Stan's BEOS Troll FUD Patrol

in bitshares •  12 days ago

At the risk of giving BEOS FUDslingers a broader audience, let me address some of the FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) that has been slung our way since we announced our BEOS Rainfall last week.

Troll funkit:
The real disappointment is a chain cannibalizing on the bitshares consensus. Thats disgusting.

I assume funkit is talking about us building up a new BitShares consensus of people who willingly let us use their voting power to support deeper integration of BitShares with EOS. We now have the single biggest voting block ever seen on BitShares supporting what we are doing. Over ten percent, which is impressive, but not overwhelming. We are building, not cannibalizing BitShares consensus for the greater good of BitShares in an EOS dominated world.

It is further disgusting to see a closed source system with no feedback to the the developer community.

The source code is open for inspection and feedback, but must be licensed for use. This is essential for our funding sources to participate. Not every project can give away its source code and survive.

Not to mention central control over everything from board to nodes. There is zero need for a blockchain in BEOS. A database should be sufficient.

BEOS works exactly like BitShares and EOS as a DPOS system. So, of course it uses a blockchain to protect everybody's assets. Nodes are elected by BEOS holders. We have a nonprofit central foundation, the BEOS Limited Cooperative Association, to legally issue the tokens without fear of regulatory interference. Most major chains, including BitShares, have foundations to handle their legal interfaces to world governments.

It is further disappointing to see the contempt towards existing business, advocates, investors and enthusiasts.

No contempt. We just insist on our rights to run an unmanned business any way we see fit. This is no different from Apple or Google or Tesla. Not every blockchain has to be run democratically. Most businesses have boards of directors who ultimately answer to shareholders, but not on a day to day basis. We have struck the right balance for our purposes, which we have every right to do, since we paid for the development of this Decentralized Autonomous Company from private sources.

BEOS is the exact opposite what I learned 2 years ago when I first became fascinated with “the trusty robots”. A system without discrimination and equal opportunities for all.

BEOS is not attempting to fit into funkit's preferred model. It's a business, just like an exchange, which provides services tying two of funkit's preferred blockchain types together. It uses a blockchain with BEOSholder elected block producers to look after ownership rights autonomously. It relies on a board to manage its development funds and set its future directions. This will make it stronger than BitShares, which often can't reach a consistent consensus on how to spend it's development funds. In the end, BEOS is a privately owned company which provides services we hope people will like.

Feel free to leave and join the group that I believe is called @officialbeos where I am not allowed.

You can imagine why funkit may not be allowed there.

Fabian (not technically a troll, but with a legitimate question)
BEOS doesn't follow social consensus on airdropping.

BEOS is 100% raindropped on bitshares holders who support the project, which in my mind far exceeds a 20% one time airdrop on everybody, including those who don't like us and don't want us to succeed. So, we exceed the social consensus by a huge factor. It is not the same as the original BitShares consensus but, then exactly no projects have ever followed the 20% rule. We are giving the circulating supply all away, but only to believers in what we are doing.

*Trolls: Many Folks whining about the 500 BTS ($25-$35) membership fee to get a BEOS account.

Michaelx provided this rationale:

You can always spend $25 today and acquire 500 BTS for the fee, or make a Steemit post or two and trade it for BTS to cover the fee. The fee is there to make sure there is no name squatting. It enacts a member fee which covers lifetime membership in the BLCA (BEOS Limited Cooperative Association) which is a non profit organization that BEOS holders get to vote for Directors, Block Producers and Worker Proposals.

The fee also helps cover the substantial costs borne by the BLCA to create the technology that allows this all to happen. EOS accounts are around $3 and give you a long gibberish name. Short EOS accounts and custom names are auctioned for thousands of dollars. A standard fee allowing you to reserve any name you like in BEOS seems reasonable in comparison.

A BTS lifetime account is 3000 BTS. For that you get lower fees. BEOS based BTS can be sent and received for no transaction fee. You also get a ton of BEOS, maybe up to 10 for every BTS you stake for the whole 89 day rainfall period.

Troll Dexy Bitshares:
If i run my private scam-project such as beos or arisebank, can i also advertise my shit in the pinned message in the BitShares community chat?

