I apriciate everyones concern and feedback, but please back off. We all get the point and this discussion is interfering with actual productive R&D.
If we are talking about principles here:
1) PTS should live on and be supported by who ever wants to buy in / share drop to it.
2) BTS should ask for a reasonable recognition (20% or less) share drop in future chains.
3) AGS is what it is. It is just another share drop target. I personally thing PTS should have share dropped 10% on AGS for funding its upgrade and freeing it from mining.
4) I don't want DVS to set any precedents.
If we are talking about principles here:
1) PTS should live on and be supported by who ever wants to buy in / share drop to it.
2) BTS should ask for a reasonable recognition (20% or less) share drop in future chains.
3) AGS is what it is. It is just another share drop target. I personally thing PTS should have share dropped 10% on AGS for funding its upgrade and freeing it from mining.
4) I don't want DVS to set any precedents.
Somebody else made the comment. But it is soooo good, I decided to borrow it:
Humongous nail in the Alphabar's coffin!
And Stan shared his wisdom on his son's comment:
The truth is that which approach is best varies with how each person weights the factors that go into in.
BM apparently weighs honoring the toolkit a bit higher.
Alphabar weighs keeping the distribution unchanged higher.
Both are noble considerations.
BM sees PTS as another chain that is borrowing toolkit technology to upgrade.
Alphabar sees himself as donating his time to help fix something for the community that was broken.
Both are valid perspectives.
All such decisions can be tipped one way or the other by adding just one more little fact or motivation.
That doesn't mean that either side is wrong or evil. We all just weigh the various factors differently.
We need to realize that lots of arguing is not likely to change these weightings. They go deep into each individual's personal beliefs.
Since we aren't likely to change those, we should try to accept the choice of the person who must decide.
Otherwise, we are just continuing to pollute our collective swimming pool with no further benefit.
Whether we grow or fade depends on how fresh and clean we keep the water in this swimming pool.
BM apparently weighs honoring the toolkit a bit higher.
Alphabar weighs keeping the distribution unchanged higher.
Both are noble considerations.
BM sees PTS as another chain that is borrowing toolkit technology to upgrade.
Alphabar sees himself as donating his time to help fix something for the community that was broken.
Both are valid perspectives.
All such decisions can be tipped one way or the other by adding just one more little fact or motivation.
That doesn't mean that either side is wrong or evil. We all just weigh the various factors differently.
We need to realize that lots of arguing is not likely to change these weightings. They go deep into each individual's personal beliefs.
Since we aren't likely to change those, we should try to accept the choice of the person who must decide.
Otherwise, we are just continuing to pollute our collective swimming pool with no further benefit.
Whether we grow or fade depends on how fresh and clean we keep the water in this swimming pool.