reply on: Stacker Saloon \ stacker news

80 sats \ 3 replies \ @jeff 7 Jun \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon

RE: pledge

This has been on the donation-requests pages:

Owner's Pledge If this territory ever runs a cumulative net profit, I'll find a way to do right by the earliest contributors. There is no guarantee of that scenario. Most likely, it'll take the form of "pay-it-forward"-style BTC-adoption/effort/charity.

RE: sequencing

...I'm mulling just trusting you today, giving it to you, on faith/trust, and I pay you after transferring, simply because I don't have time to dig up cold-storage this week.

RE: partnership

This is why I'm slow to respond here. I'm mulling just giving you 51%, you control all decisions. I chime in with my $0.02, you consider it, and then do what you think is best. And I don't complain whatever the outcome. :) ...but, there is also a scenario where if there is more money flowing in, maybe it starts to make sense for me to help build tech-related things, and we start taking things more serious.

The only stipulation I'm mulling attaching to just outright giving you control on faith right now is... some kind of constraint, like, I get veto rights for you to sell/transfer/abandon it -- indefinitely. Basically, I don't want to give it to you, and then you turn around and sell it or flip it somehow, or in the event of abandonment (eg. you disappear for 12 months), I get it back.

81 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 7 Jun

That's what I thought the pledge was. I have no objection to that, whatsoever.

There's no chance that I would sell without consulting you, but I get that you have to take my word for that.

I don't know how we would implement the abandonment stipulation, but I have no objection to it in principle.

69 sats \ 1 reply \ @jeff 8 Jun

Apologies for the slow reply. Both a busy day, and I'm thinking about what's best to do.

I thought of a potential issue with splitting it on the honor system. Fast forward 8 months, you've put in some creativity somehow, or a bunch of work, and I've not contributed. There is imbalance. Resentment grows. Suddenly forwarding revenue gets contentious for some reason. Time is worth something. Even just tracking the split is a PITA.

I think, unless the software properly supports co-owners, might be best to just go all-or-nothing. Maybe. Not sure. Which means I think I'm leaning to just giving you 100%.

But, I think I want to see if my schedule opens up, before I make that final call. It all rides on if I have enough time to build what I want to build.

I think if I still feel like I don't have enough time to do what I want on the tech-tooling side, then you can have it, probably in a few months.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 8 Jun

I recall them talking about adding co-ownership functionality, but I have no idea where that sits on their to-do list.

I'm fine with proceeding along the lines you lay out. If we get a few months down the road and there's no mechanism for co-ownership and you find you don't have the time you'd like to invest in the territory, then I'll happily take over.

From there, once they do implement co-ownership, we can revisit the idea.

FWIW, if we split an outright buy, I think my attitude would be that any effort either of us invests is purely voluntary, since we would both have the option of sitting back and treating the territory as a passive income source. I appreciate the concern, though, about getting into an arrangement like that with someone you only know online.