Governance vs Grants - Pricing solutions?

[GrandMasterDash]

With dash currently at ~$23, a proposal costs ~$115.. putting more preasure on the Proposer to come up with a winning offer. Thus encouraging large projects and excluding smaller projects that might otherwise be beneficial / fruitful.

Equally, if MNOs want to use their voting power for proper governance (not just issuing grants), should they be paying ~$115 for the privilege? - especially when the governance proposal is not enforceable.

 

[UdjinM6]

The fee serves 2 purposes:
1) spam-protection - the higher price of Dash, the more incentive for an attacker, the higher should be the costs to spam it. Thus the fact that $ price is rising doesn't really change anything.
2) IMO mn owners should have reasonable amount of adequately sized projects to review and to vote for i.e. there should not be 100s of them each month (no way they are going to review that much) and they should not ask for $100 (it makes no sense to spend their time on something that small, just donate few dash if you like it and done ). This doesn't mean that there should be no small projects at all but probably they should find a way to join together in some sense, I'm not sure tbh.

 

[Walter]

It isn't broke, don't fix it That's my view... for now. Should we speculate about what our thoughts would be should Dash be worth $200 each? $1000 to submit a funding proposal... Maybe that would discourage innovation and grassroots community initiatives?

Walter

 

[IronVape]

I'd like to see the proposal process remain accessible to smal projects for as long as we are able to. It gives a since of inclusion. There is no problem with spam proposals yet, so let's not fix what is not broken.

 

[demo]

Please add the "other" option.

And also add my option:
Free for the non spammers. Tiered pricing for spammers. Lets vote who is a spammer.

 

[demo]

The fee serves 2 purposes:
1) spam-protection - the higher price of Dash, the more incentive for an attacker, the higher should be the costs to spam it. Thus the fact that $ price is rising doesn't really change anything.

Fee for proposals should be asked only for the new members of the community, because for the old members we already know if they are spammers or not.


So the well known persons who do not spam, they should be able to propose for free.

 

[demo]

The fee serves 2 purposes:
2) IMO mn owners should have reasonable amount of adequately sized projects to review and to vote for i.e. there should not be 100s of them each month (no way they are going to review that much) and they should not ask for $100 (it makes no sense to spend their time on something that small, just donate few dash if you like it and done ). This doesn't mean that there should be no small projects at all but probably they should find a way to join together in some sense, I'm not sure tbh.

You should have a tree like structure for the budget proposals, and not a linear structure.
The tree-like structure could be a dynamic and not a fixed one, with the help of hashtags in a tree like structure. This will make more easy for the MNOs to review the proposals, because they will be able to navigate into categories.

You should not limit the number of proposals to 100 or so. This does not scale to the digital currency of the future.

Limiting the number of proposals will become the grave of the budget system. You should find the solution and optimize the classification of the proposals, in order to be able to scale to the digital cash of the future.

https://www.sitepoint.com/cms-content-organization-structures-trees-vs-facets-vs-tags/
https://www.contentful.com/blog/2015/02/17/content-trees-tags-and-facets-in-contentful/

 

[GrandMasterDash]

The fee serves 2 purposes:
1) spam-protection - the higher price of Dash, the more incentive for an attacker, the higher should be the costs to spam it. Thus the fact that $ price is rising doesn't really change anything.
2) IMO mn owners should have reasonable amount of adequately sized projects to review and to vote for i.e. there should not be 100s of them each month (no way they are going to review that much) and they should not ask for $100 (it makes no sense to spend their time on something that small, just donate few dash if you like it and done ). This doesn't mean that there should be no small projects at all but probably they should find a way to join together in some sense, I'm not sure tbh.

Spam protection, true, but at what cost? One might argue, given the rising USD value of dash, that 1 dash is sufficient enough. I mean to say, it worked as spam protection when dash was just 5 USD, so what is different now?

Equally, given MNOs are being paid significantly higher dividends now, I see no reason why they shouldn't be working harder for it.

 

[demo]

@GrandMasterDash you forgot another poll option:

Poll option: Variable pricing based on dash's price in dollars

Why not doing the dynamic fee based on the price then?
If dash price > 10$ < 20$ then 4 dash fee
If dash price > 20$ < 30$ then 3 dash fee
etc...

and another one proposed by @David :

Poll option: Keep it 5 dash but reimburse some dash in case the net votes exceed a specified number.

For both the above two poll options, if anyone of them is finnaly selected as the preferable one, then a new poll should arise ( a poll that depends on the result of this poll) which will clarify more the decision. A clarification needed for the first poll option is for example how exactly this "if-then" (described by @splawik21) should be designed. A clarification needed for the second poll option is for example how much dash should be reimbursed, and after what number of net votes.

This is how the interdependent polls are constructed, in a tree like structure.

 

[demo]

The proposal of @David is not exactly the one you recently put as poll option:
Fixed pricing but a successful outcome has variable reimbursement based on total number of votes

but it is:
Fixed pricing but a successful outcome has variable reimbursement based on total number of NET votes

You can of course keep it like this, and then if this poll option is the winner option, then add a new poll in order to clarify whether the votes are considered to be NET votes or not.

I asked @David to come here and support his poll option, but instead of answering he troll rated my post, and with the help of a moderator (probably @tungfa) he deleted my post from his thread.

