Well, I think the price is falling, because…

1.: …at the moment, it is an overall difficult market.
2.: …the team is not focussing on marketing (which is ok).
3.: …the product is hard to explain to retail investors.
4.: …with GEN being traded on smallish exchanges, bigger investors are probably not interested yet.

DAOstack is not the first project that aims to provide DAO functionality to end users (you can recall Aragon). However, the developers, I hope, took into account the experience of their predecessors.

What exactly do you mean by "supporting the community"? First of all, who is the "community"? Token holders? This would be an extremely diverse group, consisting everything from a short-term spaculator to a hardcore believer.

And then, what do you mean by "supporting"? Could be anything from actively engaging with them regarding questions and updates to helping them pump the token or whatever.

I'm in favour of an open and communicative team, but be aware that there isn't so much to communicate about. Unless you have a working product, actively advertising the service will do more harm than good. Here is something everybody who does advertising knows and everbody who wants to advertise something needs to know:

You only have one shot.
If a potential client clicks on an ad and comes to a "still working on it, come back later, subscribe for out newsletter" page instead of a product they can instantly use, they will never come back to it, because in their mind, it is tagged as "unfinished, not working" and it is extremely hard to change this perception.

With that in mind, you can't expect the team to run around telling everybody how great their product is going to be. I mean, there's nothing wrong with creating buzz and getting people interested, but you have to be somewhat careful about what kind of people we are talking about. Potential users of your service are definitely not the right kind for now.

Things are not that easy.

First of all, asking for a listing fee is somewhat unethical in my book and sends an overall wrong signal. It drives truly community driven projects out of the public eye and focusses on projects with centralized development. But this might be getting to deep here.

However, I got the feeling that DAOstck bigger problem might be the question if the token might be a security. This is extremely difficult regulatory territory, and the fact that DAOstack even refers to "DAO", keeping in mind that the original DAO token was deemed a security, doesn't make this any easier.

In other news, I find trading via IDEX actually pretty easy and stress free. No sign-up, no KYC, built-in hardware wallet security… weren't we all screaming for working decentralized exchanges for the last year and a half? Well, here they are, yet we still need Binance (or whatever the "hot exchange to be at" is) to pump our bags. How was that part about self souvereignity again? Yeah…

 I'm curious to know in less than 10 days 20% bonus will unlock of pre sale and then after a month the big 30% private sale tokens bonuses of 30% will unlock so how the planning to handle that. the curculating supply will increase in big numbers and how the team will make sure the liquidity?

It is not a problem if the token is not listed yet in major exchanges. Let the dev team finish the development stage, and try to simplify the technology for the mass adoption. Once these two steps are completed, no doubt you will see greater things.

Yeah, when I put my trading goggles on, I totally agree. Having a BTC trading pair on a somewhat decent exchange would be definitely a big step forward. As big as ETH is, the big daddy of crypto is still Bitcoin.

Yet, I can totally understand if the team is not willing to throw millions of $$$ down Binance's throats to make us happy. I am not an ICO participant, so my position is a different one, though.

Regarding the security aspect, I am really not sure. I don't know the international laws regarding securities, but it will definitely hurt the short term price development, and be it only because the US (we are most likely speaking about US security law here) is a big market.
And while the days of the wild west may not be over yet, there's a decent chance that they will be in the next few years. Keeping that in mind, having a big position in a token which is more of a long term play than short term, doesn't really make sense.

In this interview for Epicenter, Matan talks about the differences between Backfeed and DAOstack, DAOs and the future of organizations, Genesis DAO, Alchemy, Holographic Consensus, Futarchy, Sidechains, Project Development, and more

https://forum.daostack.io/t/interview-5-31-2018-epicenter-with-matan-field/219

Daostack offers a wonderful and very thoughtful solution that can have a big impact on solving extremely important problems by using collective intelligence.
The project has a very well-organized ecosystem that is able to ensure the fairness, efficiency and transparency of all internal processes.

Don't know what about binance, it is not simple and very expensive (around 1.5-5 million dollars in tokens), in case of quarkchain, due to it's price to the moment of listing it was around 20 million dollars on QKC ...)) But CZ always says that if the team is good and doing their best with their project, then they can list them for free, and it is good policy, i respect him for that.

And yes i'm not an ICO investor too but to this moment i have a big position in GEN (as for my pocket) and of course i will be happy to see it on binance too, payed or not, it doesn't matter for me and other investors  And in any case it is my medium or even long-term investment and if the price fall further, i will close my eyes and buy more  I don't know why, but i have a good feeling about DAOstack, really hope that i'm not mistaken.