Quote from: ThomasVeil on November 30, 2014, 03:30:49 AM

Quote from: brekyrself on November 30, 2014, 01:50:23 AM

Quote from: ThomasVeil on November 29, 2014, 10:03:57 PM

It think it will hurt the whole ecosystem. If there are no ideals of crypto then why should average people start to care?

The founders, who are all highly respected and speak at many conferences....

That was true for Bernie Madorff for about 40 years. Which is simply to say that this is no guarantee. Exactly what Crypto was supposed to fix.

Quote

..., can not exactly just "change" the system at will.

How is it prevented? They did stop the BitAsset markets before and changed the pegging system.
They will not be able to do this once the USD price slips again?

Quote

You speak of ideals yet the BitShares folks have been some of the most honest, open, and up front people in this crypto space!

They have been quite inconsistent from the start.

Quote

The system is run by delegates thus just like mining they would have to upgrade to the version with differences. Check out the summary again at http://bitshares.org/bitshares-reloaded/ and it will start to make sense why they went this merger route.

You're avoiding my Litecoin example - giving Litecoiners some arbitrary numbers of Bitcoins and then adding those to the bitcoin cap might also make sense. Litecoiners might even agree as it would stop their bleeding. That's still pretty clearly a bad thing to do.

Caps are supposed to stay stable - else I can have no trust that in 3 months there will not be another big inflation - because the devs are respected and enough delegates profit.
If voted officials and corporations can do these kind of acts, then we can just stick to the current banking system.

I don't quite follow what you are trying to conclude, crypto software is in its infancy, of course it will be updated throughout its life cycle? Are you not agreeing with their asset market rules, changes in direction, or way going about business?

I am not avoiding your litecoin example however it has nothing to do with BTS merging, 100% different situation. I can't tell by your join date if you have been around for awhile and saw BitShares through since the beginning? I would not go by that thread you linked, instead do the research yourself by looking at Bytemaster's posts which date back to having conversations with Satoshi.

High level BTS history:
Protoshares was launched as a minable investment vehicle, along side AGS which users could donate PTS or BTC directly without mining. 50% PTS and 50% AGS is what made up the genesis block of BTS, this was quite fair. Original plan was to have individual dac's such as BTS, Vote, Play, Music, etc... however this would divide the attention of the dev's too greatly. Thus with PTS and AGS no longer viable, why not unite all the products under one umbrella? Great win for investors, great win for the dev's who can concentrate on one super DAC with all the features of the individual dacs. BTC and LTC were born competitors, BTS simply originated from PTS and AGS.