Topic: [POLL] The IPO idea. (Read 22911 times)

Damelon · « **on:** March 28, 2016, 07:22:31 pm »

I have just created a few polls on my own, because I think the IPO idea needs to be discussed and polled as soon as possible.

The reasons are that if it clearly is rejected, it needs to be done ASAP.
If accepted, it needs to be planned.

Either way, it needs to be clear. The recent lack of clarity is making people jittery and I'd like to get it out of the air.

I would like to ask everyone to vote on this simple vote on whether to even consider an ICO. It will hang over our heads if it's not decided soon, I think.

Poll #1:
https://nxtportal.org/transactions/7164171584167869009

Poll#2
https://nxtportal.org/transactions/13164019658351272000

durerus · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:08:43 pm »

Dear voters,

It is not like we need IPO now because there are no funds left. We have enough funds for development and marketing for at least one more year, as was explained in the Q&A on slack yesterday. So don't panic vote for IPO, please!!!

When we make clear that we want 2.0 with a 1:1 NXT : fNXT distribution the price will go up. Then the community can donate more value for marketing and development.

I urge you to think about it: Expropriating NXT holders via democratic vote could destroy the reputation of Nxt, our highest value!

VanBreuk · « **Reply #2 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:09:11 pm »

Good to see this vote up. For a graphic overview of results you can also use

Poll #1 (Should a portion of the fNxt in Nxt 2.0 be held back and sold off in an ICO?)
https://www.mynxt.info/poll/7164171584167869009

Poll #2 (Should an ICO for Nxt 2.0 be considered at all?)
https://www.mynxt.info/poll/13164019658351272000

Sebastien256 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:15:26 pm »

My opinion is that ico=expropriation is not needed. A 1:1 distribution should make the price of NXT rise and this would be enought to get more fund, hopefully.

durerus · « **Reply #4 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:23:52 pm »

Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 08:15:26 pm

My opinion is that ico=expropriation is not needed. A 1:1 distribution should make the price of NXT rise and this would be enought to get more fund, hopefully.

Good opinion!

abctc · « **Reply #5 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:43:55 pm »

Jean-Luc said yesterday: "I concur that funding is an issue",
so I will vote for ICO.

Riker · « **Reply #6 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:48:12 pm »

Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 08:15:26 pm

My opinion is that ico=expropriation is not needed. A 1:1 distribution should make the price of NXT rise and this would be enought to get more fund, hopefully.

@Seb: in my view, wishful thinking is not a project plan.

Sebastien256 · « **Reply #7 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:57:01 pm »

Quote from: Riker on March 28, 2016, 08:48:12 pm

Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 08:15:26 pm
My opinion is that ico=expropriation is not needed. A 1:1 distribution should make the price of NXT rise and this would be enought to get more fund, hopefully.

@Seb: in my view, wishful thinking is not a project plan.

My main point is that I think expropriation is not worth going that way at the moment.

Seriously, I would be ready to allow ico at a very last alternative. However, I think we are not at that point yet.

VanBreuk · « **Reply #8 on:** March 28, 2016, 08:58:45 pm »

I'm not hell-bent on either outcome, but

- I understand currently the NXT tokens have one ability among others that allows them to forge, and that that ability is meant to be transferred to fNXT, but I don't think that means ICO=expropriation. The purpose of an ICO is not solely funding, which regardless of current funded initiatives/people will be needed, but also platform promotion, opening the community wider and getting some extra market attention. If you ask me if I'd donate a part of my forging power for those benefits right now, I'd answer yes.

- The 1:1 distribution and NXT/fNXT decoupling already had an impact in the community and the markets. Probably not in all the contacts being run in the backstage, or in other aspects, but it obviously had an impact. Current uncertainty is surely not good, but we cannot take for granted that confirming the initial 1:1 distribution proposal will now make the price rise instead.

Sebastien256 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 28, 2016, 09:06:14 pm »

@vanbreuk,
of course ico=expropriation to some extent, to be honest i'm not sure what you don't understand here
With a ico it remove the right to forge to some NXT holder, whatever the way you look at it. This is something investor bought when acquiring NXT.

Anyway, I will follow the majority whatever the outcome.

