i know he did
and i am double flattered
but i do not belong there
:wink:
you guys are the real testers, i am just helping out once in a while
as i do for everything/body else where it is needed
Proposal for Testnet Contributors Fund
- Thread starter moli
- Start date
i know he did
and i am double flattered
but i do not belong there
:wink:
you guys are the real testers, i am just helping out once in a while
as i do for everything/body else where it is needed
TaoOfSatoshi
Well-known member
I like the idea, not because I'm on the list, but because I think that Testnet is a resource that is very important. Without testing to make versions stable, we would have no finished product. I have abstained from voting, however, because I feel it is an obvious conflict of interest, voting to pay myself.
I feel that I do my part on Testnet, but if I was to be paid for something, it would be for the countless hours I put in on Twitter, relentlessly promoting Dash. But lucky for you guys, I don't know how to submit a proposal for the Dash Twitter PR Initiative yet
wink.
While I did not vote, I would be interested in seeing how it turns out...
I feel that I do my part on Testnet, but if I was to be paid for something, it would be for the countless hours I put in on Twitter, relentlessly promoting Dash. But lucky for you guys, I don't know how to submit a proposal for the Dash Twitter PR Initiative yet
wink.While I did not vote, I would be interested in seeing how it turns out...
moli
Well-known member
Thanks Tao for your comments on how important Testnet is, and you're right, if someone doesn't believe in testing software why would they buy it. Making software is like manufacturing cars. Would someone buy a car that hasn't been tested? And same here, I have not voted for this proposal, my name is on the list but even if I got the coins, i would use them to tip someone else. I would never count on getting paid here.. this initiative is just a little tip to pat on the back for people who have put in their time and resources to build this community.I like the idea, not because I'm on the list, but because I think that Testnet is a resource that is very important. Without testing to make versions stable, we would have no finished product. I have abstained from voting, however, because I feel it is an obvious conflict of interest, voting to pay myself.
I feel that I do my part on Testnet, but if I was to be paid for something, it would be for the countless hours I put in on Twitter, relentlessly promoting Dash. But lucky for you guys, I don't know how to submit a proposal for the Dash Twitter PR Initiative yet
While I did not vote, I would be interested in seeing how it turns out...
You can always submit a proposal for your own cause, not sure you'll get supported but it seems maybe there's some other way to earn from Twitter? I'm sure you're creative enough to figure that out .. :smile:
crowning
Well-known member
Put a donation address in your signature and get rich fast.
At least that's what I've been told...
moli
Well-known member
Sub-Ether
Well-known member
Thanks Moli for putting up the proposal, you put a lot of work into this version.
And thanks to everyone who selflessly hosted masternodes and hardly mentioned it.
For my part, I had a node going and ran the mining when required(sometimes I was the only person with any hash power which I couldn't believe with whats at stake!), I am the proud owner of many tdash (offers please?)
Also updated about 50 times and posted any errors I spotted.
I enjoy repairing electronics and understand circuits, and although this is almost 100% software and some of the c++ code is over my head, I do get most of the ideas and such an esoteric combination of this complexity requires thorough testing(and constant updates to self to remind whats going on) before it is released as would any other product into the real world.
V12 was the largest update so far, and I don't know if anyone remembers in an earlier release (V11?) the main chain froze due to a multiple fork and there was major panic (and selling), it went to the ridiculous and rather surreal scenario of everyone asking if anyone had Evan's phone number so that they could wake him up to rescue a rather dire situation.
Now, this didn't happen in the V12 release due to the Dev teams excellent anti fork technology and extensive testing but it could have and masternode/wallet holders would surely be unhappy if this happened again or they lost their funds in some way that was overlooked (eg like the rare encrypted password error that carried over from bitcoin)
The way I see it, is we are all in this together, in it for the proverbial long haul, and I would happily switch on all of my hash power (which is only 20 meg) and forgo mainnet mining if this is what it takes to stabilize testnet and sort out the bugs.
The core team is only small and can only do so much, so if you are on the fence about voting you have to ask yourself, are we worth it, do you want to provide us with added incentive or should we continue to do everything for nothing ? :grin:
good morning everyone :smile:
P.S. thats my one long post for the day, byzzz
And thanks to everyone who selflessly hosted masternodes and hardly mentioned it.
For my part, I had a node going and ran the mining when required(sometimes I was the only person with any hash power which I couldn't believe with whats at stake!), I am the proud owner of many tdash (offers please?)
Also updated about 50 times and posted any errors I spotted.
I enjoy repairing electronics and understand circuits, and although this is almost 100% software and some of the c++ code is over my head, I do get most of the ideas and such an esoteric combination of this complexity requires thorough testing(and constant updates to self to remind whats going on) before it is released as would any other product into the real world.
