@rnglab you were flagged by a worthless gang of trolls, so, I gave you an upvote to counteract it!  Enjoy!!

Thanks for posting this here too @rnglab !

Feedback is welcomed!. Any ideas on how to make the initial user experience something friendly?

Congratulations @rnglab! You received a personal award!

<table><tr><td>https://steemitimages.com/70x70/http://steemitboard.com/@rnglab/birthday3.png</td><td>Happy Birthday! - You are on the Steem blockchain for 3 years!</td></tr></table>

<sub>_You can view [your badges on your Steem Board](https://steemitboard.com/@rnglab) and compare to others on the [Steem Ranking](http://steemitboard.com/ranking/index.php?name=rnglab)_</sub>


###### [Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness](https://v2.steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=steemitboard&approve=1) to get one more award and increased upvotes!

+5%!

> ## Why not a BitAsset?

I think, we should clearify the terms a little. Technically, you are going to create a **market-pegged asset**.
These are usually also called smartcoins. Some even call them bitassets which is totally fine if you asked me.
The other distinction is between

* committee-owned assets (let's call them bitassets) and
* user-owned market-pegged assets, also denoted as *privatized* market-pegged assets.


> ## Why not a Privatized Smartcoin?
> **Because it's not intended for specific private revenue. We want it to be decentralized, a tool to build bridges. A common good.**

A Privatized Smartcoin can be decentralized as well if it has a multisignature issuer. That would be the same thing as
with committee-owned smartcoins. The committee-account is nothing more than a multsig account.
What is more important is that the price feeds are *distributed* among many people to not give a single individuum the
power over settlement price.


> ## We found just good reasons to create this Worker proposal:

Great stuff! Still, I would have loved to see a multisig account own the worker, but it's too late for that now.

Anyway, you have my support!