• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Proposal: DS Liquidity Providers v2

Ryan Taylor

Ryan Taylor

Well-known member
Foundation Member
This is a cross-post from https://www.dashwhale.org/p/ds-liquidity-v2

The liquidity provider team supports the network by providing liquidity for mixing on the network. Results for mixing on the network have resulted in dramatically shorter mixing times, which in the past could have taken as long as a few days to complete.

Unfortunately, the Liquidity Provider proposal has failed to fund for the past couple of months, putting these services at risk. One of the recent sources of objection to the proposal is the cost. Since the proposal was first created, the price of Dash has increased over 200%, so the cost concern is valid.

To address this concern and (we hope) return the proposal to funded status, we are resubmitting the Liquidity Providers proposal for the next two months to replace the existing proposal, adjusted for the current price. After two months, we should be on the new budget system. The new adjusted amount requested is 46.37 Dash per month for May and June. This consists of:

1) $300 / mo. for liquidity providers @ $6.47 / Dash
- Uses most recent available average price from April 13th on https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/price-dash.html
- Uses the $300 amount from the original liquidity provider proposal

2) 2.5 Dash / month to reimburse my cost of submitting the proposal

This proposal will allow our liquidity provider team to continue facilitating coin mixing on the network while addressing the cost concerns causing the current proposal to go unfunded.

EDIT:
Manually vote YES on this proposal:
dash-cli mnbudget vote-many dbfad115053cc2a43a373e237339ed7ee3ffadaac335ff1a5d521b16212d226d yes
OR from the qt console: mnbudget vote-many dbfad115053cc2a43a373e237339ed7ee3ffadaac335ff1a5d521b16212d226d yes

Manually vote NO on this proposal:
dash-cli mnbudget vote-many dbfad115053cc2a43a373e237339ed7ee3ffadaac335ff1a5d521b16212d226d no
OR from the qt console: mnbudget vote-many dbfad115053cc2a43a373e237339ed7ee3ffadaac335ff1a5d521b16212d226d no
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've always liked the liquidity provider fund, sad to see it not voted in the last couple of months. Sometimes there are just better proposals that need funds. Happy to see the adjusted amount in this new proposal. This budget proposal has my support.
 
Liquidity providers version 1 (original version) currently enjoys 15% approval which means that we could end up with both version 1 & 2 getting paid.

3ivdbOf.jpg


So i suggest that people that voted yes on version 1, change their vote to no and then vote yes on this proposal version 2.

Also i suggest that both on dashwhale and on the dashtalk thread of version 1 people get urged to do this.

I also plan to support this version 2.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi everyone.

Decided to submit this proposal, as I believe it is important to honor commitments. It’s the whole reason Evan is re-writing the budgeting system in v12.1

It's called LP-reimbusrment - still not showing up on Dashwhale.org - but soon enough it will.

The Liquidity Provider initiative started on the 25th of September 2015, but only 3 payouts ever rolled out. People have been running mix-wallets basically out of good will. 7 payments in total did not happen.

A deal is a deal, at least in my book. I hope the community is sensitive to this.

Price appreciation is surely a valid concern, and thus babygiraffe’s new proposal makes perfect sense! There are at this moment of writing 1694 unallocated Dash in the budget system. I submitted a proposal for the total amount of non-payed months + proposal submitting costs (560 + 5)

These funds will be divided to the team of 6 = 93,34 Dash each

Now more than ever we need DarkSend (Soon PrivacyProtect) to operate at its fullest potential. Evan has yet again found some implementation issues that will vastly improve DarkSend, but we still need Liquidity Providers to make the network super responsive. In the near future there will be no need for Liquidity Providers at all.

Now more than ever because high-level Merchants (Like ProtonMail and BolehVPN) are starting to adopt Dash. This will be a massive help to attract more merchants in the privacy sphere (that a team is working at in the background). I’m sure everyone with privacy concerns will want to test or even stress test the efficiency of Dash.

On behalf of the Liquidity Provider team I hope you vote YES to this proposal to incentivize the magnificent work the LP team is doing, providing lots of personal funds for the mixing process, as well as monitoring all sorts of stats regarding it.

Support DaskSend!

.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yidakee said:
Hi everyone.

Decided to submit this proposal, as I believe it is important to honor commitments. It’s the whole reason Evan is re-writing the budgeting system in v12.1

It's called LP-reimbusrment - still not showing up on Dashwhale.org - but soon enough it will.

The Liquidity Provider initiative started on the 25th of September 2015, but only 3 payouts ever rolled out. People have been running mix-wallets basically out of good will. 7 payments in total did not happen.

A deal is a deal, at least in my book. I hope the community is sensitive to this.

Price appreciation is surely a valid concern, and thus babygiraffe’s new proposal makes perfect sense! There are at this moment of writing 1694 unallocated Dash in the budget system. I submitted a proposal for the total amount of non-payed months + proposal submitting costs (560 + 5)

These funds will be divided to the team of 7 = 80 Dash each

Now more than ever we need DarkSend (Soon PrivacyProtect) to operate at its fullest potential. Evan has yet again found some implementation issues that will vastly improve DarkSend, but we still need Liquidity Providers to make the network super responsive. In the near future there will be no need for Liquidity Providers at all.

