Bud, give it a rest. James has been transparent the whole time. ICO investors did their due diligence, they do not need babysitting at this point.
If you don't like the conversation feel free not to join it. This is a legitimate line of questions. How could investors do their due diligence if this information was not made clear before, during or after the ICO even up until now. It
seemed to be clear. But now that the moment is potentially upon us things are seeming quite muddy.
I divided the 17000 number by 90% of outstanding assets. The method has been agreed to and voted on, so really a moot point to debate.
Anyway, in the unlikely event the 0.234 threshold is hit, I am giving it out as holiday bonus to the SuperNET contributors.
The allocation will use a decentralized process. First round of voting to determine each person's "weight" and then a second round where each person allocates the portion of the bonus (calculated by their weight) to 3 to 5 people. The process itself will be finalized via community consensus, or lacking that even another vote to determine what method to use to do the allocation. I do not want to do any arbitrary bonusing as with 300 people in the slack now I dont know the exact level of contribution from most of them as I am spending most of my time coding and answering questions. I am not a micromanager.
So investors should be happy that the key contributors as determined by the community will be getting the largest bonuses
I believe this makes for a happy community, which in turn will create a better SuperNET
James
P.S. I do not want to do premature marketing as that could just create some hype. Since SuperNET's tech goals are quite unique and never done before, it is best to be totally ready before doing the big marketing thing. And I already have some budget for this anyway, I just feel getting 100+ people more vested with SuperNET will help the project more at this stage than premature marketing