Proposal: Business Development (January)

[TaoOfSatoshi]

This thread, although not originally designed to talk about communication, has turned into a fantastic discussion and consensus regarding communication. I'm happy to see it. Great job to all participants, a pleasure to read!

 

[Stealth923]

Thanks @babygiraffe - not sure if it was you but Ira Miller has now joined the slack and communication and updates are starting to trickle through from the Lamassu project perspective.

Will give you the benefit of the doubt this time and have reversed my votes on this proposal to yes and you now only need 17 votes more for it to pass.

 

[oaxaca]

... but we have a large specific opportunity coming up that the community will need to specifically vote on, but in the meantime, it would be very helpful to set some funding aside for the expense (one I'm confident will be approved by the community) to make the remaining costs more digestible. Consequently, I strongly encourage all to vote yes on this proposal while we work through the communication void.

While I might be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, I can see that there are MN owners that might have a problem with pre-allocating funds for a yet-to-be-announced project that will require future voter approval. I also understand that spilling the beans might queer the deal. It's a problem.

 

[TroyDASH]

Thanks @babygiraffe - not sure if it was you but Ira Miller has now joined the slack and communication and updates are starting to trickle through from the Lamassu project perspective.

Will give you the benefit of the doubt this time and have reversed my votes on this proposal to yes and you now only need 17 votes more for it to pass.

Yes, thanks @babygiraffe -- I don't consider this problem to be solved by any means, but I am encouraged to see some small steps in the right direction. So I am down with the hold-my-nose yes vote on this one, and I hope that next month's will be easier to support --

 

[bertlebbert]

By setting aside a small amount of funding available to capture opportunities as they arise, we are able to act quickly and nimbly to grow our ecosystem of businesses integrating Dash. We are beginning to attract much larger-impact opportunities, but these opportunities appear to require more substantial support, so we may increase the monthly allotment in the near future if specific opportunities begin regularly exceeding the available budget.
...

Note: Funding from this proposal will be reserved for business development purposes.

Excellent ! I would prefer to see this type of non-specific Business Development proposal every month. Build a reserve fund to be appropriately dispensed as opportunities arise - detailed announcements and progress reports can be released in a timely manner. Over time, MNOs will judge performance and vote accordingly.

 

[fernando]

Some more thoughts on the one person making all proposals or distributing them.

One person makes the proposals (and controls the funds, you need to prove ownership of the payment address)
Pros:

easier to control all funds and have standard procedures
separation of manager and payments means that a manager can't go rogue because he can't mismanage and pay by himself​

Cons:

less transparency on who is really responsible. We should be able to address this with more communication
concentrated risk... if a bus hits @babygiraffe more funds are lost. It would also be sad because he's a really nice guy ​

Distributed proposals among project managers
Pros:

more transparency​

Cons:

less control over funds and procedures
distributed risk means a lower chance of losing funds, but a higher chance of something happening
​

I would go with one person making the proposals, but clearly identifying who is responsible for each project. It is not possible yet, but at some time in the future I would try to use multisig addresses for proposal payments so we have distributed decisions and more security.

 

[demo]

In case this proposal is voted, then the budget money is allocated and transfered to the wallet address (which @babygiraffe controls), and @babygiraffe is the one responsible of giving that money to the people who succesfully finished the required job . But what if the job fails? What happens then?

WHY THE PAYEMENT ADDRESS OF THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT A DEDICATED (to the bsdev-general-201701 project) ONE, BUT IT IS A VERY COMMON AND USED WALLET ADDRESS WHERE A LOT OF TRANSACTIONS HAPPEN INSIDE IT EVERYDAY? Additionaly, the above wallet's report at coinfirm is not generated. Isnt the use of such a wallet address a way to obfuscate things and (in case the job finally fails to finish) a way to take control of the allocated budget money?

My question is the below:

IN THE BAD CASE where this proposal is voted but the job is NOT finished and the whole thing finally turns to a total failure, then who owns and controls the budget allocated money? Will this money remain forever into the payement address?

 

[Ryan Taylor]

Some more thoughts on the one person making all proposals or distributing them.

One person makes the proposals (and controls the funds, you need to prove ownership of the payment address)
Pros:

easier to control all funds and have standard procedures
separation of manager and payments means that a manager can't go rogue because he can't mismanage and pay by himself​

Cons:

less transparency on who is really responsible. We should be able to address this with more communication
concentrated risk... if a bus hits @babygiraffe more funds are lost. It would also be sad because he's a really nice guy ​

Distributed proposals among project managers
Pros:

more transparency​

Cons:

less control over funds and procedures
distributed risk means a lower chance of losing funds, but a higher chance of something happening
​

I would go with one person making the proposals, but clearly identifying who is responsible for each project. It is not possible yet, but at some time in the future I would try to use multisig addresses for proposal payments so we have distributed decisions and more security.