Now more than ever because high-level Merchants (Like ProtonMail and BolehVPN) are starting to adopt Dash. This will be a massive help to attract more merchants in the privacy sphere (that a team is working at in the background). I’m sure everyone with privacy concerns will want to test or even stress test the efficiency of Dash.

On behalf of the Liquidity Provider team I hope you vote YES to this proposal to incentivize the magnificent work the LP team is doing, providing lots of personal funds for the mixing process, as well as monitoring all sorts of stats regarding it.

Support DaskSend!

.
Click to expand...

Your proposal has surfaced on Dashwhale by now, so i urgently request you discuss "LP-reimbusrment" on a seperate Dashtalk thread to seperate the comments.
 
qwizzie said:
Liquidity providers version 1 (original version) currently enjoys 15% approval which means that we could end up with both version 1 & 2 getting paid.

3ivdbOf.jpg


So i suggest that people that voted yes on version 1, change their vote to no and then vote yes on this proposal version 2.

Also i suggest that both on dashwhale and on the dashtalk thread of version 1 people get urged to do this.

I also plan to support this version 2.
Click to expand...
Yes, we plan to have the version 1 proposals link to version 2, but I don't control that post. I have let Evan know to update the original, but I only submitted this moments ago. Give him a little time and I'm sure he'll make the updates as requested.
 
yidakee said:
Hi everyone.

Decided to submit this proposal, as I believe it is important to honor commitments. It’s the whole reason Evan is re-writing the budgeting system in v12.1

It's called LP-reimbusrment - still not showing up on Dashwhale.org - but soon enough it will.

The Liquidity Provider initiative started on the 25th of September 2015, but only 3 payouts ever rolled out. People have been running mix-wallets basically out of good will. 7 payments in total did not happen.

A deal is a deal, at least in my book. I hope the community is sensitive to this.

Price appreciation is surely a valid concern, and thus babygiraffe’s new proposal makes perfect sense! There are at this moment of writing 1694 unallocated Dash in the budget system. I submitted a proposal for the total amount of non-payed months + proposal submitting costs (560 + 5)

These funds will be divided to the team of 7 = 80 Dash each

Now more than ever we need DarkSend (Soon PrivacyProtect) to operate at its fullest potential. Evan has yet again found some implementation issues that will vastly improve DarkSend, but we still need Liquidity Providers to make the network super responsive. In the near future there will be no need for Liquidity Providers at all.

Now more than ever because high-level Merchants (Like ProtonMail and BolehVPN) are starting to adopt Dash. This will be a massive help to attract more merchants in the privacy sphere (that a team is working at in the background). I’m sure everyone with privacy concerns will want to test or even stress test the efficiency of Dash.

On behalf of the Liquidity Provider team I hope you vote YES to this proposal to incentivize the magnificent work the LP team is doing, providing lots of personal funds for the mixing process, as well as monitoring all sorts of stats regarding it.

Support DaskSend!

.
Click to expand...
As qwizzie pointed out, I would start a separate thread for another proposal. This is only to address going forward to make sure your team is paid.

I would correct one factual error, though.

Since submitted at the end of September (after the September payment cycle had passed), LP missed at most 4 payments in total. It paid in Jan and Feb and I believe a previous version of the proposal paid in November for only 127 Dash. No proposals paid in December due to the technical error that occurred that month. Your 560 Dash proposal reflects only 4 months, though, so I think this is just a typo in your post that you reference 7 missed payments.
 
Liquidity providers' expenses (collaterals they have to pay sometimes) is (and always were) nominated in Dash and they do not depend on the DASH/$ rate in any way imo.
So why does this proposal recalculates the amount based on the DASH/$ rate?
 
UdjinM6 said:
Liquidity providers' expenses (collaterals they have to pay sometimes) is (and always were) nominated in Dash and they do not depend on the DASH/$ rate in any way imo.
So why does this proposal recalculates the amount based on the DASH/$ rate?
Click to expand...
The only expenses denominated in Dash are the network mixing fees, which are relatively minimal. The costs of hosting and administering a node to do the mixing are not denominated in Dash, though. On the whole, you are right that this is a less net compensation for those operating one of the seven mixing nodes, but it is better than no compensation at all.
 
UdjinM6 said:
Liquidity providers' expenses (collaterals they have to pay sometimes) is (and always were) nominated in Dash and they do not depend on the DASH/$ rate in any way imo.
So why does this proposal recalculates the amount based on the DASH/$ rate?
Click to expand...
I think that they had a little more than the pure colaterals fees.
A small bonus for the time spent, launching, starting DS from time to time, for electricity to run the PC where the client is running, etc... ;)
And surely for the budget to have more chance to pass!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top