Two great ideas I just read about

Bugeater

Bugeater

Member
I have just read two excellent ideas on this forum that I really agree with that would help DASH price to increase.

#1 Change the name from DASH to something else. Maybe we keep dash in the name and have two names like MaidSafe. But the good names like Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Lisk, Factom, and Monero are unique solid promoting sounding names. Dash means so many things in so many different lands. Singapore company just launched some product with dash in the name. Need two names DASHPAY or DASHCOIN or something else, or we need a new unique name.

#2 Instead of our unit being one DASH, we make it one Deci-DASH. If you have 5 DASH, now you have 50 DECI-DASH. You need 10,000 DECI-DASH to make a Masternode. This would make the price 70cents, instead of $7. This would be excellent and our price of DECIDASH probably would be pumped to $2 just on the news.

We cannot sit on our hands and let the creator take care of promotion. He is a brilliant guy and I support his tech but promoting and advertising are not his strong suit at all. Community must take this part over for sure.
 
1) I don't think this is an option now given so much marketing and rebranding has happened around the Dash name. Even huge amounts of money was spent on dash.org. They went through three renames already from xcoin to Darkcoin to Dash. Definitely know what you're talking about with competing in a crowded space but I think it's a bit too late to reconsider this. Dashcoin is out given there's another coin of that name (defunct). Digital Cash is what it's trying to sell though. Dashpay is being used in hashtags and other stuff surrounding Dash so maybe instead of a complete reband instead to use 'dashpay' more as well.

2) I don't see the point of artificial 'devalues' of Dash which doesn't change the fundamentals of the coin or even the supply. We should focus on real value items rather than 'tricks' like these to temporarily boost price. There was already another suggestion to make Dash with many points like instead of 5 dash now you own like 500,000 dash. I really don't think this serves any point and just makes it seem like a shitcoin. Where we are now is usable. 1 Dash = 8 usd, numbers are not too big and easy to use for most regular purchases instead of what I need 428450 dash to buy this coke? I've used many 'small decimal coints' before and trust me it's a frickin pain when trying to say how much is 1 coin worth. For example with XEM which uses it in the millions or dogecoin. The large numbers make it a pain to say, use and it's just seen as 'cheap'. There are arguments for and against but I don't think there's any compelling argument to change this. Do you like saying Decidash? or Micro btc? bit of a mouthful for me unless Dash suddenly becomes 100$ then maybe :p
 
This post is actually covered in two separate threads already which I believe you have weighed in already :D
 
Bugeater said:
I have just read two excellent ideas on this forum that I really agree with that would help DASH price to increase.

#1 Change the name from DASH to something else. Maybe we keep dash in the name and have two names like MaidSafe. But the good names like Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Lisk, Factom, and Monero are unique solid promoting sounding names. Dash means so many things in so many different lands. Singapore company just launched some product with dash in the name. Need two names DASHPAY or DASHCOIN or something else, or we need a new unique name.

#2 Instead of our unit being one DASH, we make it one Deci-DASH. If you have 5 DASH, now you have 50 DECI-DASH. You need 10,000 DECI-DASH to make a Masternode. This would make the price 70cents, instead of $7. This would be excellent and our price of DECIDASH probably would be pumped to $2 just on the news.

We cannot sit on our hands and let the creator take care of promotion. He is a brilliant guy and I support his tech but promoting and advertising are not his strong suit at all. Community must take this part over for sure.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, just like all other coins, the devs consider themselves gods, refuse to give such controls to anyone else, and will quickly tell you that if you don't like it then you should fork it.

Things like the name or the number of decimal points are simply place holders that could, in theory, be voted on and changed by MNOs without any dev intervention. The same for other things such as block size or rewards... but the devs are not brave enough to give up such things. They call it a governance system but, in fact, it falls significantly short of anything meaningful.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
Unfortunately, just like all other coins, the devs consider themselves gods, refuse to give such controls to anyone else, and will quickly tell you that if you don't like it then you should fork it.