VanBreuk · « **Reply #10 on:** March 28, 2016, 09:19:16 pm »

Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 09:06:14 pm

@vanbreuk,
of course ico=expropriation to some extent, to be honest i'm not sure what you don't understand here
With a ico it remove the right to forge to some NXT holder, whatever the way you look at it. This is something investor bought when acquiring NXT.

Yes, it is taking part of the forging power. I understand that perfectly. But it is in exchange for some things. And considering the timing and the current surging markets for 2.0, I'm saying that I'd agree to exchange some of my forging power for those things. For me it is not a loss, but an exchange. So you can say that expropriation occurs when private property is taken away (some times with an argument for public interest) and with that definition in hand, you could say there's expropriation involved in the process. But saying that ICO=expropriation overlooks the benefits that an ICO could bring.

durerus · « **Reply #11 on:** March 28, 2016, 09:42:11 pm »

Quote from: VanBreuk on March 28, 2016, 09:19:16 pm

Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 09:06:14 pm
@vanbreuk,
of course ico=expropriation to some extent, to be honest i'm not sure what you don't understand here
With a ico it remove the right to forge to some NXT holder, whatever the way you look at it. This is something investor bought when acquiring NXT.

Yes, it is taking part of the forging power. I understand that perfectly. But it is in exchange for some things. And considering the timing and the current surging markets for 2.0, I'm saying that I'd agree to exchange some of my forging power for those things. For me it is not a loss, but an exchange. So you can say that expropriation occurs when private property is taken away (some times with an argument for public interest) and with that definition in hand, you could say there's expropriation involved in the process. But saying that ICO=expropriation overlooks the benefits that an ICO could bring.

But how much forging power do current stakeholders have to give away so that the benefits of an ICO take place? 50%? More? That's a difficult question.

Damelon · « **Reply #12 on:** March 28, 2016, 09:59:36 pm »

Quote from: durerus on March 28, 2016, 09:42:11 pm

Quote from: VanBreuk on March 28, 2016, 09:19:16 pm
Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 09:06:14 pm
@vanbreuk,
of course ico=expropriation to some extent, to be honest i'm not sure what you don't understand here
With a ico it remove the right to forge to some NXT holder, whatever the way you look at it. This is something investor bought when acquiring NXT.

Yes, it is taking part of the forging power. I understand that perfectly. But it is in exchange for some things. And considering the timing and the current surging markets for 2.0, I'm saying that I'd agree to exchange some of my forging power for those things. For me it is not a loss, but an exchange. So you can say that expropriation occurs when private property is taken away (some times with an argument for public interest) and with that definition in hand, you could say there's expropriation involved in the process. But saying that ICO=expropriation overlooks the benefits that an ICO could bring.

But how much forging power do current stakeholders have to give away so that the benefits of an ICO take place? 50%? More? That's a difficult question.

I'd say that is a discussion we'd better not even start before we know more about support or lack of it about an ICO per se.

There are more ways to do it than using fNxt.

I've seen a plan (can't find it right now, but was posted the last days) to do an ICO for a child chain.

Don't know whether it's a good plan, but it's a different plan at least. That leads me to believe there may well be ways of doing such a thing without fNxt.

Maybe not, but that's independent of the polls I put up. They only are about the support of an ICO yes or no. Nothing else.

Sebastien256 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 28, 2016, 10:01:52 pm »

Quote from: durerus on March 28, 2016, 09:42:11 pm

Quote from: VanBreuk on March 28, 2016, 09:19:16 pm
Quote from: Sebastien256 on March 28, 2016, 09:06:14 pm
@vanbreuk,
of course ico=expropriation to some extent, to be honest i'm not sure what you don't understand here
With a ico it remove the right to forge to some NXT holder, whatever the way you look at it. This is something investor bought when acquiring NXT.

Yes, it is taking part of the forging power. I understand that perfectly. But it is in exchange for some things. And considering the timing and the current surging markets for 2.0, I'm saying that I'd agree to exchange some of my forging power for those things. For me it is not a loss, but an exchange. So you can say that expropriation occurs when private property is taken away (some times with an argument for public interest) and with that definition in hand, you could say there's expropriation involved in the process. But saying that ICO=expropriation overlooks the benefits that an ICO could bring.

But how much forging power do current stakeholders have to give away so that the benefits of an ICO take place? 50%? More? That's a difficult question.

