SMT POCKETS - (Phase 1) TRANSPARENT, OPEN and PUBLIC DISCUSSION. (WEEK 2)
On the last post in which we discussed the various options and ideas as to the concept of going forwards with introducing a new Smart Madia Token which rewards the current Pocket Token owners in a manner that could be described as "resembling the Bitcoin Forks",
ref: https://steemit.com/smt/@jackmiller/smt-pockets-phase-1-transparent-open-and-public-discussion
We saw a number of comments that brought about a few questions, generally about the SMTs.
The SMT whitepaper has been issued and starts off with all the simplistic introduction that one would guess is expected from a Whitepaper. however there is something that is mentioned on pages 49 and 50 of the Whitepaper:
"Costs of SMT Operations And Bandwidth Rate Limiting
Like STEEM, SMTs can be transferred on the Steem blockchain with zero fees. Steem replaces fees with bandwidth rate limiting based on the percentage of STEEM an account has staked, which means the blockchain calculates how much STEEM an account has temporaily vested to determine how much bandwidth the account is permitted for transfers, posting, and other operations across a period of time. In a future version of Steem, possesion of an account name could permit some small degree of bandwidth to allow for even greater user experience......"
PS. The way many read this passage it has been concluded that people who use the SMT shall need to have more Steem Power, so that they can cover the "Bandwidth" consumption.
So we shall go from this stand point, that there is no requirement for an ICO, however this may affect the value of the SMT upon issue.
(edited text as per the general understanding of the above quoted text from the Whitepaper)
This then brings up the topics of Proof Of Stake (POS) along with Proof Of Work (POW).
POW is addressed withing the following document, which covers a lot of the questions that people may have in reference to How SMTs shall be utilized and monitored on other sites etc:
The SMT Oracles whitepaper.. [call for academics, modelers and deep thinkers]
https://steemit.com/smt-oracles/@ned/the-smt-oracles-whitepaper-call-for-academics-modelers-and-deep-thinkers
There was also another post put up by a fellow Steemian on this topic, here is the link to that post too, however the topics discussed were again in line with the topics I have addressed here.
Link: https://steemit.com/smt/@chefcryptoshark/pocket-token-to-smt-transition-mastermind-post
What I believe is a misunderstanding about this topic in general is the following:
1.0. Our current Pocket Tokens shall remain as they are. Nothing shall change in the protocol.
1.1. The suggested new SMT Pockets are a totally separate and individual Crypto, which can in its "genesis" portion award all of us who own the current Pocket tokens and likewise in the process contribute to the demand for our current Pocket Tokens and in turn possibly increase their value.
1.2. The new SMTs shall fall under the SMT protocal and can in no way be mixed and matched with our current Pocket Tokens after the SMTs are issued.
1.3. With this concept, awareness shall increase for both our current Pocket Tokens and the new SMT Pockets, hence giving this venture high visibility here on Steemit and other social networks that we are on.
I shall keep it to these 4 points for now, so as not to get into any micro topics of discussion.
I hope that in the discussion on this post we can go further into the topic and be PROactive and constructive, as it is in all of our best interests to make our current Pocket Tokens worth more than they are now and likewise to turn them into something more than just "fun and free".
Our goal should be to not let any of the opportunities that are out there pass us by, we should grab them and make the most of them, after all we are all here to make a difference, to acquire new wealth in the Crypto world.
So let the discussion begin! (Continue)
Yes, please! Let's do the first SMT as Pocket SMT! We have arguably the best head start on it.
Sign up, get onto the Discord channel if you haven't already and get on board.
ref:
https://steemit.com/pocket/@jackmiller/smt-pockets-phase-2-time-to-get-a-team-happening
I'm 97.92% sure that you're misinterpreting that passage from the whitepaper. Where does it say that the issuing account itself needs to have the SP cover all of that token's transactions?
What it's saying is this: if an account wants to use Steem, it needs to have SP. That's true whether you're using STEEM, posting, using POCKET, or (in the future) SMTs.
Having SP is how you "pay transaction fees" in Steem. Somehow you've gotten this idea that the SMT issuer has to pay all of it's users' transaction fees. That is very definitely not what the whitepaper is saying in that passage you keep quoting. The passage you're quoting is saying that the SMT user needs to have enough SP to cover his own transactions.
