I think it's good that there is a cost to make a proposal, but I think it becomes too prohibitive as the price of Dash continues to go up. I think it would be a good idea to re-evaluate these costs each time Dash makes significant moves. Around $100 USD feels right to me, but I'm curious what other people think.
Let's take a quick vote on proposal costs
- Thread starter dashly
- Start date
thesavoyard
Active member
I know I've just spent a lot for my proposal. I think it should be a % of the amount asked. With a minimum amount to prevent spamming the Master node holders with votes. That would allow diversification of projects, from small to large! Maybe between 1% and 5% with a minimum of 5 Dash asked for? Not sure what we'd need to prevent bad proposals!
Acedian
Active member
If the proposal fee is too high as it is now with Dash = $100+, then people will be discouraged form submitting ideas. This will potentially hurt Dash because of missed opportunities.
I think we should have a dynamic proposal fee base on the Dash value of $50 (or whatever USD value is agreed).
I think we should have a dynamic proposal fee base on the Dash value of $50 (or whatever USD value is agreed).
Acedian
Active member
I don't think a percentage is needed as a successful proposal almost always refunds the fee. You'd be just charging people with more ambitious failed proposals more.
I agree, that would be the best solution.
I think it should either be linked to something more stable, like the dollar or gold, or else a % of the requested amount.
% of requested amount, actually, seems most flexible. And if successful, the fee can automatically be reimbursed with no need to add to the requested fee like now. I hate that we just burn dash up now anyway
The reimbursements could be above and beyond the set budget because the fee was burned in the first place, so we're not creating more just replacing the burned fee. I think that can be done without any security risks.
% of requested amount, actually, seems most flexible. And if successful, the fee can automatically be reimbursed with no need to add to the requested fee like now. I hate that we just burn dash up now anyway
The reimbursements could be above and beyond the set budget because the fee was burned in the first place, so we're not creating more just replacing the burned fee. I think that can be done without any security risks.
I think a dynamic price measured against the dollar is the best solution. I don't think a percentage would work very well. If, say, the percentage was 5 percent and someone was requesting 100 Dash, they would pay 5 Dash to submit the proposal. If the were requesting 700, then they would pay 35 to submit the proposal ... unless I'm not following correctly? I'm not sure how many people would be willing to pay such high fees to submit a proposal which may or may not pass. The goal of having a fee to begin with is to prevent spam, so it should probably be fixed at a price just high enough to prevent spam and no more... whether it be $25, $50, $100 or some other number, at some point I think we'll have to bring it to vote.I think it should either be linked to something more stable, like the dollar or gold, or else a % of the requested amount.
% of requested amount, actually, seems most flexible. And if successful, the fee can automatically be reimbursed with no need to add to the requested fee like now. I hate that we just burn dash up now anyway
The reimbursements could be above and beyond the set budget because the fee was burned in the first place, so we're not creating more just replacing the burned fee. I think that can be done without any security risks.
Skatopia
Member
The price originally was very low in $, and was meant merely as an anti-spam measure. It should remain that, and be dramatically decreased to fit merely that purpose. I say look at what it was originally, then relate the $ price at the time...set it there again. It was good enough before. Or do the percentage idea someone left above, with a minimum flat rate of like $50.
This was already discussed a number of times. Use forum search.
tl;rd: imagine DASH going to $1000 and proposal submission fee stays $50. System would be swamped by requests for "free money" (one may argue it does already). MNO won't have time, resources, and desire to go through each one responsibly and will resort to bulk voting yes or no. And this is not the desired behavior in the budgeting system.
Join forces instead, communicate and form groups. Instead of submitting 2 proposals on "promoting DASH in Ukraine", do a single one which would be more comprehensive. Instead of submitting 10 funding proposals for ATMs, create ATM Task Force, propose funding conditions for ATM owners and clear investment thesis for MNO. Instead of.. Well, you get the idea...
tl;rd: imagine DASH going to $1000 and proposal submission fee stays $50. System would be swamped by requests for "free money" (one may argue it does already). MNO won't have time, resources, and desire to go through each one responsibly and will resort to bulk voting yes or no. And this is not the desired behavior in the budgeting system.
Join forces instead, communicate and form groups. Instead of submitting 2 proposals on "promoting DASH in Ukraine", do a single one which would be more comprehensive. Instead of submitting 10 funding proposals for ATMs, create ATM Task Force, propose funding conditions for ATM owners and clear investment thesis for MNO. Instead of.. Well, you get the idea...
- Priced in grams of gold; stable, universal and we're meant to be sticking it to fiat
- Percentage based on amount being asked to allow proposals of different sizes.
- Minimum to prevent spam
- Max cap because I see no point over a certain amount
- Small fixed amount for zero sum proposals to allow for governance questions
$50 is still $50 regardless of the price Dash goes to. Unless your suggesting that those of us with 1000+ Dash would suddenly view $50 as cheap when Dash hits $1000 and flood the board with proposals... so we need to make the cost of proposals go up as the price of Dash goes up so that this doesn't happen. Seriously, I doubt it... Also, that's just another way of saying that proposals should only be reserved for the "elite", which I'm opposed to.
demo
Well-known member
Here comes again the need to vote the numbers! This community is a community of fools. They have just voted the numbers, but when someone asks them if they want to vote the numbers, their answer is "NO" !!! Fools!!! Tottaly fools.
