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

Budget System v2 / Transform PR

If Michael terpin can't take a little criticism or gets offended by people asking "the wrong questions" or by people asking questions in "the wrong way" than maybe he's in the wrong business... considering he's been doing this for over 20 years I'm pretty sure he's got a handle on it. All you people coming to his defense in one way or another while completly ignoring some of the questions raised proves that no matter how it's worded you guys won't give a shit. You support him, you want to give him money. Your attempts at derailing our line of question g has failed. You blamed the PR closure on our "rants" while simultaneously claiming it was otohs votes and a malfunctioning budget system.

You are all so confused maybe go have a private chat in your private closed slack and get everyone on the same page. Your project manager should be able to set that up.

I see these people you guys claim are trolls actually asking questions and actually looking for solutions. You guys could see it too if you weren't so reluctant. Driving a wedge between two groups does dash no good.*

This isn't just you people's project. In fact no body owns it. Get off your high horses.
 
Last edited:
TheDashGuy said:
(...)I am just against the idea of throwing our budget funds at centralized companies in general, not to mention we are in no dire need of a PR company(...)
Click to expand...

Sorry, I cannot agree with you. So, you speak for yourself.


InTheWoods said:
(...)
Transform PR has a history of underperformance.
(...)
Click to expand...

I still do not see that "history of underperformance" you claim (having had only one month of TransformPR works).

Also, I still do not understand clearly what makes you against Mr. Terpin's work. I'd like you to, please, point me to the facts enough to help me clear my opinions. It must be something very serious, to justify your behaviour on the subject.
 
buster said:
If Michael terpin can't take a little criticism or gets offended by people asking "the wrong questions" or by people asking questions in "the wrong way" than maybe he's in the wrong business... considering he's been doing this for over 20 years I'm pretty sure he's got a handle on it. All you people coming to his defense in one way or another while completly ignoring some of the questions raised proves that no matter how it's worded you guys won't give a shit. You support him, you want to give him money. Your attempts at derailing our line of question g has failed. You blamed the PR closure on our "rants" while simultaneously claiming it was otohs votes and a malfunctioning budget system.

You are all so confused maybe go have a private chat in your private closed slack and get everyone on the same page. Your project manager should be able to set that up.

I see these people you guys claim are trolls actually asking questions and actually looking for solutions. You guys could see it too if you weren't so reluctant. Driving a wedge between two groups does dash no good.*

This isn't just you people's project. In fact no body owns it. Get off your high horses.
Click to expand...

Sure, what you say makes sense. But some community members should refrain to act like bitcointalk Trolls, and collaborate properly, instead.
 
David said:
It's helpful to remember that the proposal was passing with 75% approval after otoh changed his votes. The only reason it wasn't funded was because Evan recognized a flaw on the budget system and asked otoh to change his votes back.

So for the record, the only reason Michael isn't working with us this minute is because of a flawed budget system, NOT because of lack of support from the community.
Click to expand...

I didn't know about this... I may need to update myself on all that's going on here.

Could someone, please, guide me further on "Evan recognized a flaw on the budget system and asked otoh to change his votes back".

Thank you.
 
buster said:
Anything specific you are referring too when you say " act like bct trolls"... you say trolls but I disagree.
Click to expand...

I do not want to pick personal fights here, because they are unnecessary (and I am not talking about you). But it is not hard, for anyone, to see who is trolling and spreading FUD, and who is bringing clear FACTS.

edit: please, read again my last posts here.
 
raganius said:
I do not want to pick personal fights here, because they are unnecessary (and I am not talking about you). But it is not hard, for anyone, to see who is trolling and spreading FUD, and who is bringing clear FACTS.

edit: please, read again my last posts here.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to fight anyone. You are calling people trolls I'm asking for specifics because I don't see it. If you can't provide that no worries.
 
Lets try not to derail any further please. I propose an amicable reboot of Q&A !

Objective & specific questions directed to Michael.
 
Let's assume for a mo that this is a perfectly normal difference of opinions, the kind of thing that should be part of decision making for any borderline proposal. Now look at the effect its having, its causing splits and alliances that ultimately could divide the community and threaten the Dash project as a whole, maybe not on this issue but it could on others in the future and you can be sure our beloved BCT trolls are taking notes on how it can be used for their agenda.

So, we've lots of very smart folks here and every problem can be viewed as an opportunity, how do we turn this potential vulnerability into a strength? Personally I haven't got a fecking clue and this thread is probably the wrong place to discuss it anyway but if we can accommodate these kind of differences in a way that drives the whole project forward then we've got governance nailed.
 
I was attending d10e in Amsterdam (you can see the topics and agenda here: http://www.d10e.org/2016-amsterdam-agenda/) where I became painfully aware about an acute state of un-awareness about DASH in the Bitcoin Community. I might write an in-depth account once I am back home. This trip, for I am still in Amsterdam, kept me away from this fascinating discussion. (just now I saw the idea of directing questions at Michael, but all of this might be deemed questions to Michael anyway)

To get back to the speed I did not only read all the posts but also the Transform’s Three-Month Public Relations Proposal (for DASH) February 7 – May 6, 2016 PDF (you can read it from a link here: https://www.dashwhale.org/p/budget-system-v2) a gem being this sentence:

“Through a hyper-targeted, aggressive, yet strategic approach, Transform will initiate the perfect storm of media coverage extending traditional outreach across the crypto, technology, and business verticals.” I would really love if Michael would allow himself several minutes to translate that sentence into a concrete, actionable, measurable steps. In the Perfect Storm Clooney dies, maybe that makes me edgy. But kidding aside, let us mull over the document a bit more:

Than, if ever were a Trojan horse in an agreement, one can find a perfect example here: “Modest amounts of crisis management will be included in retainer. If a larger crisis unfolds, the Firm will bill on an hourly basis beyond the level of the current retainer, with Client approval.” Note “hourly basis” and a lack of the value each hour represents, measured in either DASH or fiat currency. What does “crisis management” entails has not been really defined. Is a crisis if Evan gets flu or the fiat price of DASH goes down? The network shuts itself down? A troll attack on the forums? This stipulation really reeks for the lack of concrete definitions.

Then they, in “Media Monitoring and Analytics” segment (page 5 of the PDF) get down to business and claim: “In order to effectively measure the quantifiable increase in attention and conversation around Dash, Transform PR will produce a detailed report that includes placements across all relevant outlets and platforms.”

Than again, they provide what the “Analytics” would entail:

Measure circulation/views that each blogger receives on a monthly basis.
Calculate advertising equivalency (where applicable).
Provide link to each article or blog post.
Identify whether online articles also had offline coverage (and vice versa).
Provide qualitative analysis of results.

Nice, but please think about it for a sec:
-- HOW do they measure the traffic each blogger receives? Unless they have a direct analytics for each media outlet (which I bet you a