Can/should we jointly own Dash's online accounts?

[amanda_b_johnson]

Current Situation

The Dash network started out with just one DFO: Dash Core Group (or the "Dash Foundation" at the time). Like studs, this group opened a series of online accounts which still serve as the primary Dash-representing online profiles to this day: dash.org (including email domains), @dashpay Twitter/X, @dashorg YouTube channel, etc.

Over the years, various DCG employees have at their discretion granted access to these accounts to other DFOs. For example, I myself was granted a @Dash.org email address and unlimited publishing rights to the YouTube channel from 2016-2017 (both of which I gave up after I stopped making treasury proposals), Mark Mason was granted similar rights a couple years later, and I'm told that a group out of Venezuela had publishing rights to the @dashpay Twitter account up until quite recently. There may be more instances of granted account access of which I'm unaware.

The question of Dash's online accounts is on my mind since @rion, @Hilawe, @trust_thyself and I discussed next week's Incubator WEEKLY, which will feature @thedesertlynx and @Marine as they seek grant money and eventual treasury funding for performing marketing and biz dev tasks on behalf of the network. Online Dash accounts are, of course, crucial to these functions.

So here are the problems/questions with the current situation:

1. When DCG granted access to these accounts to other DFOs in the past, we saw that in at least one instance said access was not removed when said DFO was no longer being funded or approved by the network to act in a marketing capacity, and extreme drama ensued. There were other instances in which the @dashpay Twitter account was making posts in broken English. How can the network act to prevent similar problems in the future if it doesn't own the accounts in question?
2. Even when another DFO was being funded to run the @dashorg YouTube channel (in this case, myself in 2016 and '17), a DCG employee continued to post videos which in my opinion were conflicting with my content strategy and damaged our subscriber count. Who should have had the final say on content?
3. When I had a @Dash.org email address, I sent out a weekly email to a subscriber list I personally maintained. At one point, a subscriber emailed me back pointing out that I hadn't been including an "unsubscribe" button in my weekly emails, and that I was legally required to do so (I was unaware of this). Though a relatively benign example, this shows how DCG could have potentially faced legal liability for extending a @Dash.org email account to a non-employee untrained in its corporate compliance.
4. If DCG grants access to these accounts to another DFO, what happens if that DFO quits? Does DCG take back the accounts, even though they claim to currently employ zero marketing staff?
5. What if there are two marketing DFOs currently approved by the treasury? If one is to be given access to these accounts at all, which should it be? The one with higher votes?
6. Dash.org positions itself as a website that represents the entire Dash network, but @Dash.org email addresses are generally restricted to DCG employees only. Should approved DFOs not all have access to dash.org email addresses if the website does, in fact, represent the entire network? Or should they start their own email addresses and compete for domain authority?
7. Which scenario would look better to potential partners: receiving emails from various domains like @Dash.org, @dashmoney.io, @dashincubator.app, [email protected], etc, or to only ever receive Dash-related emails from a single domain? Doesn't receiving emails from multiple domains potentially cause confusion, and even look suspicious/scammy?

In short, I'm wondering if there's a way that online Dash accounts--social, email, and similar--can somehow be "owned" (either actually or in practice) by the network itself as opposed to by any single DFO. And whether we can somehow designate who gets access to these accounts by our governance/funding votes. And whether such a thing is a desirable goal in the first place.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Why do you need the cover of dash.org instead of just owning your space? Not an attack, just curious really because I would of thought that was the best way to take control. If noting else, it would re-enforce that dash is decentralized.

 

[onetime]

Our Dash community is small enough (currently) that I think it would probably be cool if DCG would give a Dash.org email address to anyone who requests one - and then give some simple rules or guidelines on how to use it. If they are ever seen and reported violating the rules, then they'd lose access to that email account.

I hope that Dash's DFOs can cooperatively communicate and collaborate with each other on what type of marketing/promotional content gets shown on our official website, Twitter/X and Youtube accounts when they post things. If there were disagreements between the DFOs that they couldn't work out with each other on their own, then they could let the DAO decide on it if necessary.

