Correct! Even tho I see FibreLite as the best solution, this is the communities decision and is not mine to make. I'm holding Fibre like the rest of you, I would never jeopardize my investment.

Things are going really well and we have seen massive growth over the last two months. I do not want this too slow down!

Regards
Killa

A psychic once tole me I was psychic.

Personally, I don’t really like the idea of Fibrelight, giving the trend of Lites following the heavies. I think it’s a rip-off and its success is not dependent on the developers but the market. In this case, it might actually be success. Or not.  But, for the sake of debating, here is my bluster:

1.   Fibre should be different from FibreLight, not only in scarcity. Think of a way for it to be always better. Your silver vs gold methaphor is not the best in this case, scarcity between these two metals is not the only thing that dictates the gap in price. Here are a few questions that need to be answered by the developers:

A.   How will you link the two coins?
B.   Why should I choose FibreLight instead of Fibre? Why should I choose Fibre instead of Light? These two coins should be clearly marketed at two different set of people and needs. Who are they? How will you market to those people?


Let’s presume for a second that crypto is the future of money and that who gets ahead at this genesis will have a future currency that societies will use afterwards. People compare crypto with the dawn of the internet, and then, me, an already paranoid investor in property, in fiat, in gold, in silver, in gems and now in crypto, I start questioning your motives for trying to release a second hand currency without backing it up firstly in the original currency. The Fibre name, logo and creators are not enough of a guarantee for me in this unregulated market to be proof of something to be gained. I don’t trust boards, governments, corporations and neither should you. I trust my family and I trust innovation. Fibre has proven itself so far to provide innovation. Is it ready to create a family? Are the developers unscrupulous BTC hungry opportunists? Or are they regular people as you and I that genuinely believe they can be part of something great? It yet has to be seen, tested and proven.



2.   If FibreLight should ever be conceived, it should be at most 10% ICO (9.000.000 coins) and the rest of 81.000.000 coins distributed procentual amongst the Fibre wallet staking addresses at the FibreLight launch T-0.00 moment. The holders of Fibre should get around 90% of the Fibrelight supply, meaning 124.6 Fibrelight/1 Fibre owned. FibreLight ICO should start at 0.00001.

If all the above questions are answered correctly and the correct conditions are met*, I will personally buy 30 BTC worth of the FibreLight ICO. This is my pledge!  

*Revisions pending by the Fibre community.

Good to know on the forward growth possibility of the existing code base without a fork, but what is this number we are talking about in this large investment? Also, what is the cost to get this into that cloud-base for doing all these great things --this was what caught my eye early. I know you guys can pull this off and provide the road maps and produce results, so honestly I am trolling for the CAPX and OE nothing else.

On the ROI front, these are multiple thoughts. I know dividends would work the same way as earnings on shares but in this case coins, the system would pay out a percentage every so often and your cut would be in relation to your holdings and the value and market cap of FIBRELITE to ensure the FIBRE community continues to stand behind baby brother FIBRELITE. That is a pretty simple and straight forward solution to maintaining coin holder value with a new coin and would need to be programmed into the wallet or the operators would be charged with doing all this wallet and fund management from outside the wallet with transparent accountability.

However, that is not the primary suggestion I wanted to present to solve both issues, funding and fear.

I envision an inner-wallet exchange (simple two coin trader) from FIBRE to FIBRELITE that could work both ways. Coin shifted from FIBRE to FLITE would have a prescribed coin ratio exchange value and vice-versa. You could also get more elaborate and base the ratio on current market condition of both coins (cap, value, outstandings). You would then basically be using both blockchains of both coins to trade off each other and as a result, generate volume while drawing in new capital from those folks wanting to get in at a lower cost basis with FIBRELITE. In order to create continued funding for coin dev, a portion of each FIBRELITE traded would go into a FIBREFUND wallet that would enjoy all the aspects of a FIBRE coin holder and thus going full circle back to FIBRE and dividends and the ultimate goal of generating new dev revenue and disturbing original stake holders but adding additional value there as well.

These are just additional ideas to keep us rolling along in trying to get everyone's vision in the mix and making this coin a leader in the industry. I hope some of this can be tweaked out to compromise the visions because unlike some coins, this appears to be the place where things get done.

Just saw the post from belibeli and there are some good thoughts there that could be blended.


wnw

You keep changing the polling questions after we vote!

I don't think it's going to be this black-n-white, but Option B is my vote at this time, using the definition prior to existing, before the last change.

Option A

Why?

I don't understand Option B .. but how many coins does a current investor in Fibrecoin gets?  Only the amount of today or an amount + X % of the supply added?

Yin/Yang tried to switch to Harmony - it was a disaster.  But those guys weren't nearly as developed or communicative as the Fibre devs.  So while I see the similarity, I don't think that the instance is analogous.  Still worthy of note though...

You can spoof IP's for the vote, thus I don't trust the poll.