• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Budget Proposal - Vendor-Experience

TheDashGuy said:
What do you call this?
https://www.dashwhale.org/p/transform-pr

Or:
https://www.dashwhale.org/p/dash-org
https://www.dashwhale.org/p/core-team
https://www.dashwhale.org/p/public-awareness


I don't see any expense reports, updates, feedback, details, resumes, dates or chat on these "rushed" proposals.
I see plenty of people suggesting we look into these things more, yet they are still funded., without discussion, without complaint.

He wants to build and test out ways to make a merchant experience that is good for retail use, why are we telling him no? Why are the coins just going to burn in 7 days? Please enlighten me of this.
Click to expand...

The transform pr was a direct consequence of public awareness. It used those funds.

Transform PR is a known promotion agency in the crypto space. I voted NO for that proposal. I know projects who've had a bad experience with Micheal Terpin. Money flushed down the drain basically.

The dash.org domain was something Evan paid for out of his own pocket and was happy to cover for that expense himself. It was up to the community if to cover that expense or not. There wasn't much to talk about regarding buying the domain in retrospect and it was pretty self explanatory. Everyone understands the value of a short catchy domain.

The core-team proposal was bit vague, have to admit, but it did mention regular auditing, transparency and reports and was much more explicit either way than this one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TanteStefana said:
OK, what if we compromise. And you promise not to hate me, and I'll be LOUD and DEMANDING of a monthly review of what you accomplished, and you'll give us a reasonable report, meaning at first, what your working on, what you've accomplished, how many contacts and potential users you've brought in, etc... answer my many questions with a smile, and I'll let it go 8 years :tongue: But you'd still have to convince everyone else, and I think shortening the time would go a long way in doing that :)
Click to expand...
Just for you Tante.:smile:....Actually, I think we did pretty good with the soda machine updates. It is tough to give give updates everyday, but certainly it is expected that we tell everyone what we are doing frequently.
 
But you can see, the requirements to unfund is harder than to fund.

I'm guessnig what's likely happening is that the 729 coin budget is too small. You're hoping to make up for it over the long haul.

But really, Dash needs to know what they get for funding. Obviously - short term, we're getting integrated merchant services but there is so much more to this.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT COULD BE POSSIBLE IF SOMEONE WANTED TO DO IT Not that it's what these guys are proposing.

The way I see it, I mean, if I were putting this together, I would make a proposal like this:

1. For the funding of this startup company, Dash will pay 729 Dash per month for 8 years to fund a company that will provide official merchant services and support.

2. It is expected that this business will grow and at the end of 8 years, we plan on being self sufficient.

3. For this investment, Dash will own 50% of the business, ownership given to the Dash Foundation where 50% of the profits, if any, will be paid and re-used as seen fit for the Dash project.

4. The other 50% of the profits will go to the initial developers, who will make their own arrangements of ownership and profit participation. This arrangement must be agreed to by the Foundation and any changes made must also be approved of by the Foundation.

Etc....

This takes time to work out, and the project could be approved right away with the promise of getting everyone to agree, or else terminate the funding. This would be good because eventually, you can pay yourselves a salary (probably needs to be approved of) and if it's successful and becomes independent, the profits that the Foundation receives could help pay for core development expansion (and improve your base salaries - thus be motivational). This could be our first project that was envisioned to help increase available funding for more Dash projects.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TanteStefana said:
But you can see, the requirements to unfund is harder than to fund.

I'm guessnig what's likely happening is that the 729 coin budget is too small. You're hoping to make up for it over the long haul.

But really, Dash needs to know what they get for funding. Obviously - short term, we're getting integrated merchant services but there is so much more to this. The way I see it, I mean, if I were putting this together, I would make a proposal like this:

1. For the funding of this startup company, Dash will pay 729 Dash per month for 8 years to fund a company that will provide official merchant services and support.

2. It is expected that this business will grow and at the end of 8 years, we plan on being self sufficient.

3. For this investment, Dash will own 50% of the business, ownership given to the Dash Foundation where 50% of the profits, if any, will be paid and re-used as seen fit for the Dash project.

