Letter to 402 and the community
-
To be honest I'm against it and here's why. Who forked over cash to all of the people who were swindled by the likes of "Enron" type. No one, it's buyer beware. I believe the Crypto world on whole makes poor decisions for the following reasons:
- The average age is much lower than the average age of a working professional, they have not had the "hard" life experiences that create a cautious person.
- Crypto isn't "real" money, I clicked on some faucets, got some BTC, bought some Burst, lets get some assets and double down! It's almost too easy compared to the new to the work force individual that works 4 hours after school 3 days a week at the neighborhood burger joint to make $8 an hour.
- Understanding what makes senses isn't always easy. People don't know how to evaluate a new asset, understand the full concept or they were not provided enough details and invested anyways.
Just my 2 Burst
-IceBurst
-
I Think its lovely. In my case, I've lost a lot with NEWS. If this really starts I'm compromised to use every BURST from 911 to back 402 and other true assets.
I really thank you nameless, even if the idea doesnt work, your act is very noble. I will include you in my prayers.
-
I like the idea but I already sold 200k burst worth of assets from N.E.W.S. :(
-
@nameless
I'm in. But we need to think how to make so that issuers of fraudulent assets themselves are unable to take advantage of this offer...
In the case of N.E.W.S.- issuer gave a bunch of assets for unknown accounts.
-
@IceBurst , that's the spirit man! You were against the idea and came up with a list of very valid arguments. I like that, and it motivated me to come up with alternatives.
I want more pros and cons! Let's debate this folks and come up with some cool shit together
-
@emcb said in Letter to 402 and the community:
@nameless
I'm in. But we need to think how to make so that issuers of fraudulent assets themselves are unable to take advantage of this offer...
In the case of N.E.W.S.- issuer gave a bunch of assets for unknown accounts.the fraudulent accounts and stuff like that will be noted down of course. As not all scams will be qualified, same applies for the accounts :)
-
@nameless I'm on the fence - I share some of the same concerns as IceBurst. Also, what's to stop me creating a fake asset, buying it through sockpuppets, then begging Creepy Uncle Nameless to help me out ?
-
@haitch , valid point. This is the insurance asset discussion all over again.
We would of course have to come up with some guidelines for scam assets that would qualify. Like them being at least 6 months old or something...
Also, consider the fact that the funds for 911 would be limited.
But then again... you make sense. What is to stop you? Nothing really...
This aspect needs more debate
-
@nameless said in Letter to 402 and the community:
This is the insurance asset discussion all over again.
Yep. It's a good idea, it's a noble idea - but the mechanics of making it work ...........
-
@haitch said in Letter to 402 and the community:
@nameless said in Letter to 402 and the community:
This is the insurance asset discussion all over again.
Yep. It's a good idea, it's a noble idea - but the mechanics of making it work ...........
yeah..i know man... that;s why i'm throwing the ball here and hoping to have some results. let's see what happens
maybe the combined brain power of more of us will actually make a reasonable version of this thing...
-
It's a Utopian idea I would say, but in a truly Utopian system there is no need for fail safes as the premise is we all are working towards the greater good. The reality is there are A$$holes everywhere that want to steal your money. It could be the evil SurfBar Rootkit, it could be a scam asset who truly knows what the mask of the next swindle will be. I recommend that assets enroll in the escrow system, that's the only way to ensure that at least 50% of the funds are recoverable to investors. Here's an interesting option, I might even run it.
IceBurst Insurance:
You have to show me your portfolio, I'll rate each assets chance to fail based on my magic insurance scale multiple it by the percentage of assets that are known scams and charge you a monthly fee to ensure your portfolio against scams. Your portfolio as a whole will be incured for a total liability limit. Interesting concept isn't it? So the questions is; Who would pay for insurance, the answer might surprise you.-IceBurst
-
@IceBurst , yet again a strong argument, especially the ending... i wish i could argue with your logic, but i can't. It makes too much sense. You're pointing out a sad truth...
-
@nameless its indeed a noble idea, however I also share some of the concerns that has been expressed. I would better vote for each asset provide escrow and hook themselves up to the investors and therefore deliver. An insurance is another option, as @IceBurst said, but what if the insurance and the asset scam you? (please take no offense here @IceBurst, others may also offer this kind of asset in the future) If something like this happens the victim could end up loosing double, however if the insurance (as an asset itself) is escrowed, then it would be another story. So long story short, I am for the escrow option :)
-
@vExact , yeah... the deeper we dig into this, the more we start to come to the conclusion that escrow is the only true solution.
Hopeless romantic that i am, i'm still hoping there is also another way... fucked if i know
-
@nameless said in Letter to 402 and the community:
Right now, 402 pays out roughly 110k BURST each day
Is this in an internal number? Because I have some 402 share and have not receive any payment.
-
-
@IceBurst I already have an escrow system for assets that want to use it. Socal does, BenBurst does, ccMiner is using it - slightly differently, a new asset from potkas is using it. I'd encourage all asset issuers to look into using it.
-
@nameless While im a bit against it, and even after i had been scammed myself. As i think it was my fault to believe to the news asset! And it was pretty much a big portion of my burst in that asset! Im not mining for that long, so not that big amount. But it did hurt me enough. Im afraid it would make people less cautious and easier to scam if we do something like this. But if we want to do it, then i would recommend to first figure out, how to find that old transactions! And only add people to this asset if they bought the scam asset prior to the price drop after it become a possible scam! I would recommend this because there is still a lot of people buying news asset. They buy it for fraction of its price! Even after it is like 90% sure its a scam now! But they believe the large possible profit over waits the small amount of lost burst! This way we could even see if someone get the asset transferred after the scam happened! So he is possibly a new account or a friend of the scammer! So if we figure out this. And its guaranteed, that the scammer and those who risked knowing that is probably a scam wont get in to it. I would agree to the idea holding some of the asset shares myself and shortly should get more for newsilver .
-
@haitch said in Letter to 402 and the community:
@IceBurst I already have an escrow system for assets that want to use it. Socal does, BenBurst does, ccMiner is using it - slightly differently, a new asset from potkas is using it. I'd encourage all asset issuers to look into using it.
Perhaps this thread was needed to yet again point out that we have this system. I aggree, more should consider it.
I will not be using it, because my layers of security work different. I have methods of FULL LIQUIDATION set in place. But that's me ... those who don't have a fail-safe system like mine should consider escrow.
-
@haitch said in Letter to 402 and the community:
@IceBurst I already have an escrow system for assets that want to use it. Socal does, BenBurst does, ccMiner is using it - slightly differently, a new asset from potkas is using it. I'd encourage all asset issuers to look into using it.
Sorry maybe I wasn't clear. I am aware of the escrow system you run and I encourage new asset owners to enroll for building trust to the community and securing their investors funds.
The Insurance Asset would be a new concept, could be very painful to manage.
-IceBurst