 

[qwizzie]

I'm wondering if there's a way that online Dash accounts--social, email, and similar--can somehow be "owned" (either actually or in practice) by the network itself as opposed to by any single DFO. And whether we can somehow designate who gets access to these accounts by our governance/funding votes. And whether such a thing is a desirable goal in the first place.

One of the Dash Irrevocable Trust roles is :

'Hold other passive assets that ultimately belong to the network such as patents or trademarks assigned to it by DCG or other legal entities, and enforce any associated licensing requirements'

For now the Dash Trust only hold DCG shares, but we could perhaps extend this to holding the right to online Dash accounts (social, email, and similar). The Dash Trust Protectors i assume would then have control over those accounts.

But there is the question if certain Dash accounts are representing and marketing Dash the best they can currently. When i look at for example DashPay Reddit (a Dash social media account), i do wonder if we should not have a more generic Dash Reddit account. A few times i was asked by Reddit through a survey if DashPay Reddit involves crypto, which makes me wonder if that social media account is really that well aligned to Dash Marketing & PR, when even Reddit is sometimes not sure where it fits in. It is strange that we base our entire Dash Reddit presence on a Dash dapp (DashPay), that to this day is not even released on Mainnet. Same for DashPay Github, why make it more difficult for developers to find Dash by using such a specific DashPay name, instead of using a more generic Dash name ? I don't think that can be changed that easily anymore, but i always wondered about that. Maybe the more generic and easier to market Dash names were already claimed ?

We also used to have a Dash Foundation that got restricted to handling just legal tasks in later years, i am not sure if that entity is still operational in some capacity or not. Maybe that foundation can hold ownership of Dash social media accounts and Dash email accounts ?

Then there is the DIF, that can hold shares and assets. Not sure if it can hold passive assets like Dash social media accounts and Dash email accounts.

On the other hand thedesertlynx and Marine could just create and put all their attention in a new Dash social media and / or Dash email account that does Dash Marketing and Dash PR for :

Dash as a decentralized payment solution provider (L1 - current use cases)
Dash and Dash Evolution / Dash Platform / Dash Dapps (L2 - future new use cases)
Dash and its ROI options like Masternodes / Evonodes / Crowdnode / Access to DeFi through Maya Protocol (current use cases)

Each of these use cases will most likely need its own marketing strategy and marketing message and starting from scratch for some of those would not necessarily be a bad thing as Dash marketing and Dash PR has been lacking for many years for some of those use cases anyways.

 

[kot]

Interesting questions @amanda_b_johnson
Let me share my thoughts.

I would say the most important thing, above all, is to actually have social media accounts active. They don't need to be perfect, they need to work. Situation when there is no communication is way worse than e.g. faulty English.
I know there are different opinions about it, but, from my perspective, the best situation with accounts and media was when @tungfa and @fernando were available and responsible for them + we were cooperating with Wachsman PR - they worked on daily basis and had results. IMHO we should not reinvent the wheel but simple recreate what was working and/or what works on the market (in other companies and projects). There were many adversaries of Fernando and tungfa, but in fact it was the best time for our communications, PR and social media.
I am not going to analyze the past in details, look for anyone to blame or complain - I will just respond to your questions.

My general proposition would be to have multiple people and orgs working on marketing and promotion. And they should have their own channels/accounts/emails/social. Main Dash accounts should, in my opinion, just aggregate, share and amplify all info created and shared by these other individuals/orgs + share external communication about Dash (e.g. from press) + share DCG updates. In order to achieve that, there should be a role of "media and marketing coordinator", who would coordinate the efforts and post from these main accounts. No matter what - one decision maker, not voting or collective decision making. Things change quickly and reactions need to be quick.

