Geert
Active member
What concerns? Please elaborate. IMHO he's talking nonsense.
You're able to appreciate the efficacy of the DIF but not DCG. Why is that?
Pre-proposal reduce the proposal fee to 1 dash
- Thread starter xkcd
- Start date
What concerns? Please elaborate. IMHO he's talking nonsense.
You're able to appreciate the efficacy of the DIF but not DCG. Why is that?
vazaki3
Well-known member
How to judge DCG?
They do not report to dashwatch.org.
They write nothing.
The only way to inspect their job is to spend/spoil your time by watching an endless ranting in a youtube video.
As a result of all the above...Dash keeps falling....Dash is now the 50th cryptocoin.
But who cares anyway? MNOs certainly do not, otherwise they would have fired/replaced DCG a long time ago.
At least Dash's fundumentals are better than the government's FIAT money, bitcoin or dogecoin, so there is still hope in case the community changes its mind.
We are still able to crash the bad actors, our voting/praying right give us this option.
Last edited:
AshFrancis
Member
Sent 1 Dash. I support this, a greater diversity of POs and new blood entering the system is healthy for the network.
qwizzie
Well-known member
I will be voting no then, if this indeed emerges next month as a decision proposal. Interestingly, the price of Dash is now pretty similar to when Technologov created his decision proposal in 2017 to reduce the Dash proposal fee to 1 dash (which as we all know did not pass) : https://www.dashcentral.org/p/REDUCE_PROPOSAL_FEES_TO_1_DASH
Back then 1 Dash = $174
Now 1 Dash = $171
Even with the 5 Dash proposal fee, we already got spam proposals from disgruntled proposal owners like this one :
Source : https://www.dashcentral.org/budget
I don't even want to contemplate how many spam proposals with an extremely long end date will pop-up and linger in our budget system, once we lower the Dash proposal fee to just 1 dash. Not to mention the number of low quality budget proposals and low quality decision proposals that could emerge with just 1 dash as proposal fee. At least with the 5 Dash proposal fee in place, people need to do some effort to gather feedback from the Dash community, before creating a decision proposal or budget proposal (this thread forms a good example of that).
Ryan Taylor (CEO of DCG) already said he wants to postpone the proposal fee discussion untill at least Dash Platform and DashPay are launched on Dash Mainnet.
Bob Carroll (CTO of DCG) already mentioned in his latest interview, that he thinks the 5 dash proposal fee works fine and he sees no need to change it.
The outcome of GrandMasterDash decision proposal (https://www.dashcentral.org/p/set-your-price-proposals) already shows a heavy resistance to adjusting the 5 dash proposal fee.
Yet here we have another attempt to push-through a 1 dash proposal fee, that i don't think has proven so far to have considerable support among masternode operators. Also i think there needs to be more thought into seperating decision proposals from budget proposals. Now any change in proposal fee affects them both.
Instead of putting so much energy in trying to reduce the proposal fee that could introduce risks to our budget system, why not take a que from the Dash Incubator budget proposal or from the Dash Boost budget proposal and come up with a budget proposal that focus on allocating smaller funding requests in a secure, trustless and safe way. Put some kind of rating system on it, so people can request higher internal funding amounts from that particular budget once their rating get higher. I would be willing to support such a budget proposal (depending on the specifics).
Back then 1 Dash = $174
Now 1 Dash = $171
Even with the 5 Dash proposal fee, we already got spam proposals from disgruntled proposal owners like this one :
Source : https://www.dashcentral.org/budget
I don't even want to contemplate how many spam proposals with an extremely long end date will pop-up and linger in our budget system, once we lower the Dash proposal fee to just 1 dash. Not to mention the number of low quality budget proposals and low quality decision proposals that could emerge with just 1 dash as proposal fee. At least with the 5 Dash proposal fee in place, people need to do some effort to gather feedback from the Dash community, before creating a decision proposal or budget proposal (this thread forms a good example of that).
Ryan Taylor (CEO of DCG) already said he wants to postpone the proposal fee discussion untill at least Dash Platform and DashPay are launched on Dash Mainnet.