Hard to comment on this level of illiteracy. BEOS is run by some of the most respected names in the industry. Every one of the directors uses their real name and puts their personal reputation on the line. Dexy hides behind a fake name and lobs scam accusations at real professionals.

if I changed my last name from Honestscam to Larimer, would you believe me and give me 200 million bts? 🤣🤣

No, precisely because your last name is not Larimer. We worked hard for that reputation. That makes all the difference.

i just catch lulz with this project. "directors of the blockchain" ( 🤣😆😂

This awesome set of directors, with sterling industry reputations, runs the BEOS equivalent of the Bitcoin Foundation, BitShares Foundation, and Ethereum Consensys. The BEOS Limited Cooperative Association is constructed to maintain regulatory autonomy. They are responsible for managing the reserve fund and directing it to the advancement of the BEOS ecosystem. They serve staggered 3 year terms. Stan’s ends this year, Angus and Tim next year and Michael and Paul in 2021. They also vet all candidates for Block Signers and wield 2/7 of the voting power for selecting them. BEOS holders vote the other 5/7ths.

We opted for this governance model after watching BitShares fail to spend its reserve funds in a coordinated long term consistent fashion. The BLCA has the ability to engage in long term contracts without fear of voters pulling the rug out from under half-finished projects. Yet, the BEOS holders do have strong control over who signs the blocks, which is the essential feature of DPOS blockchain integrity.

Troll patinity
Its new token, no reason for it, no reason for deposit BTS, no reason for 500 count (why not 250?)

The reason for the new token is to control resources on a new chain that we will be able to freely modify without seeking permission from BTS or EOS holders. The reason for the deposit of BTS is to make sure that the BEOS tokens are only given away to people who trust us, since we will be trusting them with 5/7ths of the voting power on a network we paid to develop. The reason for 500 instead of 250 (or 1000!) is arbitrary and designed to be in the right ball park to keep unbelievers out without impacting true believers too much. If you won’t pay about $30 to become a member, you are not serious and not needed as one of our voters.

Troll Dexy Bitshares
ok. this is not a scam it's just a stillborn piece of shit, if you prefer that tolerant label

It’s the biggest thing to happen to BitShares since Graphene was introduced in 2015. It will be used in multiple new projects including,,,, and Doesn’t look stillborn to me. Glad you admit it's not a scam, though.

tbone - not an actual troll - with a valid question
That's where the staking for everything beyond the 20% unconditional airdrop comes in.

Yes, not one organization has ever airdropped 20% unconditionally. We decided to drop 100% of the current BTS circulating supply on the subset of BitSharesholders who were willing to try out our system and move their shares over to BEOS for up to 89 days. This is much more generous than any other token drop in BitShares history and targeted on people who believe in the project. The fact that it excludes people who don’t like us and don’t want us to succeed is a feature I’m particularly proud of. No apologies and no drops on haters who would just dump our gifts.

Troll Dexy Bitshares
Daniel thought BEOS was shit.

No, Daniel said “I tried to talk my Dad out of it.” His reasons were concern over regulatory problems. I heeded his advice and we took several more months to craft a bullet proof defense in depth. I’m now quite confident that we are maximally compliant with all regulatory hurdles.

Thanks for being honest - "our new business." it's your own business, and you have no moral right to use the BitShares community chat to aggressively promote your shit. (using pinned message) This project violates the rights of current BitShares stackholders, allowing to participate only those who paying an entrance fee. Thus, it is advertising of a third-party project!**

We, of course don’t see it that way. The BitShares community has a long history of supporting new projects that build on it. That's in its self-interest! BEOS is the biggest such project ever, with maximum implications for projecting BitShares assets across the EOS universe and providing smart contracts that work with BitShares tokens of all kinds. This is huge for bitshares holders and we are giving the entire circulating supply away to any holder who adopts the new network. It hardly violates anyones rights and we have the right to distribute our tokens as we see fit.

We give them to believers and let unbelievers weed themselves out.

Just like Jesus set a similar policy for who gets into Heaven.


Stan Larimer is sci-fi author, evangelist and iconoclast specializing on Christian, Jeffersonian and BitShares topics. Check out all his posts at:

Stan's Steemit Blog
Stan's Whaleshares Blog
Blue Rock Talk with Connie Willis on YouTube
BitShares for Nice People

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Ad hominem aside, there is a reason i make that claim:

BEOS doesn't follow social consensus on airdropping.

How would people that support BitShares' core product (bitassets) by improving liquidity participate in BEOS if they have their BTS locked up in collateral?


People that have locked up BTS for bitAssets means they have bitAssets right? Nobody prevents them selling their bitAssets for bts and staking them to BEOS... Even if they must at some point protect their margin position they can freely sent back the staked bts on BEOS... It is not that they are locked for all 89 days ! You can move your bts back and forth...

PS I can only assume there is a misunderstanding on how the raindrop works.


Yes, I agree it is regrettable that folks with their BTS locked up in collateral can't get BEOS. But they have their own reward - bitAssets to sell at zero interest. BEOS can be thought of as another place you can lock up your BTS for a reward. The two complement each other, both taking BTS out of circulation and boosting the demand/supply ratio.


