Pre-pre-proposal: interested in research/consultancy on DASH budget governance?

R

RickM

New member
Hello everyone. I am a social scientist with an interest in decentralised governance.

I am interested in DASH because of the 10% pool and how that is administered. I don't have a proposal to make at this point, but I'm curious how you would feel about research into governance of the DASH budget. More specifically, would MNOs, the group among which this governance has been decentralised, be interested in participating in this research? Would you be interested in funding it?

After doing some reading, mostly on this forum, and checking out DASH Central, I get the impression that not everyone is satisfied with the mechanisms through which the 10% fund is being administered. I have seen valid looking criticisms that the system requires more time and expertise from MNOs than is reasonable to expect, and that methods of tracking the success of funded projects are lacking.

From my perspective, it is interesting that this budget voting system exists at all and that it is being operated quite transparently. If you regard this as an early iteration of budget governance that has much room for improvement (in terms of the available tools and/or the ways these are used socially), then we're on the same page and maybe I have something to offer in that development process.

I would like to hear your perspectives on DASH budget governance, and it would be great to discuss this in more detail with anyone who's interested on the new dashnation discord (slack was full by the time I got here).

I'm probably in the minority here, but for me DASH is more interesting as a functioning DAO than as another cryptocurrency. There are probably others like me who are more interested in hearing about a currency that funds projects in an innovative way, than about technical aspects which are poorly understood outside the community of crypto enthusiasts.
 
RickM said:
a functioning DAO
Click to expand...
Just because a thing is in motion, does not make it "functional."

There are plenty of dysfunctional mechanisms in the world. DASH's DGBB is one of them.

DASH's Budget system was chosen specifically because of it's defects, even though better options were on the table. Few MNOs bother to participate in it, which makes it even more dysfunctional.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
Might want to team up with @Pietro Speroni (has a deep interest in eDemocracy)
Click to expand...
Hello. Surely it would be interesting to work together. I am not a social scientist. Merely a mathematician which, after a past in bioinformatics, has in the last decade specialised in eDemocracy and Computational Social Choice. As such my aim is to develop, and guide people in building, "mathematically fair" system.

Let me clarify with an example, when you go and vote your vote is equally valid as someone else. This is something very basic in Voting theory which we now consider obvious. And to limit undue people's influence voting is usually anonymous. We know that when people vote anonymously, or not anonymously the result is very different, and this is why we decided to keep the vote anonymous. In eDemocracy the participation is much more complex, interactive, and continuous. As such keeping it fair is also harder. But it has more creative opportunities (which makes me love this field).

You can look at my youtube channel, and my homepage for an idea of the kind of stuff I develop. Right now I am participating with a new coin (DNN). I did contact the DASH core team, and they did answer. But my feeling is that until the Evolution platform is out, nothing else will matter to them. And as a MNO, I support this.

As you can see my research is very focused technically. And maybe a collaboration might be fruitful especially because of our academic complementary differences.
 
Just wanted to drop in and say thanks for all these replies! There's a lot of great material here that I've started reading through, then I got sidetracked and forgot to come back and respond, busy week.
I'll be in touch with some of you for further discussion. Cheers!
 
Please don't assume that the governance system is immutable, it will change and improve. I want to work on this early next year. I've even started writing about 2 DIPs on how to make the system better. However one of the main reasons that you don't see any changes at the moment is that we simply have a roadmap, and this is not the highest priority. I personally envision a much better system, but first a few cryptological problems need to be addressed, most important of these is a scaling/complexity issue. There are solutions that have begin sprouting, we just are all working on something else right now (mostly evolution for others, and me iOS/documentation/new community app).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top