V12 was the largest update so far, and I don't know if anyone remembers in an earlier release (V11?) the main chain froze due to a multiple fork and there was major panic (and selling), it went to the ridiculous and rather surreal scenario of everyone asking if anyone had Evan's phone number so that they could wake him up to rescue a rather dire situation.
Now, this didn't happen in the V12 release due to the Dev teams excellent anti fork technology and extensive testing but it could have and masternode/wallet holders would surely be unhappy if this happened again or they lost their funds in some way that was overlooked (eg like the rare encrypted password error that carried over from bitcoin)
The way I see it, is we are all in this together, in it for the proverbial long haul, and I would happily switch on all of my hash power (which is only 20 meg) and forgo mainnet mining if this is what it takes to stabilize testnet and sort out the bugs.
The core team is only small and can only do so much, so if you are on the fence about voting you have to ask yourself, are we worth it, do you want to provide us with added incentive or should we continue to do everything for nothing ? :grin:
good morning everyone :smile:
P.S. thats my one long post for the day, byzzz
Thanks for doing this moli! At the current time I try to keep an entire set of infrastructure up and dedicated to testnet. I have been doing this for over a year and many people have benefited from these resources. I have at one time or currently hosted the following for testnet:I would like to ask testers to voice their experience with testnet, what they did, how they did... So please share your experience with Testnet to the community. Thank you
Abe Block Explorer
Insight Block Explorer
Dnsseed Node
Faucet for coin distribution
P2Pool Node for mining
Masternode's running windows
Masternode's running linux
Masternode's running mac
Linux based mining nodes x2
I plan to keep running these pieces of infrastructure but it does get expensive in both time and money to keep them up and working so this proposal moving forward would help with some of those costs and also help for me to deploy more redundancy in these nodes. I'd like to see that they were all mirrored on two vps' instead of just one. When I learn stuff and stuff finalizes on testnet I try and make a new post to: https://dashdot.io/alpha/ with an overview of how things went and try to simplify things for the general populous.
Sub-Ether
Well-known member
Look what coingun has done at his own expense, this would not have been possible without his multiple contributions.
alex-ru
Well-known member
I guess most of us are estimates testing as important part of project.
But I guess just few of us understand how important testing is? I Mean which % of whole budget must be spending on testing?
I think people (MN OPs) need explanation and justification of the specific amounts...
Now I see 2 figures:
core-team: 1176 DASH/month
compensate-testers: 1588 DASH/month
For me it looks ... a bit suspicious, but if I can see explanation and justification of this disproportion - It will help to understand...
I think we should be very careful with all proposals numbers - so non of other project members shouldn't feel injustice towards them.
OK, I can understand our public-awareness campaign should be "secret" to protect us from competitors (hope results of this campaign will be very visible, not "secret" :smile
.But with testing... I can see no reason to have "secret budget".
Could we see a kind of business-plan of spending this "1588 DASH/month for testing" to vote for it more reasonable?
crowning
Well-known member
A recommendation for the next proposal(s) (not only addressed to you, moli):
- You don't need "http://" or "https://" as prefix for the proposal URL. And because Evan's 3 proposals did not have it parsing of the URL would be much easier if everyone would do it the same way.
- On a second thought I think you did it right because without the prefix it's actually not a valid URL, even when browsers know how to handle it. eduffield should add "http://" or "https://" to his next proposals.
:smile:
:grin: If it was that simple it would be great, but that's not how "human nature" works :wink:
I guess most of us are estimates testing as important part of project.
But I guess just few of us understand how important testing is? I Mean which % of whole budget must be spending on testing?
I think people (MN OPs) need explanation and justification of the specific amounts...
Now I see 2 figures:
core-team: 1176 DASH/month
compensate-testers: 1588 DASH/month
For me it looks ... a bit suspicious, but if I can see explanation and justification of this disproportion - It will help to understand...
I think we should be very careful with all proposals numbers - so non of other project members shouldn't feel injustice towards them.
OK, I can understand our public-awareness campaign should be "secret" to protect us from competitors (hope results of this campaign will be very visible, not "secret" :smile
But with testing... I can see no reason to have "secret budget".
Could we see a kind of business-plan of spending this "1588 DASH/month for testing" to vote for it more reasonable?
Perfect!
Incentive, (real incentive) IS necessary. And each single effort IS important. Without incentive there's no effort. I have been reading the DASH thread at the BTCtalk this morning, and it is clear to me that some key people in this community still don't understand this basic reality.
When DASH was only a "simple voluntary-donation project" it was "expected" to simply rely on the donation-work of us members: It was more than fair to see some people donating huge chunks of their free time and available money with the project, for the benefit of all >> but, of course for their own benefit, because no one will ever dedicate themselves to anything that will not bring them more (expected, at least) benefits them (tangible) losses.