The BEOS project, by having people lock up bitshares for 89 days, is reducing the circulating supply of BTS. This, theoretically, is putting upward pressure on the price of BTS, so less collateral will be needed by those who do not support the BEOS project (like you) to use their BTS to improve liquidity of BitShares' core product (bitassets). Do your part!


And yet, those that have their BTS locked up are not eligible for BEOS raindrop .. whether they make a profit of (or not) of locked up BTS and taking on a financial risk, remains to be seen. The blockchain prevents them from participate in your raindrop. Hence, if they wanted to, they couldn't. Hence, my statement (that Stan calls FUD) is a technical reality and pretty easy to prove. But hey, .. facts ...

I'd like you to prove that locked up stake in BEOS put buy pressure on BTS. I'd like you to explain to the community how you dare claim that locking up BTS in BEOS is valued higher than locking them up in collateral and deemed enemy of BEOS for not supporting it (while technically being incapable of doing so). Now, do your part.


The fact is, Xeroc, that there are people, possibly you even, who have no intention of participating in the BEOS project. I have already seen many people who said they don't trust having their BTS under Dan Notestein's gateway control in order to receive the rainfall of BEOS tokens. And we are fine with that.

But very elementary economic theory tells me that if you reduce supply of anything, and demand remains constant or growing (everything else being equal), then price will rise. So you people who love bitshares the way we do can also do your part. Instead of staking your bitshares to receive rainfall of BEOS tokens, use it to short the bitasset featured products of the bitshares chain into liquidity. This ALSO takes bitshares out of circulation (putting even more upward pressure on bitshares price).

You are much smarter than I am. And have a doctorate!

I am sure you can figure it out.

We can all do our part to bring bitshares to the next level.


I have a doctorate in engineering, that does not qualify me to judge economics. That said, the topic here is that I am called troll for stating the obvious: Not all BTS holder are (or even can) participate for a 10% airdrop, which could have honored the social consensus.

Non of the arguments about BTS price changes that.

Other then that, I would have liked to not even talk BEOS anymore, but Stan went ahead and preferred to go ad hominem against me and other community members. That's not how to cooperate.


Well, I certainly don't have a doctorate - but I do have a degree in Economics and I specialized in Monetary Economics and Finance. So I can handle the simple stuff. And it is quite simple that BEOS is good for bitshares (of which I have always been a big supporter and holder).

By the way, in early 2012 I was traveling around to university economics departments and handing out physical Casascius bitcoins to Economics Professors and Ph.D. candidates as souvenirs for them at their conferences. Hopefully some of these professors hung on to them because they are now worth well over $5,000 each.

And I discussed in the comment above, if you care to re-read it, that we acknowledge that not all bitshares holders want to participate in the BEOS opportunity. And that is alright. As I explained, they can also find ways to contribute to the well being of bitshares. The two strategies will complement each other to bring value to bitshares.

I know you will think that I have not answered directly your objection. But it is not called for since Stan more than adequately covered it in the post. I accept Stan's explanation of how BEOS has actually gone above and beyond the requirements of the social consensus WHILE NO OTHER PARTY USING THE TECHNOLOGY THAT BITSHARES HOLDERS PAID TO DEVELOP HAS EVEN MET THEM LET ALONE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND! If you don't agree, that's fine. We will have to agree to disagree.


Since you are not banned any longer on "Bitshares DEX" maybe it would make some sense to give one chance to @funkit on "BEOS = Bitshares + EOS" also? Some times the biggest "enemy's" can transform to the "best" friends... A community united is unbeatable ! Please consider it seriously...


Stan's link to this post was deleted from the DEX Telegram channel. And see the triple exact same comment by funkit below (I had to downvote two of the three exact same messages so as to not take up all the space). But I certainly agree. If we find a way to become a united community, that is by far the best way forward. Let's all start by stopping the spreading of FUD. Stick to reasoned arguments about what will work best for bitshares and to meet the objectives of the founders.

Don't let FUD bamboozle you!


What's the alternative to BEOS? Making Bitshares 3.0 on EOS. Killing projects that are currently built on Bitshares 2.0. BEOS is the way to go. IMO.

Posted using Partiko Android

Sounds like people are afraid BEOS may succeed. I believe in stan's vision of everyone working together. Stop the FUD get on board, theres room for everyone.
(I'm getting rainfall, go BEOS)

Greetings, @stan,

Thanks for another great BEOS article. Thank you and your team for the generosity you're showing to BTS holders who believe in what you're doing.