Bob Carroll (CTO of DCG) already mentioned in his latest interview, that he thinks the 5 dash proposal fee works fine and he sees no need to change it.
The outcome of GrandMasterDash decision proposal (https://www.dashcentral.org/p/set-your-price-proposals) already shows a heavy resistance to adjusting the 5 dash proposal fee.
Yet here we have another attempt to push-through a 1 dash proposal fee, that i don't think has proven so far to have considerable support among masternode operators. Also i think there needs to be more thought into seperating decision proposals from budget proposals. Now any change in proposal fee affects them both.
Instead of putting so much energy in trying to reduce the proposal fee that could introduce risks to our budget system, why not take a que from the Dash Incubator budget proposal or from the Dash Boost budget proposal and come up with a budget proposal that focus on allocating smaller funding requests in a secure, trustless and safe way. Put some kind of rating system on it, so people can request higher internal funding amounts from that particular budget once their rating get higher. I would be willing to support such a budget proposal (depending on the specifics).
Last edited:
Because it makes trustless look inept.
My gut feel is that there is a little more support for a lower proposal fee, but I will not be supporting such a move because I am more convinced than ever that a fixed fee is the wrong outcome. Five dash is worth more or less depending on where you live.
My other failed proposal was Adaptive Proposal Fees, where MNOs set the price and the mean average is used. We could evolve this idea and let the Proposal Owner declare their country or region. MNO's would decide the proposal fee by country / region. But once again, I believe this would be rejected because it's "too much work", you know, what with DCG being too busy working on Dash Platform blah blah blah.
The only way this is going to change is when someone with influence within DCG takes a stand. Or do what I do and reject all DCG proposals. They have had years to prove themselves and, frankly, the results are underwhelming considering they suck up 60% of the entire budget every single month.
There's a lot of denial within DCG. Only recently, Ryan said the masternode count was possibly going down because the USD value was high. Well look at the count now and tell me the same thing.. it's exactly 4500 nodes.
AshFrancis
Member
My view is that a better solution would just be to put the proposal fee as a percentage of the funding ask, probably 5% with a minimum of 1 Dash fee or so to prevent spam. This will naturally scale with the price of Dash and the POs geographic region.
Unfortunately, like your variable fee, that is a lot harder to sell to the network, so I support lowering the fee to 1 Dash.
When DCG finally gets around to working on governance, I'm sure they will be proposing more involved changes than the proposals that have so far been put to the network. This mentality of only approving DCG changes leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I know how this will go. Ryan will hold discussions with a minority group - probably discord only - and then ask MNOs for feedback. Well fuck that, I didn't see a single comment from DCG when I was proposing Adaptive Proposal Fees or Set Your Price Proposals. They chose to leave a vacuum for speculation.
I'm undecided about proportional pricing because, a) the 5 dash maximalists will argue (as always) that lower fees equals lower quality, and b) 5% - or any number - is still arbitary and does nothing to discover the true market price i.e. no one on the other side countering that offer.
vazaki3
Well-known member
What the fuck??? Are you nuts?
You can easily chose to FILTER the spam proposals, so that they will not appear in your personal view!
Why dont you allow me to look at the "spam" proposals, as long as I want to look at them?
Not only stupid, but also a censor too!!!!
A filhty killer of ideas, living in your echo chamber.
In the meantime, Dash is now the 59th coin in coinmarketcap, and still falling!!!
Dash community should get rid of the current DCG gang and focus on effective governance, which of course requires a proof of individuality and cheap government questions to be allowed to be asked (and thus to be accepted or rejected). This is the way, otherwise Dash is certainly doomed.
Last edited:
Yes. A lot of people here may argue that CMC is mainly tokens or Proof Of Stake or some other differentiator, but the problem is blindingly obvious...... dash has not integrated or made itself indispensable to the 58 projects above it! How can dash possibly be a universal payment if it chooses to be isolated from all these projects?
De-fund DCG, vote No, signal to them that they need to wake up and get their shit together.