asset issuer. Again, Socal is the ONLY asset isseuer willing to do both.
Somewhere back in the thread I advised Socal to release assets in stages, using each release to fund the next increase in capacity. He agreed to do that.

Basically, Socal has fulfilled every requirement we desired of a new asset issuer - and is being lambasted as a leech. I'm kind of disgusted - Socal is willing to do everything we, the community, demand of him, and he's being insulted like this by some individuals.

This is not how it's supposed to be.

haitch

@MikeMike said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

@socal said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

Oh I'm still interested in doing this project, with the requisite tweaks of course and you are correct I can and will get a few extra HDDs myself and THEN issue the asset with the express purpose of sustained growth and expansion via Asset Distribution Rounds and I will even include the option for share holders to turn in their shares for HDDs paid for from share funds (not my personal funds) in the event of an asset closure

@crowetic Has offered to give you a helping hand to make it a winner. Please take advantage of this offer. He is a stand-up guy and won't steer you wrong. Maybe send him a PM so you can work it all out.
One problem I see about having the HDDs sent back to the asset holders is you cant divvy up a HD, lol. So maybe an option for large holders and divest the rest....?

Sell the HDD and distribute the funds. Problem solved.

HaveMercy

I have read through most all this I am very new to burst and crypto in general, I dont know much but it seems your asset contrary to others opinions is a pretty good idea and you are serious about it

I would like to buy your first 50k shares which is 500k burst if i am correct?

Would that amount be some thing that would help you get this started? or would it even make a dent?

dagentlemang

@haitch

When you say @socal is the ONLY one with escrow'd asset i'd beg to differ

All in all seems like everyone is just concerned about burst this truly shows how much this community is strong, we're just expressing our idea loudly.

haitch

@dagentlemang Am I missing something? I believe you have some Insurance assets - but no one has done Escrow, unless I'm missing something ?

dagentlemang

@haitch i do not hold any of m2b funds since the incident @crowetic Holds everything :) He is M2b's Escrow

haitch

@dagentlemang Maybe I missed something, and this past week I missed a lot - but I never saw anything about that ? Link ?

socal

@HaveMercy said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

I have read through most all this I am very new to burst and crypto in general, I dont know much but it seems your asset contrary to others opinions is a pretty good idea and you are serious about it

I would like to buy your first 50k shares which is 500k burst if i am correct?

Would that amount be some thing that would help you get this started? or would it even make a dent?

well yes and no. not too far up from these posts I had a new breakdown of the asset and figured it would have to be 50,000 Share blocks at 20 Burst/share, 5,000 shares would go to me to hold and get dividends from to help pay for electricity the other 45,000 would be sold to finance each expansion round. so the math is 45,000 shares * 20 Burst/Share = 900,000 Burst BUT WAIT 50% goes into the Escrow as investor insurance so say you buy all 45,000 share of the first block no matter what happens even if I die in a car wreck and all my pass words and funds die with me you will still get 50%, or 450,0000 Burst, back from the escrow so no matter what you CAN NOT lose 100% of what you invest ONLY 50% IS EVER AT "RISK"

But yes the 450,000 would pay for the first expansion round but due to my commitment of 50% of all funds raised going to escrow I will have to sell the whole 45,000 share block to fund expansion

socal

ahhh I forgot I offered for my Fee shares to stay with the Escrow and only enough Burst to be released from them to me to cover electrical costs,

dagentlemang

@haitch Absolutely , it's in my long post about raid , it was the first condition i could think of to help solidify M2B's after the theft and regain the trust to carry on , your service wasn't available (wasn't created) , but i did sign an NDA with @crowetic and escrow all shares, money passwords and my sites and prototype to @crowetic to help move past and get the game released he can confirm this.

I would have loved to have to brought into the mix as extra trust , which is why when you make you're oirginal post i was the first to ask for a paid verification service

MikeMike

@haitch said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

@MikeMike I'm still not 100%, so Ill try and keep this brief:

yes, this is absolutely the way assets should be launched - a pre-announcement with plans on how the asset will function, and community feedback/discussion to moderate it.

Socal is the FIRST and ONLY asset issuer willing to comply with both my guidelines I posted here - At the time it was congratulated as a great initiative to build trust in an asset issuer. Again, Socal is the ONLY asset isseuer willing to do both.

Somewhere back in the thread I advised Socal to release assets in stages, using each release to fund the next increase in capacity. He agreed to do that.

Basically, Socal has fulfilled every requirement we desired of a new asset issuer - and is being lambasted as a leech. I'm kind of disgusted - Socal is willing to do everything we, the community, demand of him, and he's being insulted like this by some individuals.

This is not how it's supposed to be.

@haitch
Man I gotta say you have been so helpful to me and many others I see it all the time. Same with Focus.
You two are integral parts of BURST. Yes we seem to all hurt each other at times and for the most part it is because we mean well,... after you get down to it.
I see many efforts on your part to protect the BURST Community by setting some needed standards. Others too want to setup some processes like this. We need them and I am sure they will evolve over time.
I think we should all work together to add to what you started here and come to a consensus of what the final draft will be as it should be. A Community effort though as typical started by one active member trying to do the right thing.

socal

@MikeMike said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

@haitch said in [PRE-ANN] Socal's Burst Mining Asset, 30% bonus! see details:

@MikeMike I'm still not 100%, so Ill try and keep this brief:

yes, this is absolutely the way assets should be launched - a pre-announcement with plans on how the asset will function, and community feedback/discussion to moderate it.

Socal is the FIRST and ONLY asset issuer willing to comply with both my guidelines I posted here - At the time it was congratulated as a great initiative to build trust in an asset issuer. Again, Socal is the ONLY asset isseuer willing to do both.

Somewhere back in the thread I advised Socal to release assets in stages, using each release to fund the next increase in capacity. He agreed to do that.

Basically, Socal has fulfilled every requirement we desired of a new asset issuer - and is being lambasted as a leech. I'm kind of disgusted - Socal is willing to do everything we, the community, demand of him, and he's being insulted like this by some individuals.

This is not how it's supposed to be.

@haitch
Man I gotta say you have been so helpful to me and many others I see it all the time. Same with Focus.
You two are integral parts of BURST. Yes we seem to all hurt each other at times and for the most part it is because we mean well,... after you get down to it.
I see many efforts on your part to protect the BURST Community by setting some needed standards. Others too want to setup some processes like this. We need them and I am sure they will evolve over time.
I think we should all work together to add to what you started here and come to a consensus of what the final draft will be as it should be. A Community effort though as typical started by one active member trying to do the right thing.

I'm willing to be flexible to make this work if there are some community members that want to invest BEFORE I can setup the rest of my privately funded portion then we can discuss an early Asset release but we can cross that bridge when/if we get to it