I have been a professional developer most of my life, beginning with microcomputers back in the mid 1970s. I am also an amateur astronomer and a "space head," still wanting to reach orbit one of these days. I developed the initial tracking software for the 1.2 meter Tierra Astronomical Institute telescope:

I also formed and operate an enterprise that uses 3D printing, not only to produce our product, but to fabricate the tooling we use for building the product.

Consequently, while I'm I'm happy to see projects like Quintric and Ruon, I am absolutely thrilled to be learning more about Sovereign Sky, Biquitous, and Mission Space, and to begin trying to understand how they are connected with and empowered by BEOS.

I would like (eventually) to develop some projects in the BEOS sphere, perhaps even a potentially unique DAO that is growing in the back of my head. Considering those hopes, I realize that I have a steep learning curve ahead of me.

Could you point me in the direction of what I need to learn to successfully develop a project on the BEOS blockchain?

Thanks in advance for any guidance you may be able to offer.

Kindest regards,

- @creatr




What a beautiful instrument! I'll be developing the pointing control software for telescopes. I could probably use your help. Did you interface to a database of space objects to compute your pointing angles?


I interfaced to a substantial database which was essentially a catalog of stars and interesting objects (Messier objects, etc.) associated with their right ascension and declination positions on the celestial sphere. But at that time I was not using object positions to orient the scope; it's equatorial mount was nominally aligned to a polar axis, and I was using shaft encoders, step counts, and a time reference to drive the scope to find those objects.

This was quite a few years back (mid to late 1980s?), Stan, so I am a little "fuzzy" when it comes to remembering all the details.

I was using a monochrome CRT IBM PC running at that time on what was probably an 80186 processor. When I got involved, the institute had unfortunately already contracted for some custom stepper motor driver hardware that was kinda quirky. The firmware was closed source, and I had to disassemble it in order to fix some severe bugs that popped up. :O

The institute eventually replaced my original software with some more visually oriented star-map type stuff. Nevertheless, that project was some of the most fun I've had during my long and very sketchy career. :D

Summarizing, I would absolutely love to help you with pointing control for orienting telescopes...


Hi Stan,


I poked around and dug up my project notebooks for the observatory. Thumbing through them brought back a lot of details.😃


I wrote the original observatory software from scratch, based on a collection of formulas in a then-current edition of this book. The primary software, written in C, ran on an IBM PC. The PC was situated in an insulated control room where we could sit and operate the telescope and instrument packages without freezing our tails off... 😉

I also wrote a separate, somewhat simpler code system that employed a PSION Organizer II handheld computer in the role of "guide paddle" that we used when standing on the open observatory floor under the 1.2 meter instrument.

The PC software imported a modified version of the Yale Bright Star Catalog circa 1987, that had been modified to reduce its size to fit on a contemporary microcomputer and extended to include Messier and other objects.

I of course realize that controlling a space telescope will have a rather different (and fascinating!) set of problems to be solved, such as awareness of what sector of sky is presently obscured by the Earth, probably Sun avoidance (unless equipped with solar filters?), and initial orientation within the celestial sphere.

Stan, I would really love to discuss all this with you sometime at your convenience... 😉

And I thought business development was all about making solid products customers die for and not something they have to be lured into.

Corruption, theft of ideas and centralisation, that’s BEOS’ foundation. I cold buy ripple for less reasons I see on display.



No theft of ideas, BitShares provided DPOS to EOS and is receiving back their own version of EOS in lieu of a sharedrop of EOS. Fair is fair. There is no centralization different that that of BitShares Foundation, Bitcoin Foundation, Consensys and Block One serving as "centralized" champions of a decentralized blockchain.


Oh shit, i missed the memo that said the BitShares foundation has stake in BTS and/or takes part in governance ...


Triple posting the same comment is not acceptable. I have downvoted two of the three exact same comments.

It will be traded on BitShares and hopefully many other exchanges when rainfall ends and they are unlocked.

Thank you for the BEOS project, and the rainfall, it's raining BEOS tokens all day every day :-)

Considering getting in on this... Will BEOS only be traded on Bitshares? Or will it even be traded at all or only raindropped?

Posted using Partiko iOS


See Stan's comment above ^^

I think it's becoming fairly obvious that there are people in the BTS community who just can't handle Stan and Michael achieving something big which they can't even dream of doing and in turn they FUD in telegram channels. I observe it is the same people time and again attacking the works of Stan and Mike. I also feel that even if they wanted to come to some consensus it's impossible because they have fed their ego way to much junk. Also @stan, the picture references almost feels like you doxxed them Lol! funkit especially :D

There is a way to see how many BEOS account are created?


I suppose you could go into (Explore) in a bitshares wallet, click on (ACCOUNTS) and then the beos.gateway account. Then click on (Activity) and start counting how many separate accounts have sent BTS or BROWNIES.