KUVACASH COIN OFFERING -Majority Cheating Minority.

[JOL]

You clear vision on this is right.

mostly because it starts a REALLY bad precedent..

Sorry i have to correct you, you miss the point than thats not the 1st time. We alrealdy have a case before.
A proposal owner use corruption yet in semi-publicly and assum it was a normale way of doing thing in hes sector.

nothing realy new in fact, just one bad exemple who pass, let other think, "why not, some one tel its normal and fair"

No one around Dash need someting else soon, with Daps, Dash and Dao, they have all every one need for manage a sub-DAO.

 

[TroyDASH]

Masternode owners are the big long term holders and investors in Dash, they need to make sure Dash will succeed, so it is right that they be rewarded for doing their research into various proposals so they can make correct funding decisions, (and punished if they make the wrong ones).

The protocol already takes care of this. Additionally, unlike the dash collateral - with regard to the VCO tokens, there is no punishment for making a wrong choice, only a reward, which might be non-zero even if it is the wrong choice.

This is the new digital economy. People get airdrops all the time. You cannot pretend that this kind of VCO deal wasn’t coming... it was inevitable, and I’m glad Kuvacash were the first to come forward and own it. They are leading by example with an ethical way to present it.

There was no bribe for a vote, the VCO was announced at the third round of funding, after all the votes were in. The Kuvacash team simply wanted to share back with the MNO community, as well as to incentivise MNOs to participate in the vote. Right now less than 25% of MNOs bother to vote, which is a huge problem! Kuvacash saw a way to address this problem.

Small correction - the VCO was announced before the voting closed on the third month of funding (not all votes were in). However at the time of the announcement I believe the proposal was already over the 10% threshold, so I think it is unreasonable for people to claim that the VCO was an attempt to buy votes.

That being said, I would rather have had Kuvacash distribute to all MNOs or to all dash holders, not just MNs that voted. If you incentivize MNs to vote with anything of value other than the Dash collateral, then you are incentivizing uninformed votes (votes that the MNO would otherwise not have cast). So although I think it is a stretch to call this unethical, it might not have been the best way to go about it.

 

[Triptolemoose]

The protocol already takes care of this. Additionally, unlike the dash collateral - with regard to the VCO tokens, there is no punishment for making a wrong choice, only a reward, which might be non-zero even if it is the wrong choice.



Small correction - the VCO was announced before the voting closed on the third month of funding (not all votes were in). However at the time of the announcement I believe the proposal was already over the 10% threshold, so I think it is unreasonable for people to claim that the VCO was an attempt to buy votes.

That being said, I would rather have had Kuvacash distribute to all MNOs or to all dash holders, not just MNs that voted. If you incentivize MNs to vote with anything of value other than the Dash collateral, then you are incentivizing uninformed votes (votes that the MNO would otherwise not have cast). So although I think it is a stretch to call this unethical, it might not have been the best way to go about it.

Can you explain the VCO re: no punishment for wrong choice? I’m not sure I understand what you mean there. Surely bad investment decisions in projects can lead to loss of capital for MNOs if the price of MN tanks = punishment.

And yes, votes were pretty much all in before VCO was announced, but project was well over the 10% funding threshold and in the third month. So strictly speaking, yes, more votes could have come in, but ineffectual. People needed a heads-up to engage and vote, and the team gave plenty of notice.

You can see the votes rolling in on the vote tracker, they look very flat even after the VCO announcement: https://dashvotetracker.com/history.php?ProposalID=346

Not sure how you’d incentivise uninformed votes. You have to trust that MNOs will vote for projects that will increase the value of their investment, or achieve things that they are aligned with.

Why should everyone get Utility Notes? If they don’t bother engaging then they miss out. Otherwise the incentive to vote disappears. The turn out has been pretty dismal, with under 25% of MNs bothering to vote.

The biggest risk I see here on the forum is a defamation case re: baseless criminal fraud accusation.

@tungfa you need to get onto this ASAP and clean up the thread.

 

[Arthyron]

@JOL - If you voted from a different MN address then, you should be able to redeem your VCO distribution by using the private keys from that old MN address the same way you'd do so with any airdrop, so that's not a problem. The VCO tokens perform different functions within the KuvaCash system than Dash. Fiat money (dollars) are converted in to Dash to be used for digital payment. The VCO tokens are held as collateral to allow agents to act as agents on the platform and perform other functions. They're separate systems. The VCO tokens aren't for buying or exchanging Dash.

@Barrett Davis - The MNOs have been talking about this for a while, to see if there is some way for the DAO to actually *invest* in these projects instead of throwing away money on them, for the DAO as a whole to see a return. We've talked about if the DAO can legally eventually own equity or shares in the projects it funds, could we see those shares or dividends used to buy more Dash for the Treasury, etc? One of the options was to actually have those dividends paid directly to MNOs, which as you can guess there were mixed opinions and disagreements about, but it was one of the things that has been discussed, and I think the VCO was predicated upon that discussion.

