There will definitely be plenty of notice! I think a week or two notice should be okay for everyone before we launch the crowdfund. Exciting stuff!

I like every aspect of this coin!
I consider giving 1000$ in BTC once the kickstarter campaign begins

In an ideal world, perhaps the world we're building, funding ideas through cryptocurrency is a huge step forward. Unfortunately, we're not there yet. There are a number of things to consider at present. Firstly, as much as banks can cause people headaches, in most cases money in an account is insured against theft. It'd be great if we could have something similar for a cryptocurrency as well one day. Secondly, we want to do this as professionally and transparently as we can with the medium available to us. The fact of the matter is that most individual developers or teams of developers would enter into a contractual agreement with us for the development of Netcoin, or a component of it. That means paperwork, invoices, documented transactions, etc. That could happen with cryptocurrency as well, but in all likelihood any breach of our agreement wouldn't be as enforceable as it would be in traditional systems.

I know it's not ideal, but I'm thinking of the best ways to my knowledge that we can do this as smoothly as possible. There are no guarantees whatsoever with this, which is why I want to stress that if you can't afford losing what you put toward the fund, please don't do it! It would be horrible to know that if something goes wrong someone suffered because of it. Having said that, tacotime, xwebnetwork, and myself are all putting in money of our own as well. Hopefully the advance notice will help you with this. I think one day this will all be very different and we can incubate ideas through new platforms for sure.

Most crowdfunding platforms allow whatever fiat currency you use to convert to USD. The reasoning for why we need to do this at present is outlined in post #902. I do foresee that this will change one day, but right now we don't have cryptocurrency platforms to do so, as we need to bridge the space between funding to development. It may be an extra step for a few people, which sucks, but in the bigger picture it's no big deal.

Actually treating and following this subject in the btc community forum and keeping people attended and informed about this new cryptocurrency  that is coming to change their experience of using previous ones, but then limiting the already established fan club by a fiat payment only, not only sucks but hurts and disappoints as well    
That is true, things are not ideal, but I think creating a btc exchange account (in Bitstamp, MtGox..) and letting the btc users to pay and buy limited number of tickets through it, based on the current exchange rate of usd/btc at the moment of payment, wouldn't hurt anybody. This can at least be done for small investment/purchase of the tickets (<1 btc~=$100 for example).
The final amount received in that account (after reaching a cap perhaps), which will be in $, can be easily transferred by the use of wire system to any bank in US and Europe in not more than a week (you can include and charge the transfer and other fees this method may cause, to the investor's payment bill)
It will be wise to let 30% or even a bit more share of tickets to be sold this way (and you may put a limit for each purchase, by using btctalk id, to avoid rush or unfair distribution). Your currency will certainly have a brighter future if you let more people in to have a piece of the pie (even a very small one).

That you take only the part of my post which mentioned btctalk id (just proposed it for limiting the purchase per each buyer, but that can be ignored easily) and not the proposed way of buying in with btc, is interesting and really btctalk typical  
One may desire to buy-in early not only to have a part of potential profit but also to support its favorite project. And after all, don't you think paying directly in fiat will more disturb the privacy and provide identity disclosure than paying by btctalk id and a btc wallet?!  

I'm not too happy about the USD payment requirement. I understand why it would exist (for accounting and because it minimizes risk on the developers), but I also understand it merely shifts some risks from the developers onto the investors. Developers must have identities in order to get paid and to make the process transparent (for defense against scams, fraud, theft). Pseudo-anonymous development would be fine if you do it for free but when money is involved then there is currently no effective infrastructure in place to allow independent contractors to get paid in Bitcoin (developers in this context would be considered independent contractors).

When we make payment to kickstarter we are not going to be anonymous and that means somewhere a paper trail will exist on all who supported Netcoin development. That introduces a privacy risk to all who pay in USD, but if you do believe Netcoin is a good idea and you do support the idea then in my opinion you should pay. If you want some privacy you can pay in a friends name. The other problem is what you mentioned in that it would mostly be Americans who have USD so the early distribution might not be as good as it could be with Bitcoin.

I hope there is a way to let people pay with Bitcoin, have it exchanged into USD and then pay the developers. I think that would be the ideal way but I do understand it would be difficult.

Very interesting.  Kickstarter does have some benefits that people know what it is and I do believe the Kickstarter launch will meet the funding amount provided there is a marketing campaign behind it.

If it only takes the money once the goal is met then when exactly would developers get the money? Seems abstract.

It's an all or nothing funding approach, which is why i like it because there's less risk for everyone. I believe that they will recieve the money at the end of the fundraising date that the developers have set up only if they have met their goal

There's also a legal basis that ensures that the project starter will fulfill the ends of the project.

It's my belief that I think centralizing of the funding platform is best. I've had several projects funded and it went smoothly without any hassle at all. With Kickstarter, you have the option to close the campaign the moment that it funds. This will preserve the amount of set awards that we have.

It's hard to predict how much of the population will have Bitcoin and they may have other cryptocurrencies as well. (what's the demand like...etc) It may sound easy on paper to coordinate these two different payment methods, but I suspect it may be a tad more difficult than it appears and would require some work, that will be taken away from developing Netcoin. One issue would be the timing of the payments and you could have to cross verify the first $50k...etc and you may have to refund payments through the exchange (not sure if conversion rates would be charged for this) I don't think you can limit the amount of payments with the exchange account (if this exceeds the 30% you proposed) and if the funding happens quite quickly, then the administrator would have to verify the transactions, see who paid what and then send the payments back accordingly (there can be lots of room for error, furthermore there may be additional fees for reversal of payment, no refunds for Bitcoin...) Sounds like a mess waiting to happen

But honestly though, Kickstarter isn't broke and it's very optimized. Over $500 million projects have been already funded...and they process the payments through Amazon Payments, which allows you to fund in a variety of ways. Just stick with what they proposed and lets get this project finally started. It's really no big deal.

However, the main reason why I think it has to be done in traditional systems is that the work is being delegated to developers or teams of developers and currently these agreements are best enforceable with traditional systems. We need the transparency, paperwork and invoices, so that there is accountability.

Kickstarter also provides us with that additional legal obligation.