Other thoughts:
Ad.1. When I was responsible for operations in DCG, we have introduced quarterly accounts review process. Critical systems were under review and accounts unused for X months were removed (X factor was different for different systems). There was also process of onboarding and offboarding accounts. I think similar thing is needed here. The only question is who would be responsible for that (I have some ideas to share later).
PS. There were/are too many drama creators and too few content creators. Just avoid drama as it is counterproductive. Learn from the past.
Ad.2. Problem as old as human history. Decentralization won't work in this case. In my opinion, there should be dedicated person, who is assigned to "media and marketing coordinator" role (similar to the role Fernando was having). I would create such role as a separate entity, if DCG is not going to do marketing efforts.
Ad.3. I would leave email addresses in the main dash.org domain for DCG only. In case of bigger DFO's, I would consider subdomains e.g. dfo-name.dash.org. But it should be rather limited as email accounts are NOT free of charge. As an alternative, for DFO's purposes dashpay.io domain could be used.
I would definitely NOT give email addresses in dash.org domain to anyone, who simply wants it (for many reasons - legal, regulatory, confidentiality, brand recognition etc.)
Ad.4. There is a mechanism of shared account or multiple operator/admin account in almost each system. This shouldn't be a problem if the role of "media and marketing coordinator" would be in place. This role would be a primary or secondary owner. DCG or DIF/Trust could have similar rights.
Ad.5. "media and marketing coordinator" should collect information from all DFOs and coordinate posting from the main accounts
Ad.6. See Ad.3.
Ad.7. It depends of what kind of emails do you have in mind. DFOs could have their own, very specific interest and communication, related to their own services. My opinion is that critical partners like miners, exchanges, press should be contacted by the "media and marketing coordinator" with the address from dash.org domain. Other type of communication could be done from any other address. Multiple domains and email addresses mean multiple people and companies working in the ecosystem - this is not a bad thing after all.

Cheers!

 

[trust_thyself]

Re: the social media accounts: I personally find appealing what @GrandMasterDash and @kot put-forth -- a number of projects operating under different banners that share a goal, and an "owner" of the choice social media accounts who 1. might create and share content and who 2. definitely proactively shares quality content from other DFOs.

The "owner" may be on the DCG Inc team -- as that was who created the accounts -- in which case it would be of utmost importance that they view non-DCG Inc DFOs not as competition but as family, in the sense that we can do more together. Or -- as DCG Inc isn't now focused on marketing -- that "owner" could be someone else trusted by the network, perhaps decided via a governance vote (though that limits voting options) or a poll here on the Forum (as many interested parties could be listed as options). If the "owner" were a non-DCG Inc person, perhaps DCG Inc could retain "admin" privileges and extend "editor" or "admin" privileges so that if that "owner" ever goes rouge or becomes inactive, their access could be terminated and extended to another.

Re: the Dash.org email addresses: Extending "dash.org" email addresses to non-DCG Inc employees would add complexity. Complexity in deciding to whom to grant access, monitoring and subjectively determining what content is appropriate, when/how to withdraw access, etc. Better to see many projects operate under the Dash umbrella, each wholly accountable for their performance or lack thereof. Perhaps a middle ground could be: if/when a non-DCG Inc DFO has an important ask, they could liaison with a DCG Inc person to send on their behalf (Ccing them), perhaps utilizing a newly-created generic email handle for this purpose.

 

[Marine]

Good question, Amanda – thanks for bringing that up.
Indeed, there was a problem with maintaining Dash's social media accounts. I have to admit that some of the posts were a complete mess, written in broken English, with no value, and out of context. Essentially, almost all these posts were created by the Venezuelan community, who are not particularly proficient in English. I only posted a few things related to Evo and AMAs.

Before being laid off from DCG (let's be fair, it was a layoff), Ernesto and I created a proofreading chat room where our tech team and other DCG members could fact-check and proofread all scheduled messages. I still have access to that account but no longer maintain it since I don't work at DCG anymore, so I prioritized taking care of my newborn baby over social media volunteering. Currently, Dash's Twitter account is managed by Matt, a DCG volunteer, but from what I see, he doesn't post anything.

I like the idea of sharing access with other Dashers. However, in my opinion, there has to be one person responsible for content, because if we jointly own the accounts, who is to be blamed if there's a mistake?

Let's nominate several candidates for ownership and conduct a poll. I believe that should bring an end to this situation.

Cheers!

 

[kot]

I would also suggest separation of technical ownership and content/posting ownership.
Usually technical maintenance is a little bit tricky and might be very challenging for marketing people.

 

[amanda_b_johnson]

Thank you, everyone, for your input so far. I appreciate the thoughtfulness and details.

With potentially multiple large shifts coming down the pipeline for Dash, maybe this online account situation is a wait-and-see scenario? Will keep pondering and post again if/when relevant. Thanks again.

