Dashwhale / rango's budget proposal : Christmas Lottery

[qwizzie]

Dont forget to vote guys, voting will close after 8 days

https://www.dashwhale.org/p/christmas-lottery

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13042345#msg13042345

A new budget proposal is out there, guys ... and it really smells like a daaaangerous precedent :wink:
- dashwhale

 

[rango]

Yes, the more tickets you have in the box, the higher is the chance to win. There is an idea for annother, more fair lottery proposal, where every DASH owner can participate (last transaction that makes it into a block, wins a bounty).

But given the current constraints of the budget system (yes-no votes > 10% of all masternodes), tiny proposals almost have no chance to get approved and innovation is inhibited, before it can happen.

 

[TaoOfSatoshi]

But given the current constraints of the budget system (yes-no votes > 10% of all masternodes), tiny proposals almost have no chance to get approved and innovation is inhibited, before it can happen.

To be fair, your lottery proposal is not an innovative project that will better the Dash ecosystem. We have not seen such a proposal yet from anyone other than the Dev team. If we see a really good independent proposal and it gets voted down, then I will agree with you.

 

[rango]

Innovation is maybe not the right word.

This masternode lottery brings benefits:
- activity on budget system
- community engagement and entertainment of masternode owners and thereby contributing to masternode owner long term engangement (and maybe the price as well)

A (future) lottery for all DASH users (last TX in a block wins bounty):
- easy PR, attract new users and entertain old users

Bottomline:
ridiculously low investment, potentially great benefit outperfoming the invested lousy 40 DASH multiple times. If the risk is such low, it's sometimes just the best thing to give it a try!

Good independent proposals:
We did not see even one good independent proposal, since the release of the budget system and will most likely not see any until multiple of these parameters change:

- low total available budget purchasing power due to stable/declining DASH value
- proposals owners have to write a overwhelming lot to discuss the proposal with the community
- proposals owners have to waste time on extensive reporting
- big projects require 1-2 manmonth's of project coordination (worth 4k USD in project management).
- proposal owner has to shoulder legal issues with contractors

I can't think of even one reason, to fire up a big independent proposal and swallow the above mentioned toads. Anybody?

 

[stan.distortion]

Yes, the more tickets you have in the box, the higher is the chance to win. There is an idea for annother, more fair lottery proposal, where every DASH owner can participate (last transaction that makes it into a block, wins a bounty).

But given the current constraints of the budget system (yes-no votes > 10% of all masternodes), tiny proposals almost have no chance to get approved and innovation is inhibited, before it can happen.

Good point, its the same requirements regardless of scale. If there where more proposals it could fall back onto the amount of funds available and then there would be room for smaller proposals to get through but that 10% requirement is a big hurdle to get over. That's mostly a participation issue though, maybe voting in graphical clients will improve that but I doubt it would do much, using the fee to launch a proposal to pay for votes might though, maybe split it up equally between the number of nodes and allow higher amounts to incentivise participation.

Interested to see how this one turns out as it tests the self-interest aspect of proposals, could be a good one to have every month as a way of gauging that.

 

[alex-ru]

This masternode lottery brings benefits:

Personally I am very dissapoined with current "332 Yes / 149 No" voting...
Normally Dash system is self-ballanced as "What is good for investor - is good for the System". You are trying to hack this fundamental principle by this "proposual".

And this attack looks like rather successful - it is really sad. But thanks for objective test anyway.

 

[rango]

Personally I am very dissapoined with current "332 Yes / 149 No" voting...
Normally Dash system is self-ballanced as "What is good for investor - is good for the System". You are trying to hack this fundamental principle by this "proposual".

And this attack looks like rather succesefull - it is really sad. But thanks for objective test anyway.

That's a way too political interpretation. Yes, this proposal hacks this fundamental principle of the proposal system (masternode owners should not release budget funding for themselves), but that's just a more or less unintended sideeffect and i don't want to switch the core of this proposal to the "last TX in block" lottery to avoid confusion. I outlined the main goals of the proposal above.

 

[alex-ru]

That's a way too political interpretation. Yes, this proposal hacks this fundamental principle of the proposal system (masternode owners should not release budget funding for themselves), but that's just an unintended sideeffect which should be ignored given the low absolute DASH amount. I outlined the main goals of the proposal above.

Amount doesn't matter. If fundamental principle doesn't work - we (and others also) can not rely on it... It is this simple.
Worst thing is - I don't see a way to fix it (except changing shareholders to more responsible-experienced...)

 

[rango]

Is is very likely that the yes voters judge the tiny breach as irrelevant and focus on the benefits. I don't think masternode owners would vote yes on a 7000 DASH proposal to be evenly distributed across all yes voters.

