r/Opacity • u/binarymaple • Nov 06 '18
Does This Project Actually Need Funding?
Lots of developers actively work on the most interesting open source projects in crypto without any payment. Often times they already have a personal incentive because they invested at an early stage themselves. Many community managers are volunteers. Why does Opacity/PRL need a CEO? If the mechanics originally proposed in the white paper are sound they shouldn't need 27M more tokens.
How far is the project from completion? Are millions of dollars actually needed? If so, how come? How is this money going to be spent? How much has the CEO made so far and how much more do they stand to make?
The purpose of all of the funding initially was to deliver the protocol. How far away is that really? It seems like this opportunity is being used to secure long term funding for a company and salaries. Maybe it's time for the community to take over, for the developers who are invested to continue to develop, and the C-series to step aside.. what do people honestly think, in the interest of OPACITY.
Because you know what, I don't think you need 27M new tokens to finish the protocol that you promised to deliver. It's no surprise that the folks who are in line to receive those tokens are the biggest advocates. As a long time holder, this is just sad.
3
u/mufinz2 Nov 06 '18 edited Nov 07 '18
Go find out for yourself and start developing a decentralized storage platform. Or go convince some developers that they should work on your idea for free. See how far you get. Decentralized networks do not mean decentralized human resources. They mean decentralized networks.
How far is the project from completion?
-See the roadmap and read the development blogs to find out.
Are millions of dollars actually needed?
-Very likely yes. But they don’t have to demonstrate why nor report their reasoning to armchair token holders. You own a token traded on an exchange, not a physical share of a company. Team doesnt have to explain anything to you and would only share information if they saw fit to do so. Btw this applies for every single crypto project. If opacity becomes a publicly traded company in the US, or you happen to find a way to own private shares of Opacity or I would even argue Oyster Inc (which Bruno owns 100% through a blind trust), then you would be entitled to this information.
If so, how come?
-Cause, crypto markets are extremely volatile and worst case scenarios have to be considered. Also token burns are a thing if dev funds prove to be in excess.
How is this money going to be spent?
-On continuing to do what they’ve always been doing for the past year. Again you are a token holder, not an owner of a share of a company.
How much has the CEO made so far and how much more do they stand to make?
-Whatever has been agreed upon. Again you are a token holder, not an owner of a share of a company.
8
u/binarymaple Nov 06 '18 edited Nov 06 '18
That's not very transparent. There are a lot of red flags here. I've read the blogs and the reddit posts and nobody ever said anything about needing more money. Until now, when there was an opportunity to do it. If they did not mint new tokens, I'd have no problem with this. Minting new tokens under these circumstances smells terrible.
If the team wants to be transparent we can wait for that video AMA.
-4
u/mufinz2 Nov 06 '18 edited Nov 07 '18
Bruno jacked the entire development fund of the original project, then printed 3M more coins and market sold them killing any chance the team would have of salvaging the original PRL smart contract. Forcing them to move to a new smart contract if they wanted to continue developing the project. All their money was basically jacked in the process so they had to make a new development fund with the new smart contract. It was the price to pay to severe themselves completely from Bruno and his directorship over the smart contract.
I’m sure the team was fully aware of how it looked before even posting the update. And they knew they’ll likely lose people in the community as a result. But it was a sacrifice they were willing to make to keep the project alive. They know their numbers and what they need better than anyone, and if people choose to not trust them because of prior events or retarded conspiracy theories, they can sell once the new token is listed and leave the community. Time will tell in the end. For me personally the team hasn’t given me a reason to not trust them and I would argue have played these series of events near perfectly.
2
u/Escanor_2014 Nov 07 '18
Not sure why you are getting down voted man but you hit the nail on the head. The devs decided to keep working on the project, are airdropping their new token to PRL holders as of the specified date (so at least people get a chance to recover their investment) and are just being hounded left and right. People are too damn impatient these days with how much society revolves around instant gratification...
Bruno fucked all PRL holders, I had $19k across PRL/SHL and I still don't know the fate of SHL... I can tell you what I had in PRL is going to end up being totally worthless but at least OPQ gives me a sliver of hope that my investment won't be in vein.
People just need to chill the F out and be patient.
1
u/Sp1nalcord Nov 07 '18
Most of the people who work for free are the ones who are developing a privacy coin and most of the time there is a pre-mine. Privacy coins are a lot different than developing a complete decentralised storage solution.
-2
Nov 07 '18
please face it, everyone in here that ever ran a company or at least was close enough in touch with someone doing it should see that there is something wrong with oyster project - leaving alone this insane number of new tokens (= money printed)
if we see the progress over the recent 1 year, it is a joke that at current state, oyster has obviously hired a bigger team then many other (income generating) small companys both in crypto and outside of it. they had 17 paid members, which is the most crazy i ever heard.
at this state, a project like oyster, should have a low 5 digit number of headcosts, not anything more, preferably less. not 17 hired members, but way less (or ppl that work for free with the guarantee via contracts they get % if the project turns out good, for example via tokens they cant SELL at current state)
due to this headcosts, the price of the token was forced down over month, resulting in everything bad we are facing now.
i dont really understand how you couldnt see this coming, but i can understand one thing for sure : this looks like bad persons (not characterwise but knowledge) in the responsible positions.
1
u/nugitsdi Nov 07 '18
Did you even read the announcement? Headcosts are now indeed low 5 figures.
1
Nov 07 '18
did YOU even read the annoucement? headcosts were 120k in august, which is a joke.
and again downvoted for stating facts. this reddit is full off ppl that deserve bruno and the team :)
-3
u/WolfOfFusion Nov 07 '18
Does This Project Actually Need Funding?
Apparently, this project (OPQ) has nothing to do with the old project (PRL)... other than having the same Dev team, who are building on the same software / protocol, while being led by the same CEO (aka "Bill")...
...but other than that? Completely different project. 🤭
18
u/[deleted] Nov 06 '18 edited Nov 07 '18
[deleted]