This is one of the reasons why the history of the polls is needed, it is needed in order to prove the crazyness of a community. So that the newcomers to be aware of the mental state of the community they are about to enter.
<vote history><-- why vote history is usefull?
How much Dash should a proposal cost at current prices?
5 Dash 4 vote(s) 20.0%
4 Dash 0 vote(s) 0.0%
3 Dash 0 vote(s) 0.0%
2 Dash 2 vote(s) 10.0%
1 Dash 9 vote(s) 45.0%
*Less than 1 Dash 5 vote(s) 25.0%
</vote history>
This is one of the reasons why the history of the polls is needed, it is needed in order to prove the crazyness of a community. So that the newcomers to be aware of the mental state of the community they are about to enter.
<vote history><-- why vote history is usefull?
How much Dash should a proposal cost at current prices?
5 Dash 4 vote(s) 20.0%
4 Dash 0 vote(s) 0.0%
3 Dash 0 vote(s) 0.0%
2 Dash 2 vote(s) 10.0%
1 Dash 9 vote(s) 45.0%
*Less than 1 Dash 5 vote(s) 25.0%
</vote history>
Last edited:
camosoul
Well-known member
Leave the proposal submission fee alone. The main problem we had previously as that it was so cheap that losers with no resources could submit dumb proposals asking for "Hey, I have no money because I've never had a good idea, but I've always wanted to try one of my stupid ideas, so please won't DASH give me money to waste on bad ideas?"
People who actually bring something to the table, are people who have resources gained from the last time they did something useful in the world.
Leave it at 5 DASH, or better yet, raise it to 10 DASH.
Weeds out the pothead couch-surfers.
If you believe your idea isn't good enough for you to spend your own money on it, why should DASH spend it's money on it?
If you know your idea is awesome, and you know you have what it takes to back it up, you should already be doing it, and not really care if it costs $1000 to get DASH to follow you through on it. Or not. Whatever. Why do you care either way, it's only $1000. If DASH doesn't want to fund you, then you don't have to worry about the socialist bitching and whining when it succeeds. Frankly, I think there's more benefit to staying out of DASH's budget than getting in it... Dealing with MNOs just isn't worth the hassle. If you want to do something, do it, keep it private, and to hell with these idiot snowflakes.
There are only 2 things DASH needs at this point.
1) IX to be fixed, and the MNOs have already delegated millions of dollars worth of DASH only to have this matter completely neglected.
2) A service to go with it, which by it's nature, would have to a private corporate entity anyway. The MNOs as staunch socialists that would never fund this.
So, there's one thing that desperately needs to be done, and for which millions have been paid, and it has been rejected outright in spite of how painfully obvious it is that it is needed.
And the second, which there's no way the MNOs would ever support it anyway, and that's just fine because they don't deserve a say, nor will they accept reality while being deliberately divorced from it...
All you can really do for DASH at this moment is create a retail service template hoping that IX gets fixed someday... Even if you had a proposal, there can be no results because IX is still broken. It's a guaranteed setup for failure, and it's not an accident. IX has been deliberately kept in a broken state to assure no one can make progress on this. Anyone who tries is slandered and trolled by those who are controlling the outcome by keeping IX broken.
People who actually bring something to the table, are people who have resources gained from the last time they did something useful in the world.
Leave it at 5 DASH, or better yet, raise it to 10 DASH.
Weeds out the pothead couch-surfers.
If you believe your idea isn't good enough for you to spend your own money on it, why should DASH spend it's money on it?
If you know your idea is awesome, and you know you have what it takes to back it up, you should already be doing it, and not really care if it costs $1000 to get DASH to follow you through on it. Or not. Whatever. Why do you care either way, it's only $1000. If DASH doesn't want to fund you, then you don't have to worry about the socialist bitching and whining when it succeeds. Frankly, I think there's more benefit to staying out of DASH's budget than getting in it... Dealing with MNOs just isn't worth the hassle. If you want to do something, do it, keep it private, and to hell with these idiot snowflakes.
There are only 2 things DASH needs at this point.
1) IX to be fixed, and the MNOs have already delegated millions of dollars worth of DASH only to have this matter completely neglected.
2) A service to go with it, which by it's nature, would have to a private corporate entity anyway. The MNOs as staunch socialists that would never fund this.
So, there's one thing that desperately needs to be done, and for which millions have been paid, and it has been rejected outright in spite of how painfully obvious it is that it is needed.
And the second, which there's no way the MNOs would ever support it anyway, and that's just fine because they don't deserve a say, nor will they accept reality while being deliberately divorced from it...
