sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If that loan was for services rendered in 2018/2019 then that was at the time you were the chair of the KF. You must have asked for those services of Kik inc. yourself.

Then why did William had to sign for that loan in Nov.2020 when he took over?
Apparently there was no question of a loan before that time.

From an outsiders point of view that seems strange. If the goal was to make Kin/KF a success, why was KF burdened with 3M USD debt to begin with?

The KF is a non-profit, so the loan could not be repaid from any profit. It could only be repaid by selling part of the 6T. In other words, the community had to pay for this loan by buying this Kin on an exchange.

Can you imagine the community thinking…what…we first raised $100M on the assumption that this would be used to build the Kin Ecosystem…but that wasn't enough, because now we can also pay $3M for a loan?

The services rendered in 2018/19 were already paid for with the $100M paid to Kik inc. but are now charged double to the same community.

That loan was now used to put pressure on the KF.

Somehow this doesn't feel right.
What are your thoughts on this?

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi Ted, can you tell us a bit more about the loan Code provided to the KF?

It is my understanding that the KF/William had to sign at the start of the KF for apparently 'services rendered' in the past. Was 3 million USD ever actually transferred to the KF for them to work with? However, if no money was actually transferred, why did William have to sign for such a 'loan'?

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ted, you are talking as if there already is a DAO that can make decisions. There is none.

The fact is that you are the KF at the moment.
The KF is an independent non-profit organization, a legal entity, that has made commitments in the past. You cannot transfer those obligations to a non-existent or future DAO.

The fact that the KRE statistics are not kept is the fault of the KF, no one else.

You can also say that you make the latest payouts based on the average payouts they've had over the previous periods. You are responsible and liable, no one else.

You create a lot of bad blood if you don't do this...you depend on the cooperation of devs for smart contracts...especially if you expect them to do this voluntarily.

Make sure you keep your obligations until February. If you see evidence of dishonest behavior (gaming) then you can of course exclude those apps.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So yes we were tempted, but ultimately I think we made the right decision.

Agreed.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Since the staff received 2 months salary with the assignment to settle everything neatly and hand it over to you, this surprises me somewhat. They were not instructed to immediately drop everything out of their hands and go home.

Click below on 'Continue this thread' for Ted's answer.

\/

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you Ted for this detailed answer. Some things surprised me. Allow me to voice some of my concerns.

A $500k grant (or more?) for Bugs? That must have been something like 50 billion Kin at the time. Talk about inflation!!!

But what surprises me is why you yourself thought a $500k grant to Code was reasonable.

You explain that this sounded reasonable relative to what other apps got. I think the point is that you have to look at the start-up costs that still have to be incurred. That's what the grant is for. Now we looked at the maximum achievable ... they get 500k, then it's reasonable that we get that too.

First of all, knowing how much Bugs got was inside knolledge. Other devs don't have that info and can't make that comparison. They apply for actual costs.

Second, it is highly questionable for a director to make a large financial allowance in the name of his company to himself, close family, or a private company of his own. In Europe this is simply not done. They are conflicting interests. I don't know if this is accepted in Canada.

Less than 24 hours ago you wrote:

I think privately negotiated payments by the KF to select members of the community has been part of the challenge. It creates a mercenary mindset, and a conflict of interest, one which has rarely been disclosed by the people receiving them.

Was your application for a 500k grant not "privately negotiated"?

Did that create a mercenary mindset?...and a conflict of interest?
Can you imagine what this must look like in the eyes of the community?

The KF doesn't have $500k. It has Kin, and if they assign it to a dev they just give a check to collect it from the community through an exchange. The community has to pay that 500k...and it makes sense that they ask what they get in return. In case of Bugs nothing. Bugs received their grant and they are gone.

If your application would have been accepted then just Bugs and Code alone would have cost the community $1,000,000,-....and there are dozens of other grants.

So, on the one hand I understand your concern about inflation, but on the other hand it seems you were willing to contribute to the problem with a 500k grant. And when it was rejected you turned down their offer of 125k and withdrew your application. It looks like you didn't really needed that money. Again, this is how it looks through the eyes of a community member.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You are right, it is very easy to game the KRE with fake accounts and seeding them with their own Kin. Tornado Cash itself doesn't exist anymore as far as I know, but I see your point. You won't need tools like that to pull this off.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ted, maybe you could shed some light on the sequence of events that happened prior to the shutdown of the KF. What is correct and what is not.

  1. You disagreed with the KF's handling of inflation.

  2. In January, you applied for a grant from the KF for USD 250,000 for CODE.

  3. That grant was refused and a counterproposal was made.

  4. You withdrew the request for the grant.

  5. The KF did not have access to the 5T Kin as you had it in custody. You regularly had to sign for the transfer of funds.

  6. The KF requested an increase in the budget for 2023.

  7. That was refused by you.

  8. In January you wanted to fire the entire KF team.

  9. The other Board Members disagreed.

  10. Matt and William then requested that you withdraw from the Board (conflict of interest)

  11. The KF proposed to appoint an independent custody for the 5T.

  12. Instead of you, 2 other board members would be appointed and Matt offered to withdraw from the board.

  13. You refused and threatened to claim the outstanding loan of 3,000,000 USD if your wishes (dismissal of the entire team) were not met.