4. The other 50% of the profits will go to the initial developers, who will make their own arrangements of ownership and profit participation. This arrangement must be agreed to by the Foundation and any changes made must also be approved of by the Foundation.

Etc....

This takes time to work out, and the project could be approved right away with the promise of getting everyone to agree, or else terminate the funding. This would be good because eventually, you can pay yourselves a salary (probably needs to be approved of) and if it's successful and becomes independent, the profits that the Foundation receives could help pay for core development expansion (and improve your base salaries - thus be motivational). This could be our first project that was envisioned to help increase available funding for more Dash projects.
Click to expand...

omg, I like this a lot.. however, 8 years is far too long for a return and 50% to the initial developers is not a sufficiently big carrot. I would say 5 years MAX and give them 60% share.
 
TanteStefana

I don't think it's a good idea to encourage the creation of standard companies. Ideally we'd like to see more decentralized corporations using the model Dash introduced.
 
Solarminer said:
Your vote stays in the yes/no/abstain until you change it. So if you change your vote from yes to no, you only need to do it once.
  • Budgets are proposals which receive 10% of the possible votes (currently about 350 out of 3500) more yes votes than no votes.
  • Budgets can be nullified at any time if vote totals (cast or re-cast) fall below the approval threshold.
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Using Decentralized Governance: Proposals, Voting, and Budgets
Click to expand...

So is there a planned status web page or demo videos or anything to show people the project ongoing updates if this is approved? I really would like to see a mobile app that acts like a POS terminal come out of this maybe with an optional printer long term... I noticed several merchants using square with an ipad, it seems like such an easy target.

Thanks for the link I was just reading this over, separate topic but I wonder how do we vote to change this 10% possible vote over under, I feel like it should require more like 20%...I guess since not all masternode owners are voting it is still set low...
 
Look guys, you must have some sort of plan that requires an 8 year commitment, all we're asking is for you to either justify it or make it more free swinging, but shorter term :)
 
InTheWoods said:
TanteStefana

I don't think it's a good idea to encourage the creation of standard companies. Ideally we'd like to see more decentralized corporations using the model Dash introduced.
Click to expand...

The end result is decentralized. It simply gives them good motivation and the profits further fund other dash projects.

In my mind, masternodes are effectively a franchise, albeit a decentralised franchise.
 
InTheWoods said:
TanteStefana

I don't think it's a good idea to encourage the creation of standard companies. Ideally we'd like to see more decentralized corporations using the model Dash introduced.
Click to expand...
Decentralized corporations are great for huge entities which Dash arguably already is, and certainly will become, but for smaller projects, smaller businesses, you can't beat talent that doesn't have to get approval for every little thing. Even Dash relies heavily on Evan's guidance. I think that fitting everything into one type of structure is a mistake.
 
Let's also keep in mind that ATM / Vending / PoS Retail got 82.2% approval in a recent poll:

https://dashtalk.org/threads/poll-dash-direction.7789/

Supporting this startup, we're basically doing our own kickstarter.. and just think about the good PR that would bring.

However, personally, I wouldn't vote for 8 years. For me it would have to be a maximum of 5 years and give them 60% profits. We can setup a poll for this.
 
TheDashGuy said:
He wants to build and test out ways to make a merchant experience that is good for retail use, why are we telling him no? Why are the coins just going to burn in 7 days? Please enlighten me of this.
Click to expand...

Burned coins add value to all existing Dash as a deflationary pressure.

Solarminer said:
Most investors risk their funds to have a chance at a big win. They don't usually get a detailed way their funds will be spent. This proposal is an opportunity that you don't even have to risk funds since they will be lost anyway. Why not put them to a good use? Pay our developers and expand the Dash Ecosystem.
Click to expand...

No, most investors ask for a business plan before dispensing the cash. The funds won't be "lost", they will return to us as the monetary pool will not grow that amount.

GrandMasterDash said:
I wish yes votes had a higher threshold
Click to expand...
Well, you just need another better voted budget item to replace it...

GrandMasterDash said:
omg, I like this a lot.. however, 8 years is far too long for a return and 50% to the initial developers is not a sufficiently big carrot. I would say 5 years MAX and give them 60% share.
Click to expand...