If I am hit by a bus, or my house burns down, there is a procedure to recover the funds. With Evan being local and instructions in the event of my death, all funds would easily be recovered. We are also planning payouts to multisig addresses in the near future (right now the code doesn't allow that) and secured with hardware wallets.

I think if I start including the proposal owner in the proposal going forward, we have addressed both of the cons with the current arrangement, and retain a separation of funds ownership and project execution ownership that increases accountability within the team. The only shortfall right now is that I could theoretically run off with all the funds... with only modest amounts of money, I think this is acceptable for the time being, but we'll need to address that as well as budgets grow into the millions. It would be unacceptable - no matter how much the community trusts my character - to leave the current setup as is. For now, my professional reputation and jail-free aspirations should be enough to keep community members from worrying. When the monies involved grow and it becomes worth the expense, we should consider hiring security staff (perhaps experienced staff from exchanges) to create a financial system to protect the funds and ensure no single employee can make off with them.

 

[Ryan Taylor]

In case this proposal is voted, then the budget money is allocated and transfered to the wallet address (which @babygiraffe controls), and @babygiraffe is the one responsible of giving that money to the people who succesfully finished the required job . But what if the job fails? What happens then?

WHY THE PAYEMENT ADDRESS OF THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT A DEDICATED (to the bsdev-general-201701 project) ONE, BUT IT IS A VERY COMMON AND USED WALLET ADDRESS WHERE A LOT OF TRANSACTIONS HAPPEN INSIDE IT EVERYDAY? Additionaly, the above wallet's report at coinfirm is not generated. Isnt the use of such a wallet address a way to obfuscate things and (in case the job finally fails to finish) a way to take control of the allocated budget money?

My question is the below:

IN THE BAD CASE where this proposal is voted but the job is NOT finished and the whole thing finally turns to a total failure, then who owns and controls the budget allocated money? Will this money remain forever into the payement address?

The reason the payout address has been use is because that address is the Business Development fund address. It was first created back in June for the first Business Development payout in July and has been in continuous use ever since. When balances drop, or new expenses are anticipated, we replenish or build the balance within the same address.

We keep all funds within that address, and when a payment is made out of the BD fund address, the change is returned to that same address. This is done to provide full transparency over the balances and transactions (not just for business development, but ALL core team proposals). Anyone can view our financial report at the end of each quarter and see for themselves on the block chain that the amount in that budget's address matches the reported balance in the quarterly report's balance sheet. Pretty cool, huh? One of the benefits of a transparent blockchain.

EDIT: To be clear, the address IS DEDICATED to business development, but business development is a rolling fund in which the balance drops and then reloaded over time.

EDIT 2: By definition, unused funds in the business development fund will eventually be used. However, even in fixed budgets (say for a conference), ALL core team budgets state that any leftover funds will be applied toward similar activities (for example any leftover funds from a conference expense will be applied toward a future conference).

 

[fernando]

If I am hit by a bus, or my house burns down, there is a procedure to recover the funds. With Evan being local and instructions in the event of my death, all funds would easily be recovered. We are also planning payouts to multisig addresses in the near future (right now the code doesn't allow that) and secured with hardware wallets.

I think if I start including the proposal owner in the proposal going forward, we have addressed both of the cons with the current arrangement, and retain a separation of funds ownership and project execution ownership that increases accountability within the team. The only shortfall right now is that I could theoretically run off with all the funds... with only modest amounts of money, I think this is acceptable for the time being, but we'll need to address that as well as budgets grow into the millions. It would be unacceptable - no matter how much the community trusts my character - to leave the current setup as is. For now, my professional reputation and jail-free aspirations should be enough to keep community members from worrying. When the monies involved grow and it becomes worth the expense, we should consider hiring security staff (perhaps experienced staff from exchanges) to create a financial system to protect the funds and ensure no single employee can make off with them.

I didn't know that you had those plans already in place, but it doesn't surprise me a bit. Anyway, please look both ways before crossing!

I agree that in the future we need to look more security, not only because of character, but also because of computer accidents or hacks. When we are able to have multisig as part of the monetary base we should be able to implement any scenario we dream.

 

[demo]

The reason the payout address has been use is because that address is the Business Development fund address. It was first created back in June for the first Business Development payout in July and has been in continuous use ever since. When balances drop, or new expenses are anticipated, we replenish or build the balance within the same address.

We keep all funds within that address, and when a payment is made out of the BD fund address, the change is returned to that same address. This is done to provide full transparency over the balances and transactions (not just for business development, but ALL core team proposals). Anyone can view our financial report at the end of each quarter and see for themselves on the block chain that the amount in that budget's address matches the reported balance in the quarterly report's balance sheet. Pretty cool, huh? One of the benefits of a transparent blockchain.

EDIT: To be clear, the address IS DEDICATED to business development, but business development is a rolling fund in which the balance drops and then reloaded over time.

You did not answer to my question!
You did not answer to my question!

