Dash Core Group Q1 2019 Summary Call - 9 May 2019

kot

kot

Moderator
Masternode Owner/Operator
Dear Dash Community Members,

As we do every quarter, I would like to kindly invite you to DCG Q1 summary call. To provide you with a transparent information about the delivery team efforts, we have prepared a detailed report of development progress made during Q1 2019, company achievements and challenges we have faced during the last quarter.

The call will take place on Thursday, 9th of May at 15:00 UTC. The call will be streamed live on the Dash Youtube channel, recorded and then shared.

Here is a link to the Youtube stream:

Please prepare and submit your questions here in this thread (or send them directly to @strophy). I
I suggest to send one question per user, as there will be limited time for Q&A section.

EDIT: Presentation slides are available in the following location: https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/...sh-Core-Group-Q1-2019-Summary-Call.pdf?api=v2

Thank you,
Robert Wiecko
 
Last edited:
After resetting the votes on DIP3 activation, the most recent treasury cycle was the first in a long time not to use all the funds.
What does DCG think about this and would things be done differently in hindsight and with future migrations?
 
After DIP2 activation, DIP2 transactions (which consists at this point mostly of masternode payments from deterministic masternodes) became
incompatible with certain hardware wallets. Please provide a status update with regards to problems with DIP2 transactions on the Ledger, Trezor and KeepKey hardware wallets.
 
Last edited:
Does DCG have any ideas on how to win market-share away from Localbitcoins in Venezuela? https://coin.dance/volume/localbitcoins/VES/BTC
With those kind of #'s for Bitcoins being transacted per week in the country, it's possible that we are getting creamed in the savings/purchasing-power market--that people are choosing Bitcoin in mass!

Further, if look at our local Dash sites (Dashous & Dashnearby), they appear to be almost dead for use in VEZ
 
Last edited:
Masternode/community questions from April and May have been added to the list for the call, and will be posted as written transcripts after the call. Please keep posting any further questions you might have!
 
strophy said:
Masternode/community questions from April and May have been added to the list for the call, and will be posted as written transcripts after the call. Please keep posting any further questions you might have!
Click to expand...

But they will be addressed in the call, right?
 
masternube said:
After resetting the votes on DIP3 activation, the most recent treasury cycle was the first in a long time not to use all the funds.
What does DCG think about this and would things be done differently in hindsight and with future migrations?
Click to expand...
Thanks for the notice. I appreciate your concern. Cheers
 
I'm rather disappointed with Fernando's answer to my question.
Resetting the votes was an engineering shortcut. It may be understandable that people think this would be fine, but suggesting that it was unavoidable is rather dubious.
I think in hindsight the responsible thing to do was to support old voting keys and keep the votes, even if it required more engineering.
I believe there were also bugs in DashNexus and DMT that caused people to think they had voted while they had not.
I don't know how many people use DashNexus or DMT to vote but it could be significant.
Surprising that DCG was not aware of this. And strange that the question was answered by Fernando rather than a more technical person.
 
I'm a bit disappointed that my question was not taken into the Q & A or answerred in here.
It kinda feels like my question is the only one from this specific thread that has purposely been excluded.
If it was a case of upvotes (or a lack of upvotes) i would understand, but there has been questions taking
into the Q & A that were also not upvoted.
 
Well, while we're at it then, I too was disappointed with the answer to Private Send. It seems there were three protocol level questions (voting, Private Send and hardware wallet compatibility), and these are exactly the issues Core are assigned to deal with it. Okay, the voting problem hopefully won't happen too often, but the others are more pressing.

I'm wondering if Core needs to be restructured into three separate entities, each with their own proposals:
- Biz Dev
- Core protocol and R&D
- DAPI reference development

Perhaps this would provide more focus and accountability?

Either way, once Evo 1.0 is out, I will be asking that Core give a much higher priority to fungibility, both speed and function. I don't particularly care if it aggravates big financial institutions, we need to deal with the fundamental right to financial privacy by default. We need to deal with Monerroro, Zcrash and Horrorzen head on.
 
Hi @qwizzie it was my responsibility to collect the questions together and somehow I missed yours. It was a simple mistake, not intentional exclusion. Please accept my apologies and I will get it answered in writing as soon as possible.

Transcriptions of answers to the other questions are available here: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/community-q-a-april-2019.44688/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top