Killerstorm had some valid concerns around it. Unfortunately, this project seems to lack the technical leadership at this time to have adequately responded to his questions and factored his concerns into the development process. He probably got a bit miffed and then took it publicly.

There is development process control that is sorely lacking on this project currently (and I say that as a dev with 18+ years professional experience that has been working with the existing mastercoin code as I structure a new tool around it). I have several ideas how this can be improved, and would be happy to speak with David or Ron, or anyone else on the board about it if they are interested.

Basically, in the end it's reason #5,490 for hiring a full-time team. On the operational side, this comes down to effective delegation...hiring decisions are the absolute most important decisions one can make. How Ron is running around clearly overwhelmed reminds me of how I used to be before I learned how to effectively hire, delegate, and train new employees. Now my business largely runs itself. Not a critique of Ron himself, and I cannot assume I know exactly what is going on on his end...more just saying that the board needs more dedicated folks with previous operational-level business leadership to help Ron scale out, which I see as Mastercoin's main problem right now. The fact that he just ran off and found someone additional for the board and mentioned it in passing on this thread really irks me. And, if there are people on the board that are "too busy", why are they on the board to begin with?

Anyhow, we need someone like killerstorm leading the charge on the core protocol implementation, to ensure stable growth and backwards compatibility as required. With the budget of this project, why is this so hard to do? If it is really that hard to find people to work for MSC, then offer fiat or BTC at first. At this point, we just need the right talent. It's good to see David in there attempting to diffuse the situation, but we're playing reactive damage control here.

EDIT: I was asked my bitexch if I would be interested in applying for a board seat. Initially, my response was no, however at this point I would be open to it. I do have an active business, but I could contribute around 15 or so hours a week most weeks, and act as an advisor if there is value seen in that. My goal would be to help get things back on track in a solid way, and then look to reducing my involvement/stepping out. Ron has my resume/linkedin. If there is interest, feel free to reach out. That, or I'd be more than happy to not be on the board, and just volunteer my services in an advisory/sounding board manner. I would even potentially be up to meeting you guys in person in Vegas on the 10-12th, however, let me know in the next few days.

And, I must say that any criticisms I offer on this project come with the intention of making it better. I still strongly support this project, I think it just needs a few more experienced hands to help the existing dedicated devs and board members.

This is absurd. Traditionally, one's boss does not ask one how many hours he would like to work, why should Mastercoin be an exception to this?!

This is also why I am uncomfortable with your suggestion that you and JR not get paid; if there is no salary involved than expectations become less rigorous. I would love for both of you to continue to work on the project, but I think that only salaried employees should be counted as full-time developers, as it will make things less ambiguous.

Many venture capitalist and private equity firms expect 60-80 hours a week from their employees, and they often have much less money and much less room for growth than Mastercoin.

I can't emphasize enough that Mastercoin is *not* the only project of its kind, and that the other projects are catching up!

Mastercoin is a $100 million project with lots of room for growth. It's absolutely ludicrous that we should have to beg an important member of the community to devote time to it.

EDIT: Ron, my general point is that you are not considering things as wholly from the perspective of the success of the Mastercoin project as you ought to. You are certainly entitled to the belief that Mastercoin devs don't have to commit to working a minimum number of hours each week, but it's possible that one of the projects competing with Mastercoin *does* have more stringent demands of its developers, and will accordingly complete its development first. If you are willing to maintain your principles, even when they endanger the success of the Mastercoin project, that is your decision. However, you (and the rest of the board) owe it to the investors to say so explicitly, that way we can decide whether we want to invest our money elsewhere.

EDIT 2: I am sorry to double-post, but so far only vokain has answered rbdrbd's question, and I think it is in the interest of the Mastercoin community to know the background of its board: "Do we have anyone on the board that has "boot on the ground" operational experience growing profitable software/tech startups with more than 5-10 employees?"