The one thing I think you're forgetting is that the KuvaCash team don't actually hold equity or shares in KuvaCash, they hold VCO tokens just like the ones they're going to distribute to MNOs, that's their stake in the project, same as MNOs, same as the Agents that will need to hold VCO tokens as collateral to facilitate the fiat on/off ramps. KuvaCash didn't want to *reward* or *bribe* Dash, they wanted to *partner* with Dash in a way no other project has been able to give back so far. Whether that was good, bad, ethical, unethical is up for debate, but it's important to understand what their intent and methodology was in carrying things out the way they did.

If you're *going* to partner with the DAO, that's about as good a way as can be implemented until our legal standing solidifies and we can actually receive disbursements back to the treasury.

 

[Argon31]

Is it the job of Kuvacash to sit in judgement on who votes and who doesnt and reward people accordingly?

Who in the ..... world are you to reward or punish anyone for voting or not voting. Stay within your limits and pitch like anyone else.

The VCO comes under the purview of securities fraud, where people abuse their position to get illegal benefits. This is an open and shut case.
By collecting free coins(or whatever else) on behalf of everyone else, MNs are getting what can be construed as a bribe to vote.

The fact that it was done while the voting was on makes it more glaring and unethical. It is not your job to fix the turnout.

Your assertions on it did not affect the voting are is non-legal opinion to say the least. If it could have affected the voting thats all that matters.

People like troydash running public companies only need one complaint of this nature to get entangled in a first rate legal mess.

 

[Triptolemoose]

Is it the job of Kuvacash to sit in judgement on who votes and who doesnt and reward people accordingly?

Who in the ..... world are you to reward or punish anyone for voting or not voting. Stay within your limits and pitch like anyone else.

The VCO comes under the purview of securities fraud, where people abuse their position to get illegal benefits. This is an open and shut case.
By collecting free coins(or whatever else) on behalf of everyone else, MNs are getting what can be construed as a bribe to vote.

The fact that it was done while the voting was on makes it more glaring and unethical. It is not your job to fix the turnout.

Your assertions on it did not affect the voting are is non-legal opinion to say the least. If it could have affected the voting thats all that matters.

People like troydash running public companies only need one complaint of this nature to get entangled in a first rate legal mess.

I’m still waiting for your explanation how RICO applies in this case, as well as what the ‘10 legal issues’ are that you mentioned.

Until then we can assume You clearly have no idea. There are no laws that apply - Utility Notes are not securities.

It's actually defamation to allege fraud with no grounds - nothing fraudulent here - nobody is making a false promise.

I can see your account was only set up recently, and most of your comments revolve around attacking proposal owners, so I assume you are here to cause legal issues by engaging in defamation on the Dash forum.

@tungfa you should clean this thread.

 

[Argon31]

As for the commonsense or non-legal point:

Turnout is by far the biggest factor in deciding if a proposal goes through or not since all proposals dont get equal votes.

Ben Swann, has the almost lowest yes to no vote ratio in all the proposals that have ever made it. He only made it because he had a huge turnout. 2:
Only Evan Duffield had something go through with something similar. ( Remember Instax Soda Machine Anyone? )

A proposal with a 500-250 yes- no ratio is dead but a propopsal with a 1000-500 count will still make it.

So you are digging your own grave by saying that you were incentivizing turnout, which is a kind of fraud in itself.

 

[Triptolemoose]

As for the commonsense or non-legal point:

Turnout is by far the biggest factor in deciding if a proposal goes through or not since all proposals dont get equal votes.

Ben Swann, has the almost lowest yes to no vote ratio in all the proposals that have ever made it. He only made it because he had a huge turnout. 2:
Only Evan Duffield had something go through with something similar. ( Remember Instax Soda Machine Anyone? )

A proposal with a 500-250 yes- no ratio is dead but a propopsal with a 1000-500 count will still make it.

So you are digging your own grave by saying that you were incentivizing turnout, which is a kind of fraud in itself.

All the stats can be seen on dash vote tracker.

Ethically you might argue it’s an attempt to incentivise. But again, it is defamation to allege criminal fraud with no legal grounds.

So please spell out your explanation of how RICO applies (criminal fraud) in this case, or you are on the hook for defamation.

 

[tungfa]

i am shutting this down for now
there are a LOT of BIG words being thrown around with ZERO backup !!
Be Warned @Argon31 do NOT use "fraud" and the likes if u have no facts on hand !
(am waiting for other admins to suggest solution)