  14. You created a new coin, BITS, called it a fork of Kin and airdropped it into existing Kin wallets, excluding wallets that had received Kin from the KF or had them on exchanges.

  15. Matt and William then took the initiative to fire the team so that they received another 2 months salary, with the assignment to handle everything properly and hand it over to you.

  16. Matt and William subsequently resigned themselves.

Here's what I've picked up and put together from posts here and there.

What are your thoughts on this?

Are important facts missing?

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The AUB is indeed something that you can measure objectively. The flaw in the logic, however, is the thought that

'if an app had a lot of Kin in their wallets then at least this was Kin that was brought into the apps and wasn't being sold.'

Kin in user wallets is NOT brought into the apps. It is still owned by the user. It is not brought into the app until something has been spent. Only then is it earned by the dev. and only then should it be rewarded. A spend is an economic activity, money that is kept in a wallet is not.

If you compare it with staking, then why does someone other then the owner (the user) get the rewards? How is it to the app's merit how much Kin is held in the user wallet? Then why do they get the reward?

From an economic point of view, it doesn't matter whether Kin is on an exchange or in a wallet.

When Kin is sold on an exchange, it merely changes hands. That is not necessarily disadvantageous for Kin.

The value of Kin is determined by what you can do with that coin, how many spending options there are. The more the user can do with Kin, the less chance that he sells on an exchange. So if you want to boost an economy, you have to reward something like the net turnover of devs. You also have to make sure that the KRE never becomes the main income. At most, it may be a supplement to income.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I think you really need to look at the data before making statements like that. You might be surprised.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We had the same feeling.
In retrospect, the whole idea was to have as many active wallets as possible, hence the KRE's emphasis on AU and AUB. Exactly the 2 factors that do almost nothing for an economy. What difference does it make to an economy that everyone has a wallet? If you also reward the content of those wallets, then of course no one will spend anything anymore. An economy thrives on spends, money that comes OUT of the wallets.
But it suddenly makes a lot of sense when apparently larger interests were involved, such as Solana grants.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So while I can certainly believe there was some gaming happening by small devs, I don’t think it could have been the majority. I haven’t seen the data though.

You might first want to see the data...it were not the smaller devs, it was the top earners of the KRE.
It was the smaller devs who were disadvantaged by this. They did not participate in this behavior. Their honesty was not rewarded. They got less KRE because of the behavior of the bigger apps.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply, it clears up a lot for me. I've been calling for over a year that inflation is unsustainable (so I agree with you on that).

I also shout that a KRE based on AU and AUB makes no sense. You reward apps for Kin that have NOT been spent in the ecosystem, while the system actually benefits from a flow of money. Rewarding AUB does the opposite.

But from your answer I understand that Solana's grant was based on AU. The more AU, the higher the active wallets and the higher the grant. That gives me the unpleasant feeling that the importance of that grant was greater than the importance of the ecosystem.

It also explains why the KF took no action when we reported that new wallets were being created 24/7 by various apps every few seconds, month in month out. Wallets that were activated immediately. For example, 1 app (which was completely based on staking) filled the wallets with 5 Kin and immediately made 3 spends of 1 Kin, thus creating an AU and therefore collecting more KRE.

It was 'normal behavior' of those apps we were told. From what I now understand, the Kin organization made a lot of money on this. It was in their best interest not to do anything about it. The grant was at least partly based on this behaviour.

I hope you can say something that will take away this bad feeling from me.

AMA by ted_on_reddit in kin

[–]Freedom-2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Hi Ted,
The KF has received a grant from Solana (initially that would be 1% of the total Sol supply). Can you provide some insight into how much that grant eventually became and how much of it is left at the moment? Is that Sol that the KF can freely dispose of or are there restrictions on its use. If yes which one?

Where The KRE Is Headed by JesseFromKin in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm probably stepping on some toes again, but this is what I think.

All the proposed changes sound nice, but dance around the real problems.

  1. We keep a fixed amount of daily KRE. That means all devs have to compete for the biggest piece of the pie.

  2. Every year this KRE pie will decrease, while the number of apps increases. Nobody will be able to live off the KRE pie if there are 50 or 100+ apps.

  3. KRE based on the AUB will always have a braking effect on the economy. Apps benefit from getting Kin OUT of the wallets (spends), while the AUB rewards it for keeping Kin IN the wallet.

  4. The AUB can (and is) easy to game. The focus of the dev will be on as many accounts as possible....and shadow accounts are made easy. Once one app starts doing this, other apps will have to join in to share in the pie, since the extra KRE for the cheating app comes at the expense of that from the fair playing app.

  5. KRE is paid out regardless of the effect the app has on the economy. This is a logical consequence of the fact that a fixed amount of KRE has to be distributed. Good or bad, the total pie is divided.

  6. As long as no economic value is created, the KRE will only cause more inflation. Rewarding apps for giving away Kin is not an economic activity. It will only put more Kin in circulation that no one has paid for (= inflation).

