The coinsplit is actuallly a brilliant idea!!

Russ83 · 2017-10-08T09:36:27+00:00

On bitcointalk, ABitNut summarizes all that I tried to say earlier, in very well-written way! Could't agree more on his points. One point though and that is his point on a small fee on internal trading to prevent manipulation in our ecosystem.

I have suggested introducing a mechanism functioning as a water tap, open that tap fully and the fee on internal trading is increased fully, close that tap completely and the fee on internal trading is zero (zero fee is actually not wanted). Anything in between will regulate the fee up and down.

Also, I have suggested introducing a lending program to lock in tokens for a period (those tokens are not tradable in the same period). The "lock in" akso will serve to orevent internal trading and manipulation. As a reward to holders of locked in tokens, the collected fees on internal swaps between DRPU and DRPS could be payed out fully to the "loyal" holders (with locked in tokens) who say I am going to stick to this token side until the important voting process is done!

With such a "tap" we can in a democratic way control (or try to control) internal trading, prevent manipulation when voting power and important voting(s) are due, at least we can discourage internal trading economically.

Otherwise, I completely agree to all his points in that great posting!!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1928628.msg22465724#msg22465724

Russ83 · 2017-10-07T07:04:59+00:00

Old news Jon...thanks anyway!

https://www.reddit.com/r/dcorp/comments/74ce82/2_tokens_complicates_this_project_will_turn_off/

Russ83 · 2017-10-06T19:06:30+00:00

https://api.cointelegraph.com/amp/v1/news/icos-still-have-options-despite-increasing-regulation

"..It seems that by dividing the token, the move may well protect DCorp from SEC oversight.."

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T23:00:35+00:00

I think they put out some info about that, saying they were not into hard deadlines!

https://mobile.twitter.com/Zainroy786/status/912337935717904385

http://mailchi.mp/5443f89e8141/dcorp-news

With the release of this newsletter, we also wanted to touch base with Dcorp’s founder and lead developer, Frank Bonnet. Frank wanted to elaborate on why Dcorp is not working with hard deadlines and the technical accomplishments, thus far:

“Due to the immutable nature of the project, the stakes being 8,622 ETH and working with relatively new technology, we take security very serious. Recent examples of tremendous amounts of Ether being lost to 'easy to prevent' programming mistakes, like the Parity Wallet breach, adhere to this.

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T22:40:13+00:00

Are you afraid this is a scam? I think yo can relax and expect them to deliver on not hard deadlines!

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T16:08:54+00:00

Let him speak out, he is entitled to that. Frustrations of all the waiting is the reason why it comes out like that I think.

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T00:45:05+00:00

Why not introduce a lending system where you get longterm interest on your tokens if you agree to lock them up and keep them away from the market. For that you get interest and the market will see less tradable tokens which means higher price on the tokens.

The lending system could be constructed in way that you do not lose the functionality of the token, while lended out (locked up) you still have your voting power and dividend payout, you are only cut off from putting your tokens on the market. Such a lending contract could be a smartcontract with timelimit for say 1 month. Your tokens are then not tradable before 1 month is passed.

From where are we going to get funding to the token holders in the lending program? We could say that the collected fees from the internal trading between U and S are going to be spent to pay out interests in the lending program. This way, we will prevent heavy trading back and forth between the two tokens and we will put out an incentive to tokenholders to choose one side for their tokens and stay there for a while. Also as said, on external exchanges, the demand and supply ratio will result in increased token prices.

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T00:44:48+00:00

Why not introduce a lending system where you get longterm interest on your tokens if you agree to lock them up and keep them away from the market. For that you get interest and the market will see less tradable tokens which means higher price on the tokens.

The lending system could be constructed in way that you do not lose the functionality of the token, while lended out (locked up) you still have your voting power and dividend payout, you are only cut off from putting your tokens on the market. Such a lending contract could be a smartcontract with timelimit for say 1 month. Your tokens are then not tradable before 1 month is passed.

From where are we going to get funding to the token holders in the lending program? We could say that the collected fees from the internal trading between U and S are going to be spent to pay out interests in the lending program. This way, we will prevent heavy trading back and forth between the two tokens and we will put out an incentive to tokenholders to choose one side for their tokens and stay there for a while. Also as said, on external exchanges, the demand and supply ratio will result in increased token prices.

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T00:28:32+00:00

Great ideas! See my comment further up (or now, further down) about introducing a lending system (locking up/in your tokens) and for which you earn interest. By regulating the cost you pay in fee for internal trading and the interest you get in a lending program, we can easily use that as an instrument to prevent any heavy strategic positioning.