All you can really do for DASH at this moment is create a retail service template hoping that IX gets fixed someday... Even if you had a proposal, there can be no results because IX is still broken. It's a guaranteed setup for failure, and it's not an accident. IX has been deliberately kept in a broken state to assure no one can make progress on this. Anyone who tries is slandered and trolled by those who are controlling the outcome by keeping IX broken.
Last edited:
This has also been my number one complaint. So much so, that I had actually prepared a proposal. Before submitting it I read through the whitepapers to see if this would be addressed, and it does look like it will be addressed as part of Dash Evolution.
https://www.dash.org/binaries/evo/DashPaper-v13-v1.pdf
Since the introduction of InstantX , Dash has established itself as the fastest cryptocurrency on the market. However, in the current system (v12) this service has to be requested in the wallet. This will no longer be necessary, as this latest implementation of Dash will provide an automatic InstantX service for all transactions on the network. This will also be covered in greater detail in the DashDrive paper.
camosoul
Well-known member
I've read all that, and I'm aware. My point is that putting off a repair of the killer feature for an estimated 3 years after it's invention only means someone else can copy it. and grab the market.
This is a completely different type of first-mover scenario that the trader mentality doesn't grasp.
Depending on the retardation of others to keep you in the lead is foolish.
Just fix IX for the moment. I know it'll take some time and resources, but so does learning how to use a Trezor. It's worth it for the security and progress that can be made which otherwise cannot be made. And to stop looking stupid...
"HERE'S THE KILLER FEATURE! WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY USE IT, SO PLEASE WON'T SOMEONE ELSE DO IT? WE HATE WINNING AND WOULD RATHER YOU DID IT INSTEAD!"
No, they're not stupid. That's not it. It's about ego. As long as IX stays broken, nobody else can offer the DASH -> fiat service. They're willing to risk losing the whole game just to garner the glory of "it as us who did it." They're deliberately preventing anyone else from touching it so they can be the ones that deliver the service.
Fucking pathetic. We could already be using it, and bitclones a memory just like MtGOX... Save for the need to risk it all on a pathetic ego trip.
This is a completely different type of first-mover scenario that the trader mentality doesn't grasp.
Depending on the retardation of others to keep you in the lead is foolish.
Just fix IX for the moment. I know it'll take some time and resources, but so does learning how to use a Trezor. It's worth it for the security and progress that can be made which otherwise cannot be made. And to stop looking stupid...
"HERE'S THE KILLER FEATURE! WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY USE IT, SO PLEASE WON'T SOMEONE ELSE DO IT? WE HATE WINNING AND WOULD RATHER YOU DID IT INSTEAD!"
No, they're not stupid. That's not it. It's about ego. As long as IX stays broken, nobody else can offer the DASH -> fiat service. They're willing to risk losing the whole game just to garner the glory of "it as us who did it." They're deliberately preventing anyone else from touching it so they can be the ones that deliver the service.
Fucking pathetic. We could already be using it, and bitclones a memory just like MtGOX... Save for the need to risk it all on a pathetic ego trip.
demo
Well-known member
An idea can be awesome for a group of people, and tottaly bad for another group.
My idea for example to distribute Dash in a fair way among generations is tottaly bad for the greedy 2014-2016 generation (who hold most of the votes) but it is awesome for the rest generations and if implemented it will boost Dash and make it the coin of the future. And of course if you refuse the idea of fair distribution among generations, your coin will remain a stupid coin (like bitcoin is) that nobody will use it 20 years from now.
So yes, there are ideas that are awesome, but not for the greedy masternodes of this wicked generation...
Last edited:
Acedian
Active member
So anyone with limited means is no use to dash?
camosoul
Well-known member
After all this time, do you still believe this is unplanned?you leave me perplexed
Pearls before swine... Why do I even bother. I know every word is ignored. It's like teaching math to a cat.
I fully expect to be hated when intruding upon a sacred safe space echo chamber such as the DASH forum. I combine tidbits with a good excuse to Ad Hominem so the snowflakes can keep on being snowflakes.
Last edited:
camosoul
Well-known member
No. People of limited means have proven they are of limited use or they would not have limited means.
It costs nothing to start doing whatever it is you think needs done. Show us, don't imma gonna if only someone else would shoulder the risks I'm unwilling to take on my own idea... If even you think your idea isn't good enough to warrant your own limited resources, why should anyone else offer more? Never succeeded at anything before? No confidence? If you don't believe in yourself, why should anyone else?
Don't make it about the money. It only proves the inexperience. The money doesn't come first. The work does.
Prove you're worth a damn. The means are irrelevant.
I've given away far more than $1000 in DASH to underappreciated projects so the people don't give up. That's part of The Usual Suspects' plan; demoralization of any who try to steal their thunder by actually doing something, anything at all... If that doesn't discourage them, then comes the withdrawal of cooperation. If that doesn't stall the project and give The Usual Suspects the "see, they failed" card, then comes the outright trolling and slander... And if you dare to actually pull it off, you can expect threats of frivolous lawsuits to soak up your time and funds...
Last edited: