Pre-Proposal: All DCG board members must disclose peronal dash masternode holdings

[GrandMasterDash]

For reasons of transparency, confidence and the prevention of corruption, all DCG board members must publicly and independently disclose the IP address and category for all masternodes of the following type:

1. owned.
2. custodian of.
3. delegated for voting.

All of the above information is required without exception or omission.

DCG board members are allowed to use a pseudonym in place of their legal name.

All updates of the above information must be republished within 48 hours of change, including:

1. all IP address changes
2. the addition or removal of masternodes to the network
3. changes to pseudonym.

The dash network seeks this information to ensure incentives and motives are aligned for the confidence and safety of all participants.

Where reasonable evidence is found of omitted or otherwise misleading filings, the network may rightfully take action via a proposal. For the proposal to pass, the standard for super majority must exist, excluding all votes cast by all board members. This is to prevent collusion.

Employees performing board member roles will be considered actual board members and, therefore, must comply to the above disclosure requirements.

All disclosures must be public facing without registration or paywall.

 

[kot]

How is this supposed to be aligned with the privacy ethos you were so strongly advocating for?

 

[GrandMasterDash]

How is this supposed to be aligned with the privacy ethos you were so strongly advocating for?

A fair question.

As with politics in the real world, we hold those making or enforcing the rules to a higher standard. We have expectations of transparency from publicly funded authorities, law makers and politicians. In return for handing over this trust, we as individuals are granted the right to be innocent until proven guilty. This is to say, we are entitled to silence, privacy and representation by default.

Likewise, this proposal recognizes the critical role DCG holds in the dash protocol. The public responsibility for creating, modifying and maintaining the very foundations for payments, data contracts and more. DCGs standing in the community has no match, consistently consuming 60% of all treasury funds, and more in recent times. DCG has maintained this status for years where no other contractor has.

By voting Yes, we are providing confidence to all participants of dash, at all levels, that those wielding such power are being held to a higher standard of account. By doing so, independent groups can build the tools needed to investigate and verify the integrity of votes e.g. mnowatch.

Checks and Balances.

 

[vazaki3]

How is this supposed to be aligned with the privacy ethos you were so strongly advocating for?

My privacy ethos consists of not being able to associate a masternode to a real life identity.

So in case a DCG member wants privacy, he can use a pseudonym.

I support this proposal, as long as the DCG members are allowed to hide their real name and have pseudonyms.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

I support this proposal, as long as the DCG members are allowed to hide their real name and have pseudonyms.

Yes of course, I agree. I will add this to the text.

 

[kot]

A fair question.

As with politics in the real world, we hold those making or enforcing the rules to a higher standard. We have expectations of transparency from publicly funded authorities, law makers and politicians. In return for handing over this trust, we as individuals are granted the right to be innocent until proven guilty. This is to say, we are entitled to silence, privacy and representation by default.

Likewise, this proposal recognizes the critical role DCG holds in the dash protocol. The public responsibility for creating, modifying and maintaining the very foundations for payments, data contracts and more. DCGs standing in the community has no match, consistently consuming 60% of all treasury funds, and more in recent times. DCG has maintained this status for years where no other contractor has.

By voting Yes, we are providing confidence to all participants of dash, at all levels, that those wielding such power are being held to a higher standard of account. By doing so, independent groups can build the tools needed to investigate and verify the integrity of votes e.g. mnowatch.

Checks and Balances.

Even tho I understand where is it coming from, I disagree.
There are many reasons why I disagree but the most important is that "one rule for us, another for them" is a pure definition of hypocrisy and corruption.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Even tho I understand where is it coming from, I disagree.
There are many reasons why I disagree but the most important is that "one rule for us, another for them" is a pure definition of hypocrisy and corruption.

But it is one rule for them and another for others. DCG receive a disproportionate amount of rewards - 60% plus - thereby capping how much other contractors can receive. It could also be seen as preventing other contractors from competing on equal terms.

Would it help if I add a clause to the effect of, "...while DCG are receiving more than 33% of the treasury"?

 

[kot]

@GrandMasterDash this is very different issue than an attempt to cancel financial privacy of the DCG members.
Privacy is a basic human right. Split of the network funds is not the same caliber of things.
Happy to discuss it in a separate thread (to not mix things up).

 

[xkcd]

I don't see the benefit, voting NO.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Okay. I hope mnowatch expands its operations to capture more info and to also produce more bite-sized graphics / reports that it can attract more eyes.

 

[TheNetworkIsBiggerThanYou]

This goes in the totally wrong direction.

The pre-proposal should read DCG ONLY PAYS OUT IN DASH to its anonymous subcontractors.

 

[vazaki3]

Okay. I hope mnowatch expands its operations to capture more info and to also produce more bite-sized graphics / reports that it can attract more eyes.

We used to have a plan to create multiple and on demand automatic graphs, that will be allowed after the endofVote (due to cpu limitation). The plan was, the user should be able to select whatever two (or even three) elements of the mnowatch report, and an automatic graph will be created for him/her. Because we never know what exactly the user wants to see and investigate. By offering predefined/precompiled graphs this means that we are limiting the investigation. So the automatic and on demand graphs is our goal, in order to incentivize and facilitate the data researchers.

A very nice automatic graph could be, for example, per proposal how many individualities voted. I mean, for a specific proposal that has (lets say) 500 votes, create a pie chart where we could see the 111whale, the 95whale, etc until the small sardines. That way we could watch in a glance and per proposal, how strongly the specific proposal is supported (or not supported) by the big whales.

But the automatic graph plan is currently postponed. Still you can see below the pre-alpha version, where a graph is created by combining the "vote history" and the "voters (their IP_Hash)" elements.

https://mnowatch.org/voters-history/

Too many pre-alpha projects in mnowatch....too little time....