why was this so hard to find?

[yocko]

I have found a localbitcoins standard service dedicated to dash and was wondering why this service is not on dash.org dash exchange list?
https://www.dashnearby.com

Shouldn't all dash services and exchanges be listed if we are trying to become a real contender in the cryptosphere?

 

[tungfa]

good point
will put that on the list to be fixed

this is similar to https://www.dashous.com (speaking of local bitcoin style)

 

[yocko]

good point
will put that on the list to be fixed

this is similar to dashous (speaking of local bitcoin style)

Yes I really think all DASH services should be made as public as possible by the community.

 

[tungfa]

Yes I really think all DASH services should be made as public as possible by the community.

i totally agree
tbh this slipped by me

 

[fernando]

Yes I really think all DASH services should be made as public as possible by the community.

You are right, but it is not easy to keep up with new sites, so any help to report omissions (like this thread) is greatly appreciated.

 

[jimbursch]

Shouldn't these services be vetted before receiving the "official" endorsement that is implied by a listing on dash.org?

 

[fernando]

Shouldn't these services be vetted before receiving the "official" endorsement that is implied by a listing on dash.org?

That is another thing we consider all the time. However, there is no way we can really vet. We can't see the code, so any analysis is always limited. Even if we could see the code, it could change after examining it. We encourage people to do their own due diligence and be careful. We also insist that listing is not endorsement. And then we try to apply some common sense. If it looks reasonable, we will list it, but at first sign that there is something weird we will remove it. It is not perfect, but we believe it is best equilibrium.

 

[jimbursch]

However, there is no way we can really vet.

This is why I think maybe dash.org should not be in the service listings business. Only fully vetted services/products should be listed.

We also insist that listing is not endorsement.

You can insist, but that won't change the perception.

We are currently facing this problem with budget proposal submission services. There are currently three in existence:

proposal.dash.org
dashcentral.org
dashtreasury.org

One may be "official", two are listed on dash.org, and the third can make the case that it should be listed on dash.org.

It's just a matter of time before a policy is going to have to be written on this issue.

 

[jimbursch]

BTW -- re: vetting -- we might be able to leverage the Dash Bug Bounty program to vet "official" or endorsed services/products.

 

[fernando]

This is why I think maybe dash.org should not be in the service listings business. Only fully vetted services/products should be listed.

That would be great, but the reality is that dash.org is the most well known domain and people go there. Keeping it super clean sounds nice, but I think we would be doing a bad service to the users and the ecosystem. We need users finding what they need as soon as possible. And we need to show companies that bet on Dash that we are gonna help them and that we also bet/trust them. I think this is a field in which we can't be too dogmatic and we need to be practical. Anyway, I totally get where you are coming from and I have struggled with this for years. In the future I hope we can have many trusted and well known sites in the ecosystem that take of this, but in the meantime I think we need to take some risks (and up until now it has been ok!).

You can insist, but that won't change the perception.

True, but that doesn't mean that we should not keep trying to educate . It is the same as when we insist on people not using exchanges as wallets. You probably do it too. And you too know that people will keep doing it. But we keep saying it. Changing the paradigm to full individual responsibility is difficult and it requires persistence.

We are currently facing this problem with budget proposal submission services. There are currently three in existence:

proposal.dash.org
dashcentral.org
dashtreasury.org

One may be "official", two are listed on dash.org, and the third can make the case that it should be listed on dash.org.

I believe the third one is not listed because it requires full trust. It is not the only case, there are online wallets that are not listed either for that same reason.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

A directory service can't easily determine bad actors, but there are some basic listing requirements that can be made:

• a small one time dash listing payment would be a gesture of good intent
• a mobile phone number can be registered and verified
• a unique listing code can be placed in a specific file on the guest website (proof of admin)

While none of these requirements are foolproof, it does show some willingness to provide accountability. In the event the website is reported as dishonest / malicious, the owner can be contacted via the mobile number. If the owner can not be contacted then we can proceed to de-list.

 

[TanteStefana]

A directory service can't easily determine bad actors, but there are some basic listing requirements that can be made:

• a small one time dash listing payment would be a gesture of good intent
• a mobile phone number can be registered and verified
• a unique listing code can be placed in a specific file on the guest website (proof of admin)

While none of these requirements are foolproof, it does show some willingness to provide accountability. In the event the website is reported as dishonest / malicious, the owner can be contacted via the mobile number. If the owner can not be contacted then we can proceed to de-list.

It also makes a human take responsibility for a site that may be a type of DAO. I don't want responsibility like that. And I wouldn't blame anyone else who puts a ton of work into a project for not wanting to take such responsibility. There are all sorts of reasons to remain anonymous in this world, you can't judge by that.

As for paying, who would be receiving? That's another quagmire.

 

[abob54]

I believe the third one is not listed because it requires full trust. It is not the only case, there are online wallets that are not listed either for that same reason.

Hi Fernando,

Three out of five, 60%, of this month's official proposals have now been posted at DashTreasury.org. It is the only web-based option for posting proposals to the Dash blockchain, and it has a 0% failure rate so far. It's the only proposal posting option that offers simplicity.

While DashCentral does offer a trustless (albeit very complex) proposal tool, their internal voting mechanism requires full trust, so the mentioned trust vs. non-trust distinction on Dash.org listings hasn't been applied consistently.

DashTreasury.org like DashCentral.org makes no money, escrows no money, and are both being offered simply as a gift to help improve Dash. I believe that the only real difference is that DashTreasury.org was made by relative new-comers, and that DashCentral.org was made by someone who has been around for a long time.

While I appreciate greatly the talent and resources that have been contributed to get Dash to this point, I think it's also important not to discount efforts/resources/talent being offered by new Dash investors/users, especially when their contributions, such as DashTreasury.org, could be of great immediate value to Dash.

Thanks for the consideration - Best, abob54