Things like the name or the number of decimal points are simply place holders that could, in theory, be voted on and changed by MNOs without any dev intervention. The same for other things such as block size or rewards... but the devs are not brave enough to give up such things. They call it a governance system but, in fact, it falls significantly short of anything meaningful.
Click to expand...
Well, you now what? I'm really getting tired of that: "devs should do this", "devs should do that", "devs are doing what they like" blablabla. Yes we are doing what we like. That doesn't mean that we are not listening, some ideas just doesn't make sense to us. And we are doing what we like just like everyone else does - miners like to mine, masternoder - to host masternode, devs - to dev. Go tell miners that they should mine on gpu or cpu only, go tell masternoders that they should run MNs on high-end servers. Come back when you succeed.
To make it even more clear: I personally am NOT going to make or approve any changes that I consider wrong or potentially insecure or dangerous either someone like it or not. And THAT is what dev's job is - (not) making changes to make sure that network keeps getting better, not worse. Blindly implementing someone's wishes is NOT a dev's job, it's a coder's job. Go find one if you need that changes to be implemented - no need to fork and start new coin, hire a coder to make PRs if these are "simply place holders", let him submit it https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pulls and then we'll talk how easy it was and how secure it is. Good luck.
And btw there are 3 people with commit access (me including) and any of us can push changes to the source code (i.e. accept your PRs) but that doesn't mean that network instantly runs the very same latest version of the code. So even if smth is implemented it's not guaranteed that it will make it way into production (mainnet) - you have to make sure everyone is happy with that change and network is not going to fork to hell.
 
UdjinM6 said:
Well, you now what? I'm really getting tired of that: "devs should do this", "devs should do that", "devs are doing what they like" blablabla. Yes we are doing what we like. That doesn't mean that we are not listening, some ideas just doesn't make sense to us. And we are doing what we like just like everyone else does - miners like to mine, masternoder - to host masternode, devs - to dev. Go tell miners that they should mine on gpu or cpu only, go tell masternoders that they should run MNs on high-end servers. Come back when you succeed.
To make it even more clear: I personally am NOT going to make or approve any changes that I consider wrong or potentially insecure or dangerous either someone like it or not. And THAT is what dev's job is - (not) making changes to make sure that network keeps getting better, not worse. Blindly implementing someone's wishes is NOT a dev's job, it's a coder's job. Go find one if you need that changes to be implemented - no need to fork and start new coin, hire a coder to make PRs if these are "simply place holders", let him submit it https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pulls and then we'll talk how easy it was and how secure it is. Good luck.
And btw there are 3 people with commit access (me including) and any of us can push changes to the source code (i.e. accept your PRs) but that doesn't mean that network instantly runs the very same latest version of the code. So even if smth is implemented it's not guaranteed that it will make it way into production (mainnet) - you have to make sure everyone is happy with that change and network is not going to fork to hell.
Click to expand...
You're never going to please everyone. I for one believe Dash is a great name, and am happy with the direction we're going.
 
Newbie Opinion...

I don't look to DASH as a speculation vehicle.
Substance is a valuable asset which shall gain recognition as time passes.
IMO, best thing to do for DASH is to make use of it.

Best
rc
 
TaoOfSatoshi said:
You're never going to please everyone. I for one believe Dash is a great name, and am happy with the direction we're going.
Click to expand...
Good point, let me correct myself:
...you have to make sure everyone is happy with that change...
...you have to make sure the majority of each group (devs, miners, masternoders, merchants/services, general users) is happy with that change...
;)
 
Well done for basically saying what I predicted.. fork, start new coin blah blah blah....

The FACT of the matter is, devs COULD make certain place holders as described as above... but YOU, like many other devs, CHOOSE not to because - as you already stated - "I personally am NOT going to make or approve any changes that I consider wrong or potentially insecure or dangerous either someone like it or not". You can retaliate, try and shoot me down as much as you like, but everything I just said is indisputable. You mis-understood me.. I wasn't asking your opinion, I stated facts that certain things COULD happen. As a dev you don't like it.. that's hardly surprising.. dare not give that kind of power to people outside your realm of peers. But go ahead, explain to everyone in plain english what is wrong with MNOs choosing how the rewards are divided? Go ahead and tell us how 10% is the magic number? We have a voting system, right? - FACT... you just can't stand the thought that a different class of operators might take away what YOU consider to be fundamentally "wrong".
 
That's why everyone that "invests" in MNs behave like they do... we just do a little setting up and sit back taking very little part because devs like this think they are gods, they know better than mere MNOs. Maybe if MNOs had to do other things to earn their keep, then we'd take more responsibility and get behind it more. But all these devs.. look what you do... dare not give us more control over our destiny. That's why 28.% of MNs are still sitting on version 12.0.55... what incentives do they have to be involved that they can't even be bothered to upgrade after all this time? Ah, but yes, they have incentives when DEVS lock them out with an updated protocol ... you see the pattern? devs = gods

How about a plugin architecture on the client side AND the server side? Let us run our own plugins and quorums with specific third party plugins... sms verification etc etc.... we'll reach our own consensus without this core team... NOOOOO, no no no, the core team here is NEVER going to do that because it would just simply mean a shift of power away to a bigger pool of developers.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
Well done for basically saying what I predicted.. fork, start new coin blah blah blah....