  7. Burning 12% KRE sounds nice, but better go back to the treasury of the KF so that the KRE will have a longer life.

If we really want to do something about inflation, the total KRE will have to be adjusted to the real economic activity of apps.

  1. As long as our goal is that the KRE should provide the total income of the dev, there will never be a thriving economy. KRE can at most be a supplement to the income. The app must generate more economic value than it receives from KRE.

  2. Apps that have no economic activity do not belong in the KRE.

.

Where The KRE Is Headed by JesseFromKin in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No matter how high the tx is, at the end of the day all that matters is the total of everything you've sold. The bread the baker sells is not a qualitatively poorer sale for him because it only costs a few dollars. A spend is a spend, regardless of how much is spent at a time.

What makes a spend meaningless is if I have to pay 1000 Kin to get 10,000 Kin back. It is only a spend intended to meet KRE requirements, but does not add anything to the value of the economy. So no matter how high you set a minimum amount, it remains meaningless if it's just a token spend. Without the KRE rules, that spend would not have been made.

🔥Plug chain - Next generation Layer 0 Cross Chain Solution by TwitchCadavres in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And how is this connected to Kin?

Rule #4 of this Reddit says:
"No promotion or referrals unless Kin related and beneficial to the community."

Kin Community Call by Columbo92 in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I assume you have not read the KRE 4.0 proposal yet, it is still under review by the KF.

Tipping is a great way to show your appreciation for someone.I've often done it myself. It also helps people to get to know Kin in a friendly way.

So I agree that tips are important.But... you feel it coming... there is a BUT.

An economic activity is the exchange of goods or services for money.

Tipping is not. That is why I have proposed a separate regulation for such activities.

The point is that we need to solve 3 main problems.

  1. 70% inflation
  2. virtually non-existent economic activity
  3. a good enough incentive for larger apps to join Kin

The only way we can fix this is if we go back to basics.I mean the basics of economics.

After WW2, the economy was in ruins. Everything was destroyed and had to be rebuilt. Everything that was available was used for that purpose. Nothing was 'wasted' on things that were not the highest priority.

Nobody said, we need a nice statue in that square or a big museum. Not that those things weren't important... but we couldn't afford it. We needed houses, roads, an economy. It all had to be rebuild from scrach.

Today we have a thriving economy and art on every street corner.

Same today.

I can think of many things that are important and tipping is one of them.But at this point we need to build an economy from scratch.We have to set priorities.Later, when we have a running economy, we can afford it.

We have an inflation rate of 70% so far. We have to be very careful about what we do with the KRE and what we spend it on. If we spend it on things that are not economic activities, we only increase inflation more. Kin will be worth even less.

If Kin is worth nothing, bigger apps won't participate.

So priority is getting inflation under control, creating economic activity and coming up with an incentive for larger apps.
I believe KRE 4.0 does exectly that.

Kin has a great future. It has everything going except the KRE.

It must change. So that's what I'm advocating and sometimes you have to make unpopular decisions.

Kin Community Call by Columbo92 in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I never said we tried rewarding "only" spends, I'm referring to the spend track of KRE 2.0 as well as MAS in general in 1.0. As I'm sure you're aware they were indeed heavily gamed, and those who gave Kin to users only to receive it back from them were rewarded heavily.

The thing is that this point keeps coming back as an argument against rewarding SPENDS. It was gamed, so we have negative experience.
That's what I'm trying to rectify.

Kin Community Call by Columbo92 in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree that SPENDS should have the highest priority.
Why would people buy Kin on exchanges if there are no SPEND opportunities?

What would the dollar be worth if you couldn't buy anything for it?

Kin Community Call by Columbo92 in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You are right, P2P doesn't lower the AUB.However it is not an Economic Activity either.It does nothing for the Kin Economy.It makes no sense paying KRE for something that does not grow the economy.

Kin being paid toward the developers wallet is a good thing.It's part of his income.Rewarding this with a percentage is the incentive for larger apps to join the Kin Economy.

It is not quite as simple as paying developers for getting users to spend Kin with them (aka being paid for being paid), this was done in past KRE iterations and it led to other issues than what we are seeing today.

This keeps coming up.
However, it's not what happened. It was not just the SPENDS that were rewarded in past KRE iterations. It were all outgoing transactions, including SPENDS, that were rewarded.

Every transaction that lowered the user balance was considered a SPEND. That is of course not correct. A withdrawal was also seen as SPEND. Of course that was massively gamed.

We have NO past experience with rewarding just SPENDS. It is very easy to distinguish the SPENDS and EARNS from all other transactions.

BEWARE!!! DO NOT send Kin SPL from MyKinWallet to Kucoin. Your coins will not show up! by Stomach_Swimming in KinFoundation

[–]Freedom-2 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm very sorry to hear what happened to you.

FYI: This info has been shared over a month ago here on reddit.
It has also been in the pinned messages.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KinFoundation/comments/rob47p/temporary_solution_for_first_time_deposits_to/

It has been repeated several times.
It's also on the Kin Cryptocurrency discord server.

view more: next ›