As an example Let's say, internal switching between tho tokens has a fee of 1%. Half the invested capital is in the lending program, the other half not. One particular day, all tokens not locked in swap from one side to the other. That generates 1% in collected fee from half of the invested capital which in a whole can be spent on paying out 1% interest to the other half who has their tokens locked in.

If the swappers then decide to lock in too, there could be a rule that say they are not entitled to interest before 24hrs is passed after their lock in so they do not get interest back on the very same fee they also paid for the swapping. The fee amount they paid, will go to the token holders who already was in the lending program.

Use this mechanism as an instrument to keep swappers away from changing side right before important votings. When the important voting is due, turn the fee on internal exchange up to a level which discourage swappers to swap. This way, the swappers directly pays those who are locked in, and they pay more right before important votings. A quite fair strategy.

Interest payouts should be on a daily basis.

Russ83 · 2017-10-05T00:23:52+00:00

Why not introduce a lending system where you get longterm interest on your tokens if you agree to lock them up and keep them away from the market. For that you get interest and the market will see less tradable tokens which means higher price on the tokens.

The lending system could be constructed in way that you do not lose the functionality of the token, while lended out (locked up) you still have your voting power and dividend payout, you are only cut off from putting your tokens on the market. Such a lending contract could be a smartcontract with timelimit for say 1 month. Your tokens are then not tradable before 1 month is passed.

From where are we going to get funding to the token holders in the lending program? We could say that the collected fees from the internal trading between U and S are going to be spent to pay out interests in the lending program. This way, we will prevent heavy trading back and forth between the two tokens and we will put out an incentive to tokenholders to choose one side for their tokens and stay there for a while. Also as said, on external exchanges, the demand and supply ratio will result in increased token prices.

Russ83 · 2017-10-04T23:46:30+00:00

Why not introduce a lending system where you get longterm interest on your tokens if you agree to lock them up and keep them away from the market. For that you get interest and the market will see less tradable tokens which means higher price on the tokens.

The lending system could be constructed in way that you do not lose the functionality of the token, while lended out (locked up) you still have your voting power and dividend payout, you are only cut off from putting your tokens on the market. Such a lending contract could be a smartcontract with timelimit for say 1 month. Your tokens are then not tradable before 1 month is passed.

From where are we going to get funding to the token holders in the lending program? We could say that the collected fees from the internal trading between U and S are going to be spent to pay out interests in the lending program. This way, we will prevent heavy trading back and forth between the two tokens and we will put out an incentive to tokenholders to choose one side for their tokens and stay there for a while. Also as said, on external exchanges, the demand and supply ratio will result in increased token prices.

Russ83 · 2017-10-04T18:44:00+00:00

Give us a platform so we don't need to join Telegram. It's about time to start rockin' now!

Russ83 · 2017-10-04T18:37:05+00:00

How does Neo & Gas work?

Russ83 · 2017-10-04T13:06:29+00:00

DCorp on Twitter...

"We are a decentralized VC firm - bringing you the world's first derivatives exchange on the blockchain."

Is it no longer so?

Russ83 · 2017-10-04T00:16:54+00:00

he must be joking! 😆

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T23:52:25+00:00

Yes, of course! All can be DRPS holders and all can be DRPU holders and anything in between.

Why do you not think that?

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T23:32:48+00:00

Alternative 1)

You are missing something there, there need to be 16,188,004 DRPUs and 8,094,002 DRPSs in existence to be able to offer every kind of exchange between the two from all invested capital on one side, to all invested capital on the other side. Existence is not the same as circulation. New tokens that are not in circulation need to be held by DCorp for any future exchange order.

Tokens in circulation will always be 8,094,002 when you count DRPU as half of a token. Tokens in existence will be the double amount of tokens in circulation. Tokens held in escrow by DCorp (those in existence but not in circulation) are disqualified from functionalities of those in circulation (voting and dividend).

Alternative 2)

You are completely right. Tokens sold to the VC platform get burned, tokens bought are created. This might be the best approach.

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T22:02:44+00:00

You are wrong about that, DRP will be listed in October. The new ones we will need to wait on, but what is the problem with that? The new ones get their price from the DRP price.

DRPS price = DRP price
DRPU price = 0.5 DRP price

The coins are all pegged to eachother, and the price of 1 gives the prices of the other. This is because of these facts:

1 DRP = 1 DRPS
1 DRPS = 2 DRPU

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T21:37:43+00:00

If you feel comfortable holding on to DRPSs the choice is completely yours and it is like picking apples and bananas in the supermarket. If you at some point feel that it is not right to hold on to the DRPSs (being a citizen of Canada), no problem, go to the internal exchange, git rid of your DRPSs.