It was easier to reach a "common-sense" of justice.
Now DASH is something else, it is a huge step further.... It may seem weird at first, but now it is not fair at all to expect that some people will work for free while watching others earning for their works.... remember each effort IS important, and (not only) for humans effort and dedication demand incentive.
While DASH will no longer have to "fight" for money, deep inside, we will have a quest ahead, for a perception of justice amongst our members.
To be honest. IMO this community (at least some key members) are still not mature enough. But with this new horizon we all will grow a lot inside.
Most, if not all, agree on the importance of testing and testnet. I don't think that's the issue between a 'yes' and a 'no' vote — but it looks like the way the argument is being spun is that if you're pro-testing then you should vote for this proposal. I'm 100% pro-testing.
But my concern is the way it's being addressed here — only one person or a few can modify this list of testers. People have to raise their hands and point out how they've been contributing to testnet.
Who makes the determination on who's contributions have been greater and how people get compensated accordingly?
I set up 2 testnet masternodes before I set up my real masternodes, just to test them out for myself. I don't expect nor want any compensation for it, but my point is, Coingun's contributions are way higher than mine. But what if someone did only the "minimal" contribution on testnet and then expected to be compensated? How is that determined?
And, it goes without saying, but I will anyway - all humans are subject to cognitive bias.
Is there a more systematic way to assist with testnet without considering mixing the main and testnets outright? (BTW, I would never suggest, condone, consider mixing test/main — very bad idea.)
But my concern is the way it's being addressed here — only one person or a few can modify this list of testers. People have to raise their hands and point out how they've been contributing to testnet.
Who makes the determination on who's contributions have been greater and how people get compensated accordingly?
I set up 2 testnet masternodes before I set up my real masternodes, just to test them out for myself. I don't expect nor want any compensation for it, but my point is, Coingun's contributions are way higher than mine. But what if someone did only the "minimal" contribution on testnet and then expected to be compensated? How is that determined?
And, it goes without saying, but I will anyway - all humans are subject to cognitive bias.
Is there a more systematic way to assist with testnet without considering mixing the main and testnets outright? (BTW, I would never suggest, condone, consider mixing test/main — very bad idea.)
Thanks for putting me in that list.
This is a good test of the system.
I think this should have been a one-shot payment. As it is, if passed it will lock that amount for 12 months and who knows if the testers will stay the same.
I cannot vote but if I could I would vote YES.
This is a good test of the system.
I think this should have been a one-shot payment. As it is, if passed it will lock that amount for 12 months and who knows if the testers will stay the same.
I cannot vote but if I could I would vote YES.
If only!
moli
Well-known member
Hi elbereth,Thanks for putting me in that list.
This is a good test of the system.
I think this should have been a one-shot payment. As it is, if passed it will lock that amount for 12 months and who knows if the testers will stay the same.
I cannot vote but if I could I would vote YES.
If only!
I put in number 12 but it doesn't mean it would be locked in for 12 months. I could ask it to be voted down the following month or it would just be voted down if no longer needed. This is what Evan has said many times, that there's nothing set in stone here and the budget system is flexible. All of those proposals that are passed now could be down voted if there were enough "no" votes.
Perfect!
moli
Well-known member
During testing i found out i could skip the URL and the proposals still went through. But I just now checked, he changed it, or maybe during testing somehow that piece wasn't there for a while...
True..
Would be nice to see a multisig destination address that sends directly the budget to each tester (please test this on testnet before).
Jeztah
Active member
Testing is important and people should be compensated. How is it proven who contributes to testing? I've run testnet nodes in the past and nobody even realizes it, I would imagine there are more than a few like me.
I'd rather see a dedicated team named and it lowered to under the core dev reward amount, let the rest burn. Just claiming the reward because "they are going to burn anyway" is contradictory to the system's intention imho.
I'd rather see a dedicated team named and it lowered to under the core dev reward amount, let the rest burn. Just claiming the reward because "they are going to burn anyway" is contradictory to the system's intention imho.
moli
Well-known member
Agreed. At the beginning of testing v12 Evan put in two proposals with multisig addresses to test... didn't work. I noticed my wallets would stop syncing at the blocks right before the superblocks that paid to those multisig addresses. I don't know why they didn't work. But i guess you know.True..
Would be nice to see a multisig destination address that sends directly the budget to each tester (please test this on testnet before).
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep, no multisig, no multi-address yet...True..
Would be nice to see a multisig destination address that sends directly the budget to each tester (please test this on testnet before).
But that's only a first release and we wanted to keep it simple and working.
Besides that I see is no reason why we can't implement multiple recipients in single proposal imo, that would be more transparent and will remove the need to trust that submitter will split funds later according to his "text" proposal.