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

Amount of DIF Reserves Requested

How much Dash should the DIF ask for?

  • 0 (0% of treasry)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 100 (1.88% )

    Votes: 3 33.3%
  • 200 (3.76% )

    Votes: 4 44.4%
  • 300 (5.63%)

    Votes: 2 22.2%

  • Total voters


Active member
The DIF wishes to seek community feedback on the following a proposal.

This proposal would add funds to the reserves and operating fund of the DIF.

The DIF has been toiling away these past three months. We have been working on identifying our vision mission and goals. One reason to establish a vision, mission and goals is to limit the scope of our action. By identifying the things that are really important, we can focus our time binging forth our vision and avoid spending resources on efforts that do not advance our vision. It is with joy I report that the DIF has approved a vision:

The DIF will
  • Facilitate the solicitation, negotiation, and due diligence of investments of potential interest to the Dash DAO
  • Guide entrepreneurs seeking funding from the DIF by educating them on the process and best practices to improve the chances for a successful investment
  • Manage reserves for the network in a manner that balances the needs to grow the reserves, and to limit risks
  • Seed the liquidity and growth of emerging Dash financial markets or products
  • Conduct all activities with a high degree of transparency - while providing a bridge to the needs of potential partners desiring to protect non-public information

We are now to focus on approving a mission statement that supports this vision.

One reason this process has been so slow is that we want to be very deliberate. We want to set the DIF up for success as an institution. A second reason this process has been slow is we spent a while bringing in ReadyRaider as a partner as well as exploring a partnership with Quadency and offering that opportunity to the network. I'm really excited to explore where this idea will lead us.

We are seeking community feedback as to how much to ask for. Note that we have identified many factors that should influence this decision. One such factor is current demand for treasury funding. There is one perspective that the DIF should not ask for so much as to compete with current funded proposals. It has also been suggested that the DIF should submit proposals so as to compete for funds. In this line of thinking, applying competition should provide pressure to raise the value of all proposals.

I view this question with a dynamic viewpoint. Currently in my view, the decline of the price in dash has resulted in only the strongest of projects getting funding. I find it hard to compete against these hardened projects, some of which underwent significant restructuring and cost cutting. However, in a scenario similar to the 2017 price spike, the existence of the DIF can provide extreme value for our DAO.

I am including a poll with this post asking about the November proposal cycle. Be aware that this only to provide us feedback as one factor we will consider in view of the whole health of our network. As a mathematician I may pay special attention to the median of this poll. We note this poll is subject to a Sybil attack and is from a biased sample.


Last edited:
I prefer a slow buildup of reserves for the DIF. One that has the least impact on our budget system. Which means i voted for 100 Dash.
I agree a slow build up is desirable but AFAIK the DIF has relatively low reserves right now. I therefore suggest a fast build up and then taper off later. If we don't then we may miss certain opportunities in the shorter term.
  • Manage reserves for the network in a manner that balances the needs to grow the reserves, and to limit risks

If the legal design of the DIF guarantees their freedom to manage their reserves (Receive them, safeguard them in other more solid stores of value ... and increase them), I believe that this is the key step to project DASH ... and imo, without limits. (sorry for the arrogance)

In this scenario, the solution would not be technological, but monetary. The solution to the financial independence of DASH, seriously threatened since the beginning of the project ... and that conditions it tremendously, constantly since then.

It only takes ONE economic measure, a single "investment" for DIF to be successful, to turn it into an absolute benchmark project. And as long as I don't take it ... it won't work ... like no other project will, without BTC allowing it ... because everyone lives in the middle of a widespread scam that prevents them from owning their own development.

The technology, the community, the human capital, the Evolution Platform ... are only assets of added value and even high added value, yes, of course ... but only collaterals. No project will be successful without confronting and defeating BTC's financial strategy. (which they have tried to avoid with desperate attempts such as the different Stable coins, etc ... stable resources that they do not integrate properly into their own structures, so they do not get the necessary feedback loop to reverse the problem)

To beat BTC and its "black hole of wealth" tactic, DASH only needs to BE EXPOSED TO BTC. Duffield, in search of a sustainable financing system for DASH (a part of the monetary issues to the benefit of DAO), makes, in my opinion, by chance, the perfect way to nullify dirty EXPANSIVE flows of BTC. (which are the first half of his extraction scam, that of artificially inflating the economic structures around him whose wealth he wants to drain ).