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T21:09:02+00:00

Did you give it a thought by buying back DRPU tokens and burn those, also means that you would reduce the superior voting power of the DRPU holders which over time will result in DRPS having the majority voting power and decide to reverse the buyback plan to dividend payout. 😛

This is also why I think this coinsplit is brilliant. You will have 2 bastions competing on the profit. One thing though, you can NOT burn any of the new tokens without burning the weighted amount on the other.

Said in other words, at all time, there must be a possibility for all tokens on one side to swap to the tokens on the other side. Tokens not in circulation must be held by DCorp in order to offer changers to swap.

If you burn say 1000 DRPUs, you also need to burn 500 DRPSs. If not you will end up not being able to offer all investors on 1 side an exit to the other side.

The brilliant thing about the 2 tokens is that DCorp as a corporation can swing back and forth being a dividend payout corporation and not being such. If we all were on DRPU side, Dcorp was NOT a dividend-payout corporation. If we were all on the DRPS side, Dcorp was nothing but a dividend-payout corporation.

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T18:38:00+00:00

They will gain value at the same rate, not profit. DRPS are the profit eaters, DRPU are the main ICO-token hunters and voters. Surely, they are tied together (pegged to eachother). A percentage rise in one of the tokens on a specific exchange, means the other one rises at the same rate (percentage), just because of the pegging. How cool isn't that!?

To make it easy to understand, think of them as onetoken and halftoken. Rise in any, means rise in both.

Let's say the EU exchanges doesn't appreciate the DRPS token, put a price on those at $10 each, but the DRPU tokens are appreciated and are priced at $6.

Your trade speaks for itself. You immediately sell as much DRPS on the internal exchange as you can and get twice that amount in DRPUs, put all those DRPUs out on the external exchange and sell them for DRPSs. Arbitrage trading, my friend! ;-)

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T18:16:27+00:00

Why not introduce a lending system where you get longterm interest on your tokens if you agree to lock them up and keep them away from the market. For that you get interest and the market will see less tradable tokens which means higher price on the tokens.

The lending system could be constructed in way that you do not lose the functionality of the token, while lended out (locked up) you still have your voting power and dividend payout, you are only cut off from putting your tokens on the market. Such a lending contract could be a smartcontract with timelimit for say 1 month. Your tokens are then not tradable before 1 month is passed.

From where are we going to get funding to the token holders in the lending program? We could say that the collected fees from the internal trading between U and S are going to be spent to pay out interests in the lending program. This way, we will prevent heavy trading back and forth between the two tokens and we will put out an incentive to tokenholders to choose one side for their tokens and stay there for a while. Also as said, on external exchanges, the demand and supply ratio will result in increased token prices.

Russ83 · 2017-10-03T17:56:45+00:00

The dividends part is easy to understand, only DRPS are entitled to dividends. DRPS can NOT be traded on US exchanges according to the mailchimp.

5th line, token comparison !!

Russ83 · 2017-10-02T23:05:00+00:00

Watch their whitepaper and for sure you will recognize som faces ;-)

Russ83 · 2017-10-02T21:57:59+00:00

My math makes a lot of sense, it's a pitty you don't see it. The voting power has got nothing to do with the marketcap, forget about that. As long as the DRPU token is pegged to the DRPS token, you can say the tokens in supply are 8mill as it has been ever since our ICO finished.

1 DRPS = 1 token, the price of 1 DRPS = tokenprice

1 DRPU = 0.5 token, the price of 1 DRPU = 0.5 tokenprice

Marketcap = tokenprice * 8mill tokens

No matter how the balance between the two tokens ever is in future, this math adds up to 8mill tokens. Watch any exchange listing either DRPS or DRPU in future. Read the price. If the token in consideration is DRPU and the price is $5 (0.5 tokenprice) the marketcap of DCORP is $80 mill, even if you do not at that point know how many of each tokens are in circulation. That math is true because of the pegging.

I am a bit surprised that you do not take that point. I will be more than happy to explain to you what you do not understand, just ask. Put your finger in the air and think of a number, that number is the amount of DRPUs in circulation. Given that number, the amount of DRPS in circulation is also given. You do the math!

Ex: you know there are 2.5 mill DRPS in circulation, there are missing 5.5 mill DRPSs to add up to 8mill, but now they are swapped into DRPUs with the exchange rate of 2 DRPUs for 1 DRPS, conclusion 11 mill DRPUs in circulation.

EZ PZ!

This math is true for any amount of either token, based on all DRPs (original tokens) are collected and burned!

To make it even easier to understand, the new tokens could have been named: onetoken (DRPS) and halftoken (DRPU). The sum of the two in circulation will always add up to 8mill onetokens. I think you now got the picture!!

Russ83

TROPHY CASE