BBP no longer offered as payment method for support charities (CameroonONE, Kairos)

BBP payment method removed

On the latest revision to the Proof of Orphan Mining (POOM) payment methods for sponsored child wiki entry, BBP has a payment method was removed.

Why not offer BBP as payment method?

Why would a cryptocurrency not offer BiblePay (BBP) as a payment method? After all, wouldn’t you want encourage use of BiblePay (BBP)?

Yes, you want transactions occurring on the block chain between peer to peer, but you do not imbalanced trading on an exchange, especially where a charity may sell BBP each month bringing down the exchange price, while the buy trades do not offset the sell pressure.

At current prices of 1 satoshi, there seems to be enough interest from buyers to purchase BBP at a discount. Even after CameroonONE’s sell of 42M BBP from 1.1 satoshi to 0.2 satoshi, it quickly picked back up to 1.1 satoshi again. Obviously, there is a lot of buy interest at 0.2 satoshi! Many of us purchased at far higher prices, so I am sure there are mixed emotions about this situation. Safe to say, everyone involved is sensitive about price — although many of us lose focus on BiblePay is able to help many orphans via sponsorship and have donated over $200k USD since its inception.

According to SouthXchange Trade API, 42M BBP was sold on Jan 1, 2020. Just tracking how much Rob donated to CameroonONE (72M – 29M = 43M BBP)1 recently,


I sold most of my BBP to pay for sponsorships via BBP

I wrote:

With a heavy heart, I must ask how does one go about reducing/removing POOM sponsorship as I have no funds to continue past Jan 2020? Due to the price of BBP being at 1 sat, it currently costs 314k BBP for $25 Kairos, and 502k BBP for $40 CameroonONE. I paid for 10 Kairos children up to Jan 2020, but could not meet all my obligations for CameroonONE. I spent most of the BBP I accumulated since I started with BiblePay to sponsor the orphans. Let’s pray that God’s will be done and that the children continue to be supported in some way. You already have a heavy load running BiblePay and sponsoring many children with your big heart, I don’t think anyone expects you to sponsor additional children. Hopefully, more sponsors can step in. I’m sad at the situation that I can not serve the current orphans, but do not regret using the BBP to benefit the orphans.

Rob replied:

1) It’s OK –  I don’t think anyone is going to have hard feelings over it.
2) Regarding 1 satoshi, I felt the pinch myself and spent 10% of my biblepay this morning just paying for the children, and I bought the biblepay at a considerably higher price.
3) Do realize that paying via BBP for POOM was only for convenience sake.  Realize that the process of sponsoring a child was technically supposed to be more like this:  I can afford to sponsor the child and intend to pay with Fiat (paypal, credit card, etc), and with BBP down turns we normally would have expected you to pay this month in credit card and keep the child.  The poom sponsorships are for people who want to sponsor long term children and ‘in parallel recoup’ mining rewards in bbp.  Like I said there is no hard feelings and I think they will understand at cameroon-one when we cancel children.
4) I personally do intend to pay via credit card in a couple months if BBP is still down.
5) Let me look into a POOM cancellation process, if we have one.  If we don’t have one, we will make one.

6) Btw, Todd checked into the 30 million bbp balance and explained that the lingering balance you see is the SX trading balance (on the SX side).  Cameroon already sold all the bbp and has a 0 balance.

Sell pressure mitigation

Rob said:

** Sell pressure mitigation **

On one hand its easy to realize how our currency goes down in price more than it goes up.  We’ve given $214,000 to orphan charity directly from the blockchain since inception.

Over the last 6 months especially with POOM, we’ve adopted a model where each charity accepts biblepay directly from each POOM sponsorship payment.

I think we need to immediately reverse this and ask our charities (Cameroon & Kairos) to not accept biblepay for orphan payments.  (Even though it sounded like a good idea, lets make a use case for our cryptocurrency, it actually added more sell pressure).

So if we do that, this will require sponsors to use a credit card or paypal to sponsor the child to remain in poom.  The fiat would be considered a tax deductible contribution.

I said:

Rob said he wants charity donations via PayPal or credit card. To me, unless I’m wrong, that means he wants giving to be done off the BiblePay blockchain. Charity continues to be the biggest marketing identity of this coin since the beginning (see radio show from June 2018: Obviously, charity will continue it sounds like the hope is that anyone that receives BBP will 1) HODL, 2) Not sell to recoup their giving, 3) Not use directly for charity. If the BBP/BTC price is high, then you can give the fiat equivalent easily, but I wonder what would have happened if charities received max BBP per month because the BBP price is low. You can not support every child this way, but giving say 5M BBP to CameroonONE and 2.5M BBP to Kairos when prices are low seems more sustainable if you want to continue the “10% to charity” marketing. I just feel that with making donation via fiat (PayPal, CC, or check) you remove a lot of visibility, transparency, and gives BiblePay less of a use case. Why does BiblePay need to exist then?

Rob replied:

“Why does BiblePay need to exist then?”  In my opinion is a deceptive conclusion (It alludes to the accusation that because I am recommending a fiat payment to cameroon-one or Kairos that we are not helping children, which is false).

Whether a user pays a currently owed balance in fiat, or whether I paid COMPASSION in fiat for a given month has no bearing on who is actually footing the bill.  You are forgetting that BiblePay is paying the POOM miner back for the sponsored child payment.

So the true comparison is this:  Scenario A:  The user pays in fiat and gets a tax deduction and a BBP refund; BiblePay still sponsored the child because it came out of our GSC contracts charity budget for POOM.  Scenario B:  We pay for the child out of the governance budget, liquidate it first and pay compassion FIAT later and no user gets a tax deduction.  Both are very similar but scenario A has very little market pressure (up front).  Neither are perfect, but thats not the point.  The point is we are still supporting hundreds of children therefore not only biblepay has a purpose but weve done a lot of good in the world.

And technically right now Compassion has not ended yet, so we do still have over 120 current children.  We can update the infographic when we lose compassion to a number closer to the total poom.

Either way we still give more than 10% to orphan-charity and thats the primary reason we started.

I do feel that if our market is sluggish for 7 more months in a row, we should open a thread and discuss dynamic orphan charity expenses (IE limiting the entire charity side , payroll and governance expenses to a sliding scale of emissions) based on our price.  But I prayed about this, and God (through the Holy spirit) does not want to start on this yet, I think some dynamics are currently changing so I want to hold off on this and keep things stable for a while if possible.  But in the mean time we can look at our environment and try to see if there are ways to decentralize the sponsorships in a smarter way that relies less on any central and single foundation or authority or person.

  1. – CameroonONE switched from QT Wallet to what I assume is a SX deposit address to reduce 40 confirmations required to sell. This gives us less visibility to when funds get sent to SX, but we can still see when Rob made BBP payments to CameroonONE (Dec 31, 2019). Rob also prepaid several months in advance which CameroonONE sold at once, so that added more sell pressure on the exchange. It is more important when funds get deposited into address more than when they are moved out. We have to trust charities will sell for BTC and to fiat eventually, so we just extend a bit more this way. Even in the old scheme of using QT Wallet, once the funds were sent to SX change, we had no way to know the trades made by CameroonONE exactly. We can guess from the trade history API, but it is not 100% proof[]