Dash Core Group Q4 2021 Quarterly Call - 3 February 2022

kot

kot

Moderator
Masternode Owner/Operator
Dear Dash Community Members,

I would like to kindly invite you to the Dash Core Group Q4 2021 Quarterly Call. We will share the recent updates about the product development progress, marketing, and business development efforts made during the last quarter.

The call will take place on Thursday, the 3rd of February 2022 at 15:00 UTC.
Link to the Youtube live stream:

In order to make the call shorter, we are going to be more efficient during the reporting part + we are going to respond only to pre-selected questions during the call. The remaining questions will be answered and published on the forum by the 11th of February 2022.
Please prepare and submit your questions here or send them directly to me or @strophy.

Thank you,
Robert Wiecko

EDIT: Slides from the call: https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/...8550659/DCG-Q4-2021-Quarterly-Call.pdf?api=v2
 
Last edited:
DASH-ratio.png


The above charts are the ratios of dash to similar long standing projects, covering a two year period, unbiased from 1 Jan 2020 - 31 Dec 2021.

In all cases, a descending line demonstrably shows dash was a lesser store of value. The "shitcoins" outperformed dash.

My question is, when do you think dash will exit the top 100?
 
Last edited:
vazaki3 said:
WILL THE DashCoreGroup ALLOW THE masternodes TO VOTE THE NUMBERS?
Click to expand...

This is not up to DCG to decide such impactful changes in the voting system.
Please submit a proposal to the network to change the governance system. If it is voted in, DGC will implement it.
 
kot said:
This is not up to DCG to decide such impactful changes in the voting system.
Please submit a proposal to the network to change the governance system. If it is voted in, DGC will implement it.
Click to expand...

So this is distraction. There have previously been multiple governance proposals and every single non-DCG proposal received zero input or endorsement from DCG. This left MNOs not knowing or trusting how achievable it was, what potential problems there were, or whether DCG had the resources to implement it. Yet when it's been a DCG governance proposal, DCG invites us to engage and "discuss it".

So, given that MNOs pay your fixed income non-performance related salaries, I think DCG should put up or shut up. This is exactly why DCG doesn't get my votes.

For years MNOs have granted DCG 60% privilege of the treasury funds in the hope that some centralization will be more productive than other decentralized projects. We have certain expectations that you will deliver and that when you fail to deliver that we can hold you to account.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
So this is distraction. There have previously been multiple governance proposals and every single non-DCG proposal received zero input or endorsement from DCG. This left MNOs not knowing or trusting how achievable it was, what potential problems there were, or whether DCG had the resources to implement it. Yet when it's been a DCG governance proposal, DCG invites us to engage and "discuss it".
Click to expand...

We have stated very clearly and multiple times that any protocol change approved by the network will be implemented by DCG.
I don't see any distraction here. The network is a decision-maker for such cases and this is one of the major reasons why the governance system exists. If DCG would want to implement any major protocol change like this, we would also ask the network first.
 
kot said:
We have stated very clearly and multiple times that any protocol change approved by the network will be implemented by DCG.
I don't see any distraction here. The network is a decision-maker for such cases and this is one of the major reasons why the governance system exists. If DCG would want to implement any major protocol change like this, we would also ask the network first.
Click to expand...

So then why has DCG provided zero response to all non-DCG governance proposals?
 
GrandMasterDash said:
So then why has DCG provided zero response to all non-DCG governance proposals?
Click to expand...

The first and foremost reason is - and it was agreed a long time ago - that we do not use our unique position to make an impact on other proposals (I am still assuming we are talking about the protocol changes, not something else).
Second, why would DCG need to respond to all non-DCG governance proposals? The importance and voting power of the MNOs is something we need to rely on afaik. The MNOs and the network are much more important in the decision-making process than DCG. This is the very basic concept of DAO to me.
 
@kot I understand this but the problem is, DCG is widely accepted as the steward of protocol development and by extension governance. When small changes were proposed by myself or other non-DCG proposal owners, a typical MNO response has been that DCG resources would be stretched too thin i.e. Dash Platform is the top priority and everything else can wait. In recent years, the only non-DCG governance proposal to pass was the reduction of the proposal fee from 5 to 1 dash, and this was a huge effort just to make a one line code change, which has still not been released.

Let's say that someone proposes a governance change. Maybe the idea is flawed, or perhaps DCG recognize it as achievable and could provide some feedback to how it might be implemented etc. MNOs could then use this to help them make an informed decision. But nothing, nada. I repeat, DCG is widely accepted as the steward of such things and they take 60% of the treasury, which is a measure of the weight they carry.

To demonstrate dash is not a security we need to show that non-DCG members are actively involved and influencing protocol change, not just the odd one-off port from BCH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top