Yes, it does seem like we are funding a startup to me. Maybe we should make a deal like that. And the masternodes can appoint a representative or two to sit at the board.

oaxaca said:
This proposal does not create a company and will never earn a profit. The end goal is open source software that can be used for retail apps.
Click to expand...
It seems it can also produce physical items that can be sold or generate profit.
 
InTheWoods said:
TanteStefana

I don't think it's a good idea to encourage the creation of standard companies. Ideally we'd like to see more decentralized corporations using the model Dash introduced.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with InTheWoods, Dash is decentralized and should be working with companies that fit well with Dash. Also, an 8 year commitment, that's way too long. A lot can happen in 8 years. In the real world, you start with smaller commitments to build trust, and then only if it's successful afterwards longer commitments can be made.
 
TheDashGuy said:
These are all rather great ideas Solarminer! I would love to see what kind of ideas would come out of your brain if money wasn't the issue! You are so creative!

Side notes for everyone else:
What type of proposal information is suggested to provide? Seeing as some peoples expectations are different than others.

Should proposal be resubmitted each month? Every 2 months? Is there an "ideal" way to propose something to the network and not run into technical issues as this one is? eduffield fernando anyone?

I was hoping to propose an idea as well in the near future, just wanted to have my ducks in line. Thanks!
Click to expand...
I agree that the proposal could turn into something great, but I see two issues:

-Time. This is not really an issue because you can change your vote to no, but not everyone realizes that and puts the burden on the voters. I don't know what is the right time scope for people to feel comfortable, I guess we'll need to learn along the way by doing/voting proposals.

-Too broad. I like specific small objectives, and I think most people think like me. None of us can plan a lot in this field because everything is so new and changing. Some people have been mentioning other proposals as being too broad too. And I agree, we should make them more specific. The fact that the bar has been lower before should not cause that we don't strive to make it higher. The only reason that those proposals passed are because they came from Evan and I think we can all agree that he can have some slack because he has proved his commitment beyond doubt and brought results. The vending machine project was amazing and a huge success, but I think that trying to create a recurring budget item this size based on that is too much atm (btw, for those mentioning the core team proposal, which is 50% bigger than this proposal, those coins are shared by around 15-20 people doing a lot of things for the project, some of them for a really long time).

In any case, I think it is really healthy that people are submitting proposals and we are discussing them. I wish more people would do it, that is what the system is for. One thing I'd wish, though, is that we were all a bit more calmed. It is ok if proposals pass, they can always get voted down. And it is ok if they don't, they can be modified and passed again. We are all learning and experimenting, let's try to have fun :smile:
 
OK, we've been arguing on Slack all this time. I think I got to the root of the matter.

For those of you who don't realize it, Camo and Solar and team (moocowmoo, oaxaca, etc) put a lot of time, effort and money into the soda machine. More than they got from the proposal. In fact, the proposal was originally for 800 coins, they got 590. Now they want to keep the momentum going, but they don't want to be restricted with a plan they can't even define yet. They want flexibility. They need input from merchants, etc....

Why the 8 years? Although this can be voted down at any point and will probably have to be when Dash becomes extremely expensive, they want a commitment from the community that we will do our part in this. Camo especially says if he is putting everything into doing this project, he wants the community to show they'll be there for the long haul. I can understand this, and it was the main point that has me now thinking, OK, I'll live with the 8 year commitment, with the option of withdrawing if circumstances make it prudent to do so. I never had trouble with the cost of their proposal, only the time. And this time commitment is important to these guys. They feel the community needs to show some support for them.

This is a team that can do the job. They're motivated, and if they're still willing to submit to questioning once in a while, maybe monthly to see what they are getting done, I'm all for doing this, as it is one of the most important aspects that desperately needs work. Dash is fully functional and ready for mass adoption. We just need infrastructure. They need our serious commitment. I can understand that. I don't want to hold them to a plan that may change, and think what they submitted so far is fine. I just freaked out on the long time commitment.

Anyway, I'm supporting this now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top