Quote from: xkcdd on Today at 12:09:32 PM

So... You are in support of us or not? I am confused on this one. Please recall that it was Ryan that introduced the flawed economic model that you hate so much and it is Ryan that we are requesting be stood down as CEO of DCG. Are we not aligned on this issue, Tok?

No we are not.

Ryan is a manager. Ok it was his suggested policy and I didn't agree with it but at least he had one. My problem is with the masternodes not understanding the core business model behind their own investments and the nature of the fundamental capital flows that underpin it. In particular the role of "hashrate" as a currency medium in its primary market and the role of miners as "brokers" rather than sellers.

I imaging being CEO of DCG is somewhat of a no-win thankless task. Lots of bureaucratic drudgery, hiring and firing of people, studying the minutiae of regulatory compliance frameworks, structuring companies and so forth. I can't see many people wanting to do it with such sustained dedication.

Looks to me like DCG signed NDAs with partners and Ryan was simply trying to plug leaks so they wouldn't be exposed to contractural litigation. I'd probably be over-paranoid about that too if I was in that position, specially as the CEO. So he ran a tight ship with regard to leaks and talking to the press. Who cares ? It's not exactly a firing offence - we can all see what's happening to Dash in the markets and the developers have at least given a good account of themselves.

The bottom line is this: none of this really matters very much when the protocol already wastes nearly $2 million per week trying to incentivise stakeholders through an income stream which simultaneously drains the primary market of the bids that collateralise the capital value of the coin. Changing the CEO isn't going to change that.