I think the pourcentage will dictate approximatly the amount that would be raise in the ico. Let say for example 25% of fNXT would be sold off in a ico. I think it would be a bargain to invest in the ico as long as the value acquired in the ico is less than 25% NXT marketcap. After that point, it would better to buy NXT directly. All in all, I think this could be view a coarse first approximation as it assume, in particular, that fNXT=NXT2.0, which is not completly true because it neglect the NXT1.0 part.

allwelder · « **Reply #14 on:** March 28, 2016, 10:29:10 pm »

Don't take IPO,especially with dilution FNXT,this will scare away users and investors,this is really at risk.

Leave the IPO after sidechain released,then anyone can IPO on their own sidechain.

Jean-Luc · « **Reply #15 on:** March 29, 2016, 06:55:27 am »

IPO is the only way to get funding while remaining independent and without jeopardizing the future of the public blockchain.

Without an IPO, NXT2.0 will still be developed. But if instead of being crowdfunded it ends up being financed by private investors, it will be those investors that decide where and how it gets deployed.

allwelder · « **Reply #16 on:** March 29, 2016, 07:29:10 am »

IPO with redistribution NXT means NXT has died,now a new coin WHATNXT born with IPO again IMO.

What about this?
Let the Nxter who agree to IPO put their FNXT to a pool,then use FNXT of this pool to redistribution with IPO.Dilute the FNXT of all Nxters is not a good idea.
This like a company can start a 2nd round fundraising,but can not expropriate shares of initial investors to redistribute .

websioux · « **Reply #17 on:** March 29, 2016, 07:35:52 am »

Post launch IPO = money printing to finance the system.. and this is really bad.

It is not the only way, this is the lazy way.

I'd better regularly "spam" big accounts and those who already showed generosity to collect funds. Or launch a licence/ implementation business with the devs from which they will get paid to continue, in which the community can invest and could even claim a part of the licence profit too. In fact I would do both. If there is a real demand, then we have a dream team, not only the core devs, but the whole community that has a strong marketing power which could show full potential if it was canalized. There are tons of ressources available in the community that any startup can not dream about.

What has been built here ? Isn't it tools to develop an anarchist economy ? Is it so much doomed that this tools can not be used to build the infrastructure ?
What is Asset exchange ? What does it bring to the world ? Let's use it !

Then you have a good reason and good argumentation to attract any investor.

A post launch IPO is a complete waste of the BCNext gift.

lurker10 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 29, 2016, 07:42:52 am »

Quote from: websioux on March 29, 2016, 07:35:52 am

What has been built here ? Isn't it tools to develop an anarchist economy ? Is it so much doomed that this tools can not be used to build the infrastructure ?

An anarchist economy is not possible, it's a dream. There, somebody had to say it. People don't care to support the public infrastructure. It's a fact. There are two ways to solve this problem. Socialism by involuntary taxation (IPO with equal taxation of everyone) or incentivizing and motivating with benefits.

lovely89 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 29, 2016, 07:55:32 am »

Quote from: lurker10 on March 29, 2016, 07:42:52 am

Quote from: websioux on March 29, 2016, 07:35:52 am
What has been built here ? Isn't it tools to develop an anarchist economy ? Is it so much doomed that this tools can not be used to build the infrastructure ?

An anarchist economy is not possible, it's a dream. There, somebody had to say it. People don't care to support the public infrastructure. It's a fact. There are two ways to solve this problem. Socialism by involuntary taxation (IPO with equal taxation of everyone) or incentivizing and motivating with benefits.

I don't beleive it.

Look at the Tennessee project. Look at Iota, they have so far raised 15 000 000 iota's from their initial 'investors' and 20 000 000 iota's for an unknown investment. This is immediately after the ICO.

The nxt devs have donation addresses where people can donate. If these are running dry or have little to no tokens donated, then a dev equivalent to the Tennessee project should be started again. The devs need to let us know publicly and explicitly that the assistance of the community is needed and a lack of support will have a direct negative effect on nxt's growth (which is so crucial right no in this competitive cyrpto environment). If the community can't support itself, that's a shame and we'll see the result of lack of demand in a service.

One thing that they should not do, is go against the core fundamental principles of 'crypto' currencies. That is, to dilute the value of the tokens of the owners of nxt.

News:

Author Topic: [POLL] The IPO idea. (Read 22911 times)