We could do better with the proposals process.

[JZA]

Why can't there be "meeting team" - someone who can quickly provide some funds, graphics, presentation from previous meetings, give some advices, connect some people in the same region etc?

Well to put it one way, even Core teams are not centralized under one team, each team have different budgets and different proposals (dashcore team, evo team, core team, infrastructure team). Same as contractors.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for shared resources. But shared resources doesn't mean that everything has to be centrally analized-funded-managed. Is like saying, all the code is on github available for everyone to watch, vs, oh yeah but you also have to contact us in order to make your own repository beforehand.

Again centralization is usually more efficient, but also is more invasive and open to red tape.

 

[solarguy]

I doubt very much (and boldly predict) that we would not get swamped with trivial piddly requests if we reduced the application fee to ~100 USD. Even $50 would keep out the fluff.

That was the original intent, just to avoid getting spammed with trivial fluff proposals. 50-100 bucks still does that.

 

[JZA]

I have been in the dash community long enough to know that fees were never the factor to get swamped with piddly requests. AFAIK it was the DASH amount the big variable to decide if it was ridiculous or it has its merit. For example I put a development proposal once and confuse to put a total amount instead of a monthly amount, making my proposal too ridiculous to fund.
Also other famous ridiculous proposal like having DASH fund the construction of an air car for 200k usd, or give pizza to every student of a university for 24k.
The fee conversation was never an issue. So why all of a sudden that became the big factor?

 

[solarguy]

I have been in the dash community long enough to know that fees were never the factor to get swamped with piddly requests. AFAIK it was the DASH amount the big variable to decide if it was ridiculous or it has its merit. For example I put a development proposal once and confuse to put a total amount instead of a monthly amount, making my proposal too ridiculous to fund.
Also other famous ridiculous proposal like having DASH fund the construction of an air car for 200k usd, or give pizza to every student of a university for 24k.
The fee conversation was never an issue. So why all of a sudden that became the big factor?

Back when Dash was just a few bucks, that modest fee of 5 Dash prevented the Masternodes from getting 387 proposals per month. But it was still only a few dollars to put in a proposal. The risk was minimal if your proposal was not approved.

Now, 5 Dash is $450, so that will still prevent getting 387 trivial proposals per month, BUT now it also prevents proposals for small but legitimate projects because people are afraid to risk 4 or 500 USD and possibly get turned down. It has a chilling effect on the number of smaller proposals. It also effectively locks out folks in developing countries, where $500 might be a month's wages. They just can't risk it. That's why we should lower the proposal price to more like 50-100 bucks US or less.

The amount of Dash asked for is still a significant factor, that hasn't changed at all. Nor does it need to change at all.

 

[IronVape]

That's what proposals like Dash Force are for - you simply need to collaborate to manage such small events together.

I hear what you're saying. And as time goes by smaller proposals will eventually require 3rd party management. But I feel that we also want to improve the technology / process of managing proposals so that we can stay as close to the user base as possible for as long as possible.

 

[JZA]

This video mildly touch the issue of MN being too high and reference the issue of kicking the small guy out as DASH scales.

 

[UdjinM6]

This video mildly touch the issue of MN being too high and reference the issue of kicking the small guy out as DASH scales.

Interesting, though that's kind of offtopic here - MN collateral has nothing to do with proposal fee.
Comparing Dash to NEM is not smth that can be done directly imo but since you brought it here...

- There is no proposals/voting in NEM as far as I understand, only block harvesting.
- "100++ times more efficient code" and "written in Java"... I mean, cmon... Switching from PoW to some variant of PoS doesn't make your code "100 times more efficient"
- POI is actually Proof of Blockchain Bloat if you think of it I don't see this as a superior idea at all.
- 500 NEM nodes vs 4000 Dash masternodes (13K nodes total https://bitinfocharts.com/darkcoin/nodes/) - let's see if they can handle it if they can grow to our number of nodes.
- "2nd-tier nodes"... well, not really - it's 1 tier + light client/spv
----
Apples and oranges imo

 

[JZA]

Is not my review, and NEM would really be an offtopic rabithole. But to draw the relationship is sort of the same regarding MN collateral and Treasury fees. ATM most individual investors are locked out of any chance to get a MN just like in a smaller scale, individuals from puting a 5 dash fee. The result is creating centralization either on the MN level (through pools/shares) or middleman groups through DASHForce and the likes.

 

[Biltong]

...I feel that we also want to improve the technology / process of managing proposals so that we can stay as close to the user base as possible for as long as possible.

I might have a way to solve this using the people on the forum as well as Slack. I also think that it's essential to start planning for a potential flood of proposals once the fork gets sorted and we start rolling again. I think we are already losing good proposals. See here:
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/pre-proposal-prevent-great-proposals-from-getting-‘lost’.13827/

 

[GrandMasterDash]

No one should be discounting NEM (or decred). NEM has Supernodes that are vigorously tested for performance / responsiveness, and they have high collateral requirements. NEM is working on voting and has gained significant interest from companies like Hitachi.

Decred's hybrid PoS / PoW is also very interesting; they can vote not to accept a block. If that were bitcoin, for example, end-users could vote against Bitcoin Core and only accept blocks from Bitcoin Unlimited.

This is why you've seen NEM rise to #8, it will be snapping at our heels soon enough.

 

[Bitedge]

3. I think the development team should have a standing proposal during every cycle for a "rainy day" fund. In the event that there's 186 Dash that is looking for a home, we could always stash it in the rainy day fund rather than burn it.

I think I have a good concept to do something like this or better. A new proposal type that, if approved, recieves a % of the unawarded treasury. Details and discussion here.

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/...at-request-a-of-the-unawarded-treasury.13932/