DASH puts a "tax" on the successive speculative intrusions that is exercised against its ecosystem in that first "invasive" movement ... that is why DASH is more prepared than other projects to counter these attacks. BUT ... If DASH ACCUMULATES its own reserves in BTC, it also cancels that second part of the BTC scam: THEIR CONTRACTION cycles. (This is what Duffield is missing to close the loop: you grow on artificial pumps, by proportional drip, and of course, major, DAO ... but guarding against the second move (the moment of WEALTH WITHDRAWAL to return to BTC, AMPLIFIED) you also grow in the second part of the process: because your BTC reserves become more expensive and you let BTC "steal for you" ...... and you keep expanding your Reserves -.

In this context, in which you manage to "parasitize" the cheating growth of BTC, BTC "respects" you and leaves you alone ... or enriches you. He cannot attack you, because his fraud system turns against him and "feeds" the attacked project).

And, at the cost of DASH being ONLY a project with the ability to guarantee the wealth received (POW + ChainLocks security ... which I don't have enough technical criteria to evaluate as a secure system, but I admit it because I trust what DASH claims people) ... just with that, DASH would be UNSTOPPABLE. The most attractive project to receive wealth in the cryptocurrency sector (in my opinion, more attractive - and, by the way, ethical and sustainable - than BTC). Receive, SAVE ... and increase.

Facing those two extractive movements, which are the daily trap in the crypto sector, DASH would turn a downtrend that is beyond its control ... against another BULL, PROGRESSIVE AND ACCUMULATIVE THAT CONSTANTLY FEEDS BACK - while the speculative capital of the crypto sector continues to steal with that method -.
Last edited:
* And, of course, regarding the amount of donations from the DAO, personally, ZERO FEARS. The more wealth that is turned over to that shield, the more solid, exponentially growing and inalienable wealth DASH will have.
No project will be successful without confronting and defeating BTC's financial strategy.

I think this sentence is telling @EUsouth. As recently as six months ago, I might have said that Dash can survive on its own. It does not need the financial industry for support. However, now that I am in the thick of things I have reevaluated that position. Part of reason that BTC, a black hole of wealth as you put it, has done so well in terms of marketcap is because of support from the financial sector.

Having spent time evaluating financial opportunities placed in front of the DIF, I do agree with you about confronting and defeating BTC's financial strategy. If all goes well over the next month or two the DIF should present an opportunity to do just that. We have needed to evaluate opportunities that profit from BTC or even litecoin. I now feel that this is one way that Dash can establish an advantage over other projects. If users of other projects actually contribute to DASH reserves, think about that.

The quadency proposal will profit off of crypto activity in general. I expect that will be a recurring theme as the DIF evaluates opportunities.

I am not so interested in projects that don't advance Dash in some way. However, if a project that does advance dash could capture value of competing projects; That I'm interested in!
* And, of course, regarding the amount of donations from the DAO, personally, ZERO FEARS. The more wealth that is turned over to that shield, the more solid, exponentially growing and inalienable wealth DASH will have.

Thank you!!!

You are a mathematician Darren, you have more light than the rest.

Think about the crossover point between the DASH price and the value of DIF Reserves converted to BTC (and even the future certainty, without even reaching that point ... that that point will arrive, by pure inertia: it is the perfect deposit for capital that wants to enter crypto) . There is a point of "no return" where DASH is UNTOUCHABLE AND ITS WEALTH INALIENABLE from the scam that controls all the crypto industry: Either you leave him alone ... or you make him rich! (and , in both ways, DASH wins) :
1- for surfing the bitcoiner scam (let the bad guys work for us ;) )
2- Because of the REAL financial independence that has been denied to us but, then yes, it would allow us to value the technological excellence of DASH by pure meritocracy ... an excellence of HUGE, UNDISCUTABLE intrinsic value that DASH already has ... but since its genesis is being minimized (in its expression of fiat value) by the trap that controls wealth movements in the sector.
Last edited:
@Mark Mason has suggested that this proposal clearly outline the operating expenses of the DIF.

I'm posting here to publicly thank Mark and also to serve as a reminder to me about this suggestion.