Thanks for sharing a potential competitor! But unless I'm missing something, there is no mention of giving people the ability to launch their own token, let alone one with the properties we are referring to. It's still good to see the progress (or lack of progress) other teams are making with respect to doing what did 2 years ago. Of course, as the original commenter points out, the fact that no one else is building this is obviously not a good reason to do something. This is why this was not even considered when making the decision.
Our goal with SMTs is to fill a niche we know for a fact exists from dealing with entrepreneurs and developers from outside the community who shared why they were refraining from adopting Steem. Most reasonable people would conclude that the fact that the community has bought into the idea so completely supports the claim that it is the right path, though obviously nothing in this world is certain. But interpreting overwhelming support from the community as a bad thing is certainly an interesting approach. If anyone looks back at before SMTs were announced, you'll find hardly any mention of adding a token launching protocol. The fact that so many Steemians are excited about the protocol is clear evidence that it's just a good idea. Everybody loves the Beatles for a reason, some things are just obviously awesome :). Discounting the opinion of the user base, especially in a system that is designed around stake holding, is certainly one way to go, but not an approach we believe to be productive. But by all means, people are free to argue that the stakeholders should not pursue what they believe to be good ideas.
When making the decision to pursue SMTs we made our decision based on what everyone who matters wanted: entrepreneurs, developers, and existing Steem stakeholders (everyone with any amount of Steem Power). We then looked at the landscape and saw that no one else is doing this, and no one else is better suited to do this. So we decided to do it and then the community rallied behind the idea. That sounds like consensus to me.
I think a quote from billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel sums it up nicely: The perfect target market for a start-up is a small group of particular people concentrated together and served by few or no competitors. Once you create and dominate a niche market, then you should gradually expand into related and slightly broader markets.
Peter Thiel just invested in Block.one. No one knows how this all will shakeout. The only thing I now for sure is that users go where they feel the best and where their needs are met. The fact is that 90%+ of users on here feel like beggars. The only app that has made a difference in User happiness is Partiko. They are the ones paying attention to the importance of activity points. I hope SMTs go well but you missed the boat on communities, as profit was prioritized over people. Let’s see what happens in 2019.
But unless I'm missing something, there is no mention of giving people the ability to launch their own token.
There is a reason for that, there is no problem to solve.
Our goal with SMTs is to fill a niche we know for a fact exists from dealing with entrepreneurs and developers from outside the community who shared why they were refraining from adopting Steem.
Who in their right mind would invest in shitcoins SMT's, while STEEM is getting noticed everyday by people walking their dogs in STEEM Park.
And why did they refraining from using STEEM, don't want any associations or too embarrassed?
Because they can't customize STEEM to their business logic. There are two arguments: 1. It's a bad idea, 2. No one else is doing it. 1. Most Steemians agree that it's a good idea, if you don't agree with them, that's cool, it's your opinion. 2. No one has presented any proof anyone else is doing it.
Thanks for the reply.
I wouldn't say that it's a bad idea, more like that this feature shouldn't have top priority over other 2016 roadmap features such as Communities, I'll even say that implementing 2f authentication for security reasons should be more important along with proper marketing as @ats-david stated numerous times.
Thanks for sharing a potential competitor! But unless I'm missing something, there is no mention of giving people the ability to launch their own token, let alone one with the properties we are referring to. It's still good to see the progress (or lack of progress) other teams are making with respect to doing what did 2 years ago. Of course, as the original commenter points out, the fact that no one else is building this is obviously not a good reason to do something. This is why this was not even considered when making the decision.
Our goal with SMTs is to fill a niche we know for a fact exists from dealing with entrepreneurs and developers from outside the community who shared why they were refraining from adopting Steem. Most reasonable people would conclude that the fact that the community has bought into the idea so completely supports the claim that it is the right path, though obviously nothing in this world is certain. But interpreting overwhelming support from the community as a bad thing is certainly an interesting approach. If anyone looks back at before SMTs were announced, you'll find hardly any mention of adding a token launching protocol. The fact that so many Steemians are excited about the protocol is clear evidence that it's just a good idea. Everybody loves the Beatles for a reason, some things are just obviously awesome :). Discounting the opinion of the user base, especially in a system that is designed around stake holding, is certainly one way to go, but not an approach we believe to be productive. But by all means, people are free to argue that the stakeholders should not pursue what they believe to be good ideas.
When making the decision to pursue SMTs we made our decision based on what everyone who matters wanted: entrepreneurs, developers, and existing Steem stakeholders (everyone with any amount of Steem Power). We then looked at the landscape and saw that no one else is doing this, and no one else is better suited to do this. So we decided to do it and then the community rallied behind the idea. That sounds like consensus to me.
I think a quote from billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel sums it up nicely: The perfect target market for a start-up is a small group of particular people concentrated together and served by few or no competitors. Once you create and dominate a niche market, then you should gradually expand into related and slightly broader markets.
Peter Thiel just invested in Block.one. No one knows how this all will shakeout. The only thing I now for sure is that users go where they feel the best and where their needs are met. The fact is that 90%+ of users on here feel like beggars. The only app that has made a difference in User happiness is Partiko. They are the ones paying attention to the importance of activity points. I hope SMTs go well but you missed the boat on communities, as profit was prioritized over people. Let’s see what happens in 2019.
Posted using Partiko iOS
There is a reason for that, there is no problem to solve.
Who in their right mind would invest in
shitcoinsSMT's, while STEEM is getting noticed everyday by people walking their dogs in STEEM Park.And why did they refraining from using STEEM, don't want any associations or too embarrassed?
Because they can't customize STEEM to their business logic. There are two arguments: 1. It's a bad idea, 2. No one else is doing it. 1. Most Steemians agree that it's a good idea, if you don't agree with them, that's cool, it's your opinion. 2. No one has presented any proof anyone else is doing it.
Thanks for the reply.
I wouldn't say that it's a bad idea, more like that this feature shouldn't have top priority over other 2016 roadmap features such as Communities, I'll even say that implementing 2f authentication for security reasons should be more important along with proper marketing as @ats-david stated numerous times.
Posted using Partiko Android
Thanks for sharing your opinion. Hivemind (communities) is being developed in parallel to SMTs. They are equally high priorities.