Submit general direction to the Core Team, regading the future of the Dash DAO?

[joezippy]

Hello,

This is a follow up to the question I posed to Master Node Owners (MNOs), regarding who should own the mission and vision of the Dash DAO? (thread)

Since I posed the question, I have done the following:

• Listened to community input - majority want mission / vision w/ Core Team
  
• Talked with the Core Team CEO - brainstorming possible solutions
  
• Analyzed the communities current direction - proposal review committee
  
• Drawn these images that represent my thoughts

It's hopeful, that this general direction will allow the Dash DAO, with the approval of the MNOs to do the following:

• Scale
• Focus
  
• Become more accountable
• Lean more on reputation
• Increase survivability

I'm attaching Ryan's email regarding our conversation for transparency. All these views are mine and do not represent the views of the current Core Team.

Finally, I will be on holiday for a few days, so I'll be in and out... I just didn't want this info to get lost, thus I'm posting now in hopes you'll vote and provide thoughtful feedback for when I return.

*** Please don't discuss the mission / vision of the Dash DAO in this thread. Thank you! ***

Cheers!

 

[Biltong]

Hi Joe - I can see your idea is starting to get shape. You might find that you'll just have to keep slogging (like me) with hardly any input.

One thing: The PEC is about Evaluations: Proposal Evaluation Committee - not Reviews. Quite a difference - see below. I'm worried that the "Review committee" will get fixed in minds, while the actual review part of the process are only planned for later.

Reviewing an evaluation (also known as meta-evaluation) can be done before an evaluation (reviewing the plan) or afterwards. Prior to finalising the evaluation it is useful to review the reporting of the evaluation process, findings and conclusions in order to establish the validity of the findings and to ensure that the key messages from the evaluation are clear and consistent with the findings.
http://www.betterevaluation.org/en/plan/manage/review_evaluation

 

[joezippy]

Hi Joe - I can see your idea is starting to get shape. You might find that you'll just have to keep slogging (like me) with hardly any input.

One thing: The PEC is about Evaluations: Proposal Evaluation Committee - not Reviews. Quite a difference - see below. I'm worried that the "Review committee" will get fixed in minds, while the actual review part of the process are only planned for later.

Reviewing an evaluation (also known as meta-evaluation) can be done before an evaluation (reviewing the plan) or afterwards. Prior to finalising the evaluation it is useful to review the reporting of the evaluation process, findings and conclusions in order to establish the validity of the findings and to ensure that the key messages from the evaluation are clear and consistent with the findings.
http://www.betterevaluation.org/en/plan/manage/review_evaluation

Great point... I renamed them... More feedback, is good feedback... Cheers!

 

[Biltong]

Firstly - This one I understand
Secondly - I'm starting to like this and like it a lot!
What attracted me to Dash was it's governance and this will take it to an even higher level.
You are going to get a lot of flack, but I'll be surprised if the MNO's won't like this as well. Put you head down and work out every little detail. You will have to defend everything You are stepping on toes.
PM me if you want me to play devils advocate before posting. You have my full support!
I suspect the length of term of the CEO will be the contentious item - a long poll over 3 months? offering 1/2/3 years might take the pressure off you
Something else I found helpful with the PEC - every bit of work I do, I post: Then no-one can say I forced it down their throats/did not know about it/autonomous decision etc etc and the troll quickly gets tired of trying to disrupt/community/MNO's get comfortable with what's coming/and you do get a bit of helpful feedback.
Good luck and vasbyt! (Afrikaans for bite tight and hold on!)

 

[Biltong]

I want to know more about the benefits of this system - every little bit/detail
E.g: I can just imagine how Amanda will stuff it down critics throats
The coin with the Ultimate Decentralized Governance!

 

[ampp]

The flowcharts are nice but it takes a bit of analysis to figure out exactly how things are now thus takes more time for me to process. Having not participated in your last thread either.

I get a little frustrated by the insistence to look at the future problems and try to push for adjustments now when we are not at scale to need it. This looks like useless bureaucracy right now. If the MNO's see a problem then they will vote to adjust. But any time wasted right now making shifts is a big loss in productivity and the cryptosphere is cut throat. Things are not optimal and it's going to be reactionary but it is what it is. To me it's a bit like hiring an executive that only ever ran 500+ person companies but you are at 50 right now (growth may be impossible with that person). Because crypto is more transparent you get to see more of the difficulties that exist in managing people.

Having put through the proposal i consider the number 1 problem right now is trust. MNO's don't want to risk 100's of dash on a new person. It's not entirely about the quality of the idea. I'm sure there are several people sitting in the background unwilling to do a proposal because they have no reputation and they know it. Then it's down to escrow, which even that can be hard. I would like to see someone who is good at project management offer milestone payment escrow for proposals.

At the end of the day I think it's best to move towards your goals, baby steps. Right now most MNO don't see any problem (it's a silent majority). You need to first get people to agree there is a problem before you offer a solution. And the lack of something is not necessarily a problem it can be as simple as it is not needed yet. The lack of engagement on a discussions is a sign that your views are at least ahead of where everyone is looking right now.

 

[Biltong]

.... You need to first get people to agree there is a problem before you offer a solution. And the lack of something is not necessarily a problem it can be as simple as it is not needed yet. The lack of engagement on a discussions is a sign that your views are at least ahead of where everyone is looking right now.

Hi Ampp,
I think it makes far more sense to have a dedicated member investigate a problem - for free - find possible solutions for it - all while it's nice and quiet and there is lots of time to do the work. Get all the community feedback - throw ideas around - no pressure: Time to think.
Rather that wait for the shit to hit the fan and then react.
The more proactive you are... you know.
Doesn't cost anything. Don't take a coder away from Evo. Research for the betterment of Dash. I think we should rather thank Joe for a thankless job

I suspect it might be a long and even painful journey

And when it's finished - great! Maybe it only gets implemented months/years from now. I personally think a CEO (for example) should serve at least a couple of years and then have a period of months to ease the newly elected CEO into place. Ryan has just been appointed, so lots of time to throw this around

Can we hire a CEO from outside Dash?
Can a good CEO be hired again more than once? Always though it's a stupid system where a really efficient leader cannot be elected again after missing one term for the sake of democracy.

 

[mastermined]

Dash Treasury Review Committee Master Thread

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-treasury-review-committee-master-thread.15298/