 

[vazaki3]

1. Dash.org positions itself as a website that represents the entire Dash network, but @Dash.org email addresses are generally restricted to DCG employees only. Should approved DFOs not all have access to dash.org email addresses if the website does, in fact, represent the entire network? Or should they start their own email addresses and compete for domain authority?

yeah! As long as I remain an elected DFO, just give me mnowatch@Dash.org and apogee@Dash.org email, and give it to me now!

1. What if there are two marketing DFOs currently approved by the treasury? If one is to be given access to these accounts at all, which should it be? The one with higher votes?

WTF? The elected DFO that has just 1 vote higher than mine, should have the right to spread his filthy propaganda for 100% of the time ??? Are you nuts??? A Time Splitting rule is obviously needed.

---

All the rest opinions in this thread should not be taken into consideration as much as my opinion, because I am the ONLY currently elected DFO who is talking in this very thread (or at least who is talking here until now).

 

[amanda_b_johnson]

yeah! As long as I remain an elected DFO, just give me mnowatch@Dash.org and apogee@Dash.org email, and give it to me now!


WTF? The elected DFO that has just 1 vote higher than mine, should have the right to spread his filthy propaganda for 100% of the time ??? Are you nuts??? A Time Splitting rule is obviously needed.

---

All the rest opinions in this thread should not be taken into consideration as much as my opinion, because I am the ONLY currently elected DFO who is talking in this very thread (or at least who is talking here until now).

As usual, Demo, specific, simple, and actionable suggestions on your part would be preferred to rants.

Can you think of any way that the network as a whole could actually achieve the examples you outlined (i.e. take practical ownership of dash.org and @dashpay Twitter?) Could there be a constant, standalone governance proposal for each asset, for example? And then the network could vote on who should own/operate each? Similar to what @Marine proposed above.

Maybe this is a good use for "voting the numbers"?

 

[vazaki3]

Can you think of any way that the network as a whole could actually achieve the examples you outlined (i.e. take practical ownership of dash.org and @dashpay Twitter?)

You can use trustless secret sharing using time locks, if you want to temporary give password access. The secret that will be time-locked could be the password of dash.org or the password of dashpay, or the password of DTP or DIF, or the password of any other domain that dash controls. The secret will be revealed after the end of time, so that another person could use that password and enter the account.

Here is a protocol of trustless secret sharing using time locks:

https://medium.com/@pfh/kimono-trustless-secret-sharing-using-time-locks-on-ethereum-8e7e696494d

You could also time-lock the password of twitter, reddit, discord or any other external site, and reveal it when the time comes. But if the current holder of the password decides to change it, you can do nothing. Or can you?

 

[vazaki3]

You could also time-lock the password of twitter, reddit, discord or any other external site, and reveal it when the time comes. But if the current holder of the password decides to change it, you can do nothing. Or can you?

You may can. You have to subscribe to twitter, redit, discord by using a gmail account. Then you need to setup a 2 factor auth for this gmail account. Then the DTP admins, for this specific gmail, they should hold the second factor auth, by setting up google prompts in a PC that cannot be controlled by any DFO.

The first time the DFO tries to login by using the gmail password, he succeed to it by asking the second factor auth by the DTP admin. Then a cookie is set in DFO's browser, and thus the 2nd factor auth is not required anymore, so the DFO can use the account without bothering DTP anymore. But in case a DFO tries to change the password of the gmail account (and thus the password of twitter, redit, discord etc) he cannot do it, because it will require a two factor authentication , and the second factor is not supposed to be known by the DFO but only by the DTP admins.

 

[amanda_b_johnson]

You may can. You have to subscribe to twitter, redit, discord by using a gmail account. Then you need to setup a 2 factor auth for this gmail account. Then the DTP admins, for this specific gmail, they should hold the second factor auth, by setting up google prompts in a PC that cannot be controlled by any DFO.

The first time the DFO tries to login by using the gmail password, he succeed to it by asking the second factor auth by the DTP admin. Then a cookie is set in DFO's browser, and thus the 2nd factor auth is not required anymore, so the DFO can use the account without bothering DTP anymore. But in case a DFO tries to change the password of the gmail account (and thus the password of twitter, redit, discord etc) he cannot do it, because it will require a two factor authentication , and the second factor is not supposed to be known by the DFO but only by the DTP admins.

Thank you for these specific and detailed responses. It's possible that such arrangements may be useful to us one day -- particularly of we move forward with the notion that there are such things as "official" and "unofficial" Dash accounts. Political, security, and/or trading/price-related reasons may one day mean that access to the "official" online accounts is far more important and contested than it currently is. I'm glad there are people like you who will be able to help us if the day ever comes when such solutions are required.

 

[kot]

Thank you for these specific and detailed responses. It's possible that such arrangements may be useful to us one day -- particularly of we move forward with the notion that there are such things as "official" and "unofficial" Dash accounts. Political, security, and/or trading/price-related reasons may one day mean that access to the "official" online accounts is far more important and contested than it currently is. I'm glad there are people like you who will be able to help us if the day ever comes when such solutions are required.

This will be half ironic, half serious.
You are praising an individual, who's major input into the project is:
1. Enormous amount of spam and drama on the forum.
2. Ideas disconnected from the reality.
3. Software to spy on MN owners.

In my opinion, we need realistic solutions and engaged people - not drama creators and theoretical disputes.

 

[qwizzie]

4. Fraudulent behavior on Dash forum polls, by voting twice (demo & vazaki3). This occurred on two of his own polls, thereby distorting the vote results of those polls. And he has been spamming one of these polls since 2017.

 

[xkcd]

Ask yourself how Bitcoin does it and then you will have your answer. That's what Joel did and thus came to be the DashCommunity handle.

 

[xkcd]

3. Software to spy on MN owners.

Interesting view of it, do you think MNOwatch is the only such org looking at the DAO, you should be thankful that we do all this work and share it with everyone, for that is the very reason of the site, to shine a light on this network and learn more about it.

 

[kot]

Interesting view of it, do you think MNOwatch is the only such org looking at the DAO, you should be thankful that we do all this work and share it with everyone, for that is the very reason of the site, to shine a light on this network and learn more about it.

Most probably it was the initial reason to create the software.
However demo devastated this reason by using it in his rants to chase after some MNOs.

 

[vazaki3]

Most probably it was the initial reason to create the software.
However demo devastated this reason by using it in his rants to chase after some MNOs.

Mnowatch proposal has just 16 "NO" votes . @qwizzie casted 8 of them. Did you cast the rest 8 "No" votes? The cluster is from Poland, you are from Poland too, arent you?

Are you searching the initial reason for creating mnowatch shell script? Here it is.

I would like to create a site that will display all these data in a human readable way. I would like to make this information public for the benefit of the community. I would like neither keep it secret nor sell it to advertisers or "consultants" (who in turn they will sell it to potential proposal makers in order for them to be aware of what makes the masternode owners happy).
The Dash community should create a parallel voting system where all actors will be allowed to vote (I wonder, the miners, as members of the community that are always online, would they like to host this parallel voting system?). And in case there is a masternode operator whose votes deviate a lot from the will of the community, then all his money should be confiscated in an automated hard fork. It is well known that money is a social convention, it is well known that money does not exist in case there is no community to believe in it. So, the Masternode operators should be afraid of the community, and if they dont, we will make them afraid. Got me?

@kot, do you deviate a lot from the will of the Dash community? If yes, you should start be afraid. A hard fork that will take all you money may be decided in the future. Money is just a social convention, you own nothing in case the community says so. Nazi's 1000 mark worths nothing, the international community rejected that money. The money of criminals is also confiscated. In a smaller scale, the same could happen in Dash community too, in case a masternode always cast votes that could be judged as "Dash criminal" in the long term. It normaly occurs in democracies, ostracising is always on the go. The less Dash masternodes we have, the more their votes are exposed, so the easier ostracising becomes. So ostracizing may be also an unmentionable/secret goal of the HCMN/Evo proponents, as long as Evo highly reduces the number of network nodes and thus makes mnowatch's tracking job easier. @kot, when someone tracks you, he can easily find things to blame you, especially if you are always voting "NO" for everything.