[Pre-Proposal] DashBoost - Funding Small Projects By Sub-DAO

[Pasta]

can I delegate my vote?
For example I would like to hire as delegate @UdjinM6 for all proposals related to code development and @amanda_b_johnson for all proposals related to advertising , and let them vote on my behalf (I own one vote and a half).
Will delegation be implemented in your DashBoost system?

I am looking forward seeing your prototype, and if delegation is not supported this will be my first proposal in your system.

Thanks for your feedback Demo, delegating your vote would be an interesting system. I will need to talk about it with my team and with the community to see if it would be beneficial. It has the possible downside of having less interaction and allow more centralization. But also could help. Will think on it more. Thanks for bringing the idea up.

 

[Pasta]

Hello Dash community,

I regret to inform you that the public launch of the DashBoost test site will not go live this weekend as planned due to factors outside the control this team. The initial primary problem was the intense storms in Northwestern Europe. Ireland, where the development team is based, is under a state of emergency due to the snow and storming. If this was the only problem it might have been manageable, however, the AWS malfunction today (https://aws.amazon.com/message/41926/) affecting the US-East region removed our ability to deploy and test code. With these problems, we have decided to push back the launch of the public test site until Monday to ensure the platform is stable and to ensure my team stays safe in the storms. On Monday, our first release will come out using testnet and we would greatly appreciate if the members of this community would use it testing different features and giving feedback.

Thank you for your time. We apologize for the delay

Pasta and TechSquad.

 

[charlieb]

Thanks for the update. Stay safe everyone. I look forward to checking out the site on Monday.

 

[ayo_brezzy]

I'm sorry but I totally disagree with this. We wouldn't be able to audit all these sub-daos, true, but that's exactly what decentralization entails.

Would I want big payments to go to your (eventual) big organization and trust you with global sub-daos? - absolutely not. Should I trust that you will have enough expertise and deep understanding of each region / niche market? - obviously not. Korean sub-daos should be managed by Koreans. Likewise, a Bollywood sub-dao would be best served with those most knowledgeable in that field. And so on.

I agree but I think I see a great possible mid ground. All first proposals should be Sub Dao’d.... with a max outlay [maybe 50-75 DASH], and then all approved are sent on to general vote... so first submissions or people who have never been approved get the opportunity to get that crucial feedback.

I would probably say that they have a separate voting cycle, (I.e. 3/15 for 3/31 vote)

It would also be a great way to focus congruent efforts; Venezuela, Media, Research....

IMO

 

[ayo_brezzy]

Hey @charlieb, it depends how many qualified reviewers we get whether it will be a pool or the same all the time. At the moment I have enough reviewers to be able to do this successfully however I do not yet have enough for the long term. I definitely want a large pool of qualified reviewers. All reviewers have to come to agreement on if the petition should receive funding or not, if they disagree they have to come together and talk to a solution. And all 3 rubrics and the final decision document will be publicly available as well as all info the petitioner provided. There will be voting, so you can vote on a petition acting like a poll and making sure we are acting in a way the community supports. In addition there will be comments sections open through the whole process as well as discord if you want to give feedback as to why you think a certain petition should be granted or denied. In addition, since most of these will be multistaged, even if it passes the first time you can post a bunch in the comments and talk to us about why it's bad etc and at the review for it we might cut it's funding based on community feedback.

How do you decide who is qualified to review? I love the MNO functionality specifically because of the vested interest in it. There’s an inherent ‘good’ attached that makes the system fair, if not perfect.

Personally as a former big 4 auditor, the integrity attached to the due diligence process is an expensive [if actually present] professional quality.... and to parrot @GrandMasterDash opens up a whole new can of worms.

And I do not think it should be approved outside the current board. That just isn’t ‘decentralized’ IMO and that dis validates EVERYTHING.

Do you have a smaller test case idea?

I would also say, make the review boards fees based on full acceptance

 

[ayo_brezzy]

Hey @Pasta ,

Have you considered what @coingun suggested and just have a minimum stake required to vote?
Maybe 5 Dash is required to have 1 vote or something along those lines.
This would eliminate the potential for bribery and all the variables of having volunteers, etc.

I don’t think a reviewer should be known. It should be auto assigned.

Like @feedbands said ‘absolute power corrupts’ and what would stop someone from having a bunch of randoms submit, get approval and jet’... the work is what is needed. And a lot of damage to the ethics of the system could be done in the mean time...

Excuse me if I missed this but what is your professional background?

 

[Pasta]

I don’t think a reviewer should be known. It should be auto assigned.

Like @feedbands said ‘absolute power corrupts’ and what would stop someone from having a bunch of randoms submit, get approval and jet’... the work is what is needed. And a lot of damage to the ethics of the system could be done in the mean time...

Excuse me if I missed this but what is your professional background?

Hello ayo_brezzy, please see the update posted here. The proposal which passed in the January cycle is very different to the one described in the pre-proposal. Thanks.

 

[Pasta]

Please cease all communication on this forum post.
Due to the major differences between the proposal which was submitted to the network and passed, I would greatly appreciate if any and all comments are forwarded to the update posted here. This will help avoid any and all confusion. Thanks