The point is, as I've been trying to tell you for a while now, that you don't need to do the crowdfund thing that you're talking about.
Or maybe there's some other passage in the whitepaper that says that the token issuer has to pay all of it's users' fees. If that passage exists, please point me to it.
Could be that you are right, I'm open minded, hence that is why I am pushing the open discussions.
Both interpretations do make sense, either way, more SP shall be needed by someone and the value of Steem shall go up.
If you have someone in the team who is working on the SMTs who can answer this, that would be fantastic.
The other point that leads me to this definition of the passage is that the original steemit account shall be linked with the SMT, so my question there is "Why link it if there is no purpose to it?"
That passage never mentions the SMT issuing account.
OK. After speaking with more people about this, they too believe that the people making the transactions need to have the bandwidth and not the SMT base account here on Steemit.
I will go with that too, and lets omit the need for any Steem Power in the base Steemit Account of the SMT.
I withdraw my arguments that suggest the bandwidth for the SMT needs to be on the SMT account.
So, lets go with that, from here on, with the presumption that it is that and there is no need for any further discussion on that topic.
I read it wrong and that is that.
Can we move on from this point and start pin pointing what all needs to be done so that Pocket Token owners can cash in on the new SMTs too.
I have edited the post in accordance with this.
I still wonder Why Ned kept talking about ICO's then, but I won't dwell on it, time is flying and we have this opportunity that is up for grabs and I truly believe that we shouldn't miss out on it....
So as per the understanding of the quoted text now, this makes life a lot easier, at least in the genesis portion of the new SMT that aims at rewarding all us Pocket Token owners.
I suppose if you're launching a new social media sites and want to power it with an SMT, you may want to run an ICO to raise money.
Could be, I like to think out aloud and get responses, but for the sake of discussion here, no matter what the case may be, we agree that we shall read it as stated, that each individual shall have to cover the SP/Bandwidth from their own account.
So we can all move forwards on the idea and start thinking proactively and constructively towards making the most of what is being offered to us pocketeers!
https://steemit.com/steem/@adept/smart-media-tokens-talk-what-is-the-bancor-protocol
"When setting up a SMT you'll be able to back it with a reserve tank of STEEM while setting a reserve ratio. For example, if you back your SMT with a 2,500 STEEM reserve and have CPR (constant portfolio ratio) of 0.25, the theoretical market cap of your SMT would be 10,000 STEEM."
This sounds interesting.
I haven't wrapped my head around that stuff yet. The Bancor protocol has always sounded a little fishy to me, but maybe it's legit. I'll have to read that up at some point.
Does it mean that issuing new SMT token does not need ANY investment in Steem dolars or Steem Power? (I still didn't have time to read SMT whitepaper or dig deeper into posts where steemians were commenting this technology).
It seems that this is the way many read this passage.
So the answer to your question is "YES".
People who use the SMT shall need more Steem Power, because the number of transactions that they are doing with the SMT shall use up their bandwidth.
Yeah, that appears to be the case. There is going to be a lot of spam, I suspect.
I admire your zeal for SMT as it relates to POCKET. It's easy to ignore resources, rather than create value for them. I really like the idea of POCKET and an SMT POCKET is intriguing. I'm not certain I'm able to wrap my brain around the intricacies of SMT to speak intelligently about it, but I do question your second point (1.2) in which simply the creation of an SMT POCKET would automatically generate high visibility on Steemit and other social media by virtue of it not being mixed and matched with the current POCKET tokens. One does not seem to lead to the other.
Considering the number and variation of SMT already available, it seems awareness would have to be generated by a lot more than simply the creation of a new one, whether it's known by a similar name to the current POCKETs or not. Your current strategy of drawing awareness to the POCKET tokens by using them in raffles is an interesting one and I think more things along this line would need to be done before there could be any movement on an SMT POCKET through name awareness. @ironshield
With over 6000 Pocket Token owners out there, I am sure that we have the resources to move forwards with this idea.
Another fact-check: fewer than 2000 accounts have POCKET. The number shows up in @pocket-pi's statistics post.
OK, I must have misread the other weeks report, seemed to me that it said 6000.
However, between 1500 and 2000 people, that is a mighty fine group of individuals there!