The FACT of the matter is, devs COULD make certain place holders as described as above... but YOU, like many other devs, CHOOSE not to because - as you already stated - "I personally am NOT going to make or approve any changes that I consider wrong or potentially insecure or dangerous either someone like it or not". You can retaliate, try and shoot me down as much as you like, but everything I just said is indisputable. You mis-understood me.. I wasn't asking your opinion, I stated facts that certain things COULD happen. As a dev you don't like it.. that's hardly surprising.. dare not give that kind of power to people outside your realm of peers. But go ahead, explain to everyone in plain english what is wrong with MNOs choosing how the rewards are divided? Go ahead and tell us how 10% is the magic number? We have a voting system, right? - FACT... you just can't stand the thought that a different class of operators might take away what YOU consider to be fundamentally "wrong".
Click to expand...

Anythink can be discussed and voted here. If you have an opinion to improve a certain aspect of Dash, please explain it carefully and then we vote.

As an example:

Go ahead and tell us how 10% is the magic number?
Click to expand...

This is not the correct approach. The system is working fine as it is. Now you need to tell me (as a simple Masternode operator, so a voter) why you don't like that 10% and then do your proposal to improve the system.

For me this is the way we can evolve to better, otherwise this looks like a childish tantrum


my 2 cents.
 
aleix said:
Anythink can be discussed and voted here. If you have an opinion to improve a certain aspect of Dash, please explain it carefully and then we vote.

As an example:



This is not the correct approach. The system is working fine as it is. Now you need to tell me (as a simple Masternode operator, so a voter) why you don't like that 10% and then do your proposal to improve the system.

For me this is the way we can evolve to better, otherwise this looks like a childish tantrum


my 2 cents.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you got the point. It's not about someone submitting a single "budget proposal" because a) it wouldn't have any binding functions, and b) the 10% value should be a place holder (variable, not hard coded) that the MNOs could change at any time through voting without any further need for a dev to do it. The same is true for the block size, which Duffield once did as a publicity stunt but subsequently we realised it's not binding / independently enforceable.
 
A plugin architecture would help enormously and put dash's destiny well and truly in the hands of MNOs. Someone could then send a command to the DAPI to, say, send an sms and a quorum based on participating nodes would deal with it. That way, not all nodes would be compelled to run specific dash versions with specific features.

Another example might be dash over i2p or tor... which is rejected by most devs here because it would be too slow for instant transactions... which is a fair comment when devs must reach a single consensus... but if it were a tor plugin on the server side, it would allow MNOs to choose for themselves if they want to offer a slow tor service. Right now, that kind of thing is only possible with TransferCoin (or whatever the fork is called).

MN Plugins = no forks = specialist applications to coexist = no stupid devs behaving like gods
 
GrandMasterDash said:
I'm not sure if you got the point.
Click to expand...

I think I do (notwithstanding my limited skills with the English language).

Democracy is not only about voting. Its about be free to explain what you want and convince others to follow you with your claim. You have your agenda, that is correct, you need to respect the people who think the opposite. Or the people (like me) who don't care about your proposal (for uneccessary) and think we have a "to-do list" much more important right now.

Until now Evan & team had been doing an amazing job with Dash. You want the devs change whatever in the system? You want the system to work "without any further need for a dev to do it"? Stop crying, and start convincing me (and all the others).

And forget the technical problems to implement it... No goverment can rule without legitimacy.

my 2.
 
You know what is part of the problem here?

Because there is so much work involved in upgrading to v12.1, there has been a lot of "downtime" to people who aren't involved in the development. Sometimes that creates an environment where people can go stir-crazy and little issues can become a little larger than they need to be.

Another upgrade cycle should take care of that. Once v12.1 hits mainnnet, it's sheer awesomeness will take some of that away, hopefully, although it will never completely disappear...
 
@GrandMasterDash There are a few things to keep in mind. The budget system only allocates funds. It doesn't force people to do anything.

If you want something done request it...or even better yet put some Dash to it. We put up a job list of things we want with some dash behind them.
www.dashnation.com/gigs

There is an 80 Dash bounty on getting the iphone on the app store. This isn't saying QuantumE isn't trying, but it is opening the channel for outside help to get it done faster. Of course, this may need some review and checking before these jobs can even be accomplished. This is a decentralized community and hopefully we can grab interest from a few talented people. You or anyone is welcome to add a gig and/or bounty to be used for the gigs listed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top