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MONEY IN CASE THE JOB IS A FAILURE? WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MONEY IN CASE THERE IS NO DELIVERABLE? DO THIS MONEY ALWAYS REMAIN IN THE WALLET ADDRESS?

 

[fernando]

You did not answer to my question!
You did not answer to my question!

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MONEY IN CASE THE JOB IS A FAILURE? DO THIS MONEY ALWAYS REMAIN IN THE ADDRESS?

In case that happened and the budget was not spent, the funds would be use for a similar project. That has been said many times in different proposals.

 

[Ryan Taylor]

You did not answer to my question!
You did not answer to my question!

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MONEY IN CASE THE JOB IS A FAILURE? DO THIS MONEY ALWAYS REMAIN IN THE ADDRESS?

I answered in an edit before seeing this polite reminder.

Read any proposal I've submitted. Near the bottom of every single one it clearly states how unused money will be spent.

 

[demo]

I answered in an edit before seeing this polite reminder.

Read any proposal I've submitted. Near the bottom of every single one it clearly states how unused money will be spent.

You wrote:

Note: Funding from this proposal will be reserved for business development purposes.

This is not clear to me.

You should say "In case of a failure to accomplish the job, funding from this proposal will be reserved for business development purposes".

And who defines what "business development purposes" is?
And WHEN those fundings will be given to business development purposes?
In a month? In 100 years?

 

[Ryan Taylor]

And who defines what a "similar project" is?

It is by category. Conferences and Travel is always spent on conferences and travel. Business development is always spent on business development. Development funds are always spend on development expenses. Legal funds on legal. Etc.

There is admittedly a bit of judgment involved in categorizing an expense that could fall in two categories, but we are diligent about utilizing available funds for the betterment of the network in ways consistent with the approved intent. On the one occasion we wanted to completely redirect funding to another purpose, we actually submitted a "decision" proposal to the network (YES / NO to redirect funds) to ensure we had the network's approval.

 

[demo]

It is by category. Conferences and Travel is always spent on conferences and travel. Business development is always spent on business development. Development funds are always spend on development expenses. Legal funds on legal. Etc.

There is admittedly a bit of judgment involved in categorizing an expense that could fall in two categories, but we are diligent about utilizing available funds for the betterment of the network in ways consistent with the approved intent. On the one occasion we wanted to completely redirect funding to another purpose, we actually submitted a "decision" proposal to the network (YES / NO to redirect funds) to ensure we had the network's approval.

IMHO you should always submit a "decision" proposal to the network in case the money is not used.

Because if you, the responsible of the proposal, and you, the one responsible to judge whether the project was failure or success, is the same person who at the same time judges what "a similar project" is and gives the money to whoever and whenever, then the whole thing becomes a very dangerous situation!!

It would be unacceptable - no matter how much the community trusts my character - to leave the current setup as is.

The community does not trust you, because nobody have ever voted for you.
The masternodes do not trust you either, they have not voted for you to become an employee.
You are just an employee of the core team. Always remember that.

 

[Ryan Taylor]

IMHO you should always submit a "decision" proposal to the network in case the money is not used.

Because if you, the responsible of the proposal, and you, the responsible to judge whether the project was failure or success, is the same person who judges what "a similar project" is and you give the money to whoever you want and whenever you want, this is very dangerous situation!!

At a certain point, if you don't trust the team to execute you should just vote a different team to do the job... one willing to subject themselves to that. To expect that we seek approval for every decision would cost a tremendous amount of nimbleness and productivity that in my opinion would cause more harm than whatever "very dangerous" bad decision making myself and the rest of the team might make. Firstly, we could only receive input once a month (delayed by at least 1-5 weeks depending on the budget cycle timing). Secondly, it would cost a ton of the team's time. It would also, in my opinion, be incredibly demoralizing, demotivating and frankly insulting to most of the highly skilled volunteers working for peanuts to have their decision-making ability removed and be micromanaged. A move like that would likely doom this project to failure.

 

[demo]

It would also, in my opinion, be incredibly demoralizing, demotivating and frankly insulting to most of the highly skilled volunteers working for peanuts to have their decision-making ability removed and be micromanaged. A move like that would likely doom this project to failure.

In case the money is a lot, micromanagement is required.

 

[bertlebbert]

The community does not trust you, because nobody have ever voted for you.
The masternodes do not trust you either, they have not voted for you to become an employee.
You are just an employee of Daniel Diaz and the rest core team. Always remember that.

Well demo... I for one, definitely disagree with that, as I'm sure most do.
But hey, this question is an opportunity for you to start yet another of your famous polls...

 

[demo]

Well demo... I for one, definitely disagree with that, as I'm sure most do.
But hey, this question is an opportunity for you to start yet another of your famous polls...

The forum does not repesent the community, because there is not a proof of individuality scheme on it, so everyone may vote more than once.

One thing that may be done is @babygiraffe to add an appropriate proposal to the budget, and ask the mastenodes to approve him as the responsible to judge whether a proposal submited by the core team is a success or a failure .