 

[stan.distortion]

Is is very likely that the yes voters judge the tiny breach as irrelevant and focus on the benefits. I don't think masternode owners would vote yes on a 7000 DASH proposal to be evenly distributed across all yes voters.

Not at the moment but if something like this gained ground it could become a conventional means of using the system and from there any amount could become acceptable. That's not something that will go away simply by rejecting this proposal, its just human nature and something the system would need to account for. Kind of OT but in the early days of capitalism the stock markets where hailed as remarkable system for turning greed into a beneficial force, overstated imho but they're effective and its easy to forget how damaging that force can be and imo it will take over the system if unchecked. I know I keep harping on about them but web of trust systems are a means of addressing that and many other issues and MN voting is an ideal testing ground.

 

[Jeztah]

Hey all, lets vote for this like the US congress votes for their own raises.

We don't need more proposals just to have proposals. We don't need activity. I'd personally rather see the ENTIRE 10% burned than have this (in Rango's mocking words) "daaaaaaaaangerous precedent" pass.

This proposal at worst is negative press for DASH, at best it's a joke...... the small amount is irrelevant. Lose/lose here once again.

 

[qwizzie]

one thing is already achieved with this budget proposal, we are actively discussing it.

 

[buster]

What is going to stop someone *who is not from the community* making proposals that set a dangerous precedent? Nothing. The fact that people are actively discussing this proposal and the negative effects it has is exactly what this system was built for.

Anyone can make a proposal. This is good practice for masternode owners to fend off the bad ones.

Also less than 1000 masternodes have voted on the last 6 proposals. That's less than the 1/3. That's a pretty bad % if you ask me.

*edits

 

[raganius]

People need to understand that the fact that one does not agree with a proposal does not mean this proposal is "bad": after all, opinions will vary from people to people and no one single voter, but the majority of voters, will own the final decision.

The system brings proposal submission rules, as well as proposal approval rules. If one manages to have a proposal submited into the voting system, this person (no matter who) has got the right to see the proposal discused and voted: this is exactly why this system was built for (as buster and qwizzie have said above).

And more: regardless of individual opinions, if enough other voters agree with a proposal, it will be accepted into the budget, and this will never be a reason for shame or risk for the system, because it is the will of the majority, in accordance to the previously settled system rules.

If anyone believes that there is a failure here, and that these system rules need to be improved or tweaked, he should start the necessary discussions, and it should have its own thread and focus.

If, eventually, there is a failure in the system, it is the system that needs to be fixed, and not the voters.

By now, what matters is that the proposals are well discussed, and I am glad to see that it is happening.

 

[nmarley]

Hey all, lets vote for this like the US congress votes for their own raises.

We don't need more proposals just to have proposals. We don't need activity. I'd personally rather see the ENTIRE 10% burned than have this (in Rango's mocking words) "daaaaaaaaangerous precedent" pass.

This proposal at worst is negative press for DASH, at best it's a joke...... the small amount is irrelevant. Lose/lose here once again.

Agree 100%. This makes Dash look like a joke. Here's what I posted to dashwhale a few days ago:

I really think that the crypto community at large will look at this and see Dash as a joke... masternode owners already getting Dash and then voting to give themselves more Dash... looking at it from an external perspective, doesn't really seem like this is in the best interest of the Dash currency in the long-term.

Really sad that this is getting funded, but I'm not surprised. Don't bet against greed, right? Just wish people could see beyond the short-term to the longer-term effects of this.

 

[Jeztah]

Agree 100%. This makes Dash look like a joke. Here's what I posted to dashwhale a few days ago:



Really sad that this is getting funded, but I'm not surprised. Don't bet against greed, right? Just wish people could see beyond the short-term to the longer-term effects of this.

If I look on DW it says it needs 190 to be funded.

I see it as pure troll fodder myself.

 

[fernando]

Really sad that this is getting funded, but I'm not surprised. Don't bet against greed, right? Just wish people could see beyond the short-term to the longer-term effects of this.

I don't think it is greed. I think most yes voters have done so without much thinking because it is a small amount and people tend to vote Yes to most things. I would also prefer that this proposal doesn't pass because it is masternode owners paying masternode owners. Also because I hate lottery in general. However, it is the community's call and I also agree that discussing is good.

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. // Winston Churchill

 

[f2000]

I'm not a fan of this proposal either. I would much rather see unused money put into an address which can be used at a later date for incorporating something like Open Bazaar, a decentralized exchange (Coinffeine/Bitsquare) etc into Dash.