<vote history> <-- why vote history is usefull?
How much should dash proposals cost?
Between 1% - 5% of the value being requested 0 vote(s) 0.0%
Between 6% - 10% of the value being requested 1 vote(s) 16.7%
A flat fee, cheaper than 5 dash 1 vote(s) 16.7%
A tiered pricing structure based on the value being requested 1 vote(s) 16.7%
Keep proposals at 5 dash 2 vote(s) 33.3%
*Variable pricing based on reputation 1 vote(s) 16.7%
Fixed pricing but a successful outcome has variable reimbursement based on total number of votes 0 vote(s) 0.0%
Fixed pricing. Successful outcome has variable reimbursement based on success ranking 0 vote(s) 0.0%
</vote history>

 

[TroyDASH]

I like the idea of the proposal fee being reimbursed for proposals that are well received but did not reach the min requirements to pass.

For example if the net votes are 5% or higher (or even 0%+), then the fee is returned regardless of whether or not the proposal funding passes. Still discourages spam because the really bad proposals won't get their fee back.
Don't really see this as a huge problem right now either way, but I think it's worth a look

 

[demo]

I like the idea of the proposal fee being reimbursed for proposals that are well received but did not reach the min requirements to pass.

For example if the net votes are 5% or higher (or even 0%+), then the fee is returned regardless of whether or not the proposal funding passes. Still discourages spam because the really bad proposals won't get their fee back.
Don't really see this as a huge problem right now either way, but I think it's worth a look

I dont like the idea, simply because the proposal fee is set solely to prevent spamming! As long as someone is proved not to be a spammer, you should not prevent him for proposing! And as long as someone often ads useful propositions into the system, you should better pay him for proposing rather than asking him for a proposal fee.

Please try to remember the original reasons why something has been added into the system. The proposal fee has been added in order to prevent spamming, remember? Is there any other original reason I forgot to mention?

IMO mn owners should have reasonable amount of adequately sized projects to review and to vote for i.e. there should not be 100s of them each month.

The above is NOT an original reason, it is just @UdjinM6's personal opinion. Isnt it? So the spamming reason remains the widely accepted original reason why the proposal fee is added into the system.

Your way of thinking is flawed, as long as you assume that a rich person-company-state cannot become a spammer due to the proposal fee. The rich can surely become spammers, especially if they want to destroy Dash. The rich will start spamming, Dash community will inevitably increase the fee in order to stop spamming, the proposals will stop due to the high fee price, and Dash will die due to the lack of good proposals.

Thats why it is not how much the proposal fee costs that matters. It is the spam reputation that matters.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

At the moment, I'm thinking reinbursements are a good idea to encourage smaller projects. However, I do think a minimum charge should be maintained because at some point in the future, successful proposals will ideally include perks, such as translation into various languages (it's a global inclusive token, right?). Large value proposals are probably more in-depth and thus needing more funding for such services.

 

[TroyDASH]

I dont like the idea, simply because the proposal fee is set solely to prevent spamming! As long as someone is proved not to be a spammer, you should not prevent him for proposing! And as long as someone often ads useful propositions into the system, you should better pay him for proposing rather than asking him for a proposal fee.

Please try to remember the original reasons why something has been added into the system. The proposal fee has been added in order to prevent spamming, remember? Is there any other original reason I forgot to mention?

The above is NOT an original reason, it is just @UdjinM6's personal opinion. Isnt it? So the spamming reason remains the widely accepted original reason why the proposal fee is added into the system.

Your way of thinking is flawed, as long as you assume that a rich person-company-state cannot become a spammer due to the proposal fee. The rich can surely become spammers, especially if they want to destroy Dash. The rich will start spamming, Dash community will inevitably increase the fee in order to stop spamming, the proposals will stop due to the high fee price, and Dash will die due to the lack of good proposals.

Thats why it is not how much the proposal fee costs that matters. It is the spam reputation that matters.

The flaw in this logic is that it is entirely possible for somebody who was not a spammer, to become one. It is also possible for a spammer to impersonate or steal keys from someone who the network has whitelisted.

The reward for proposing things that are a true value-added to the network, is when you get paid when the funding is approved. The fee is a totally separate issue

 

[demo]

The flaw in this logic is that it is entirely possible for somebody who was not a spammer, to become one.

If someone becomes a spammer, then his reputation may change. I didnt said that the reputation will be stable.

It is also possible for a spammer to impersonate or steal keys from someone who the network has whitelisted.

In that case, and as long as the reputation is dynamic, the network will blacklist the impersonator-thief.

The reward for proposing things that are a true value-added to the network, is when you get paid when the funding is approved. The fee is a totally separate issue

The fee is not tottaly separated, because the fee is a risk that someone can easily take, while another cannot. You have to understand that a proposal fee that seems very small for someone, may be very big for someone else. So a clever/good poor cannot easily take the risk to propose, while a stupid/bad rich can take that risk. As persons, we are all poor in front of big companies, arent we?

So it is in favor of big companies to increase the proposal fee to 115 dollars, and even more. I wonder, is @GrandMasterDash right when saying that spies pwned dash? I mean, instead of a fee 0.33 dash that was announced for the 12.1 version, the developers preserved the 5 dash fee which is now almost a 115$ dollar fee!!! This is a lot of money for a person to handle, not to mention of course a third world person! But it is a very small fee for companies (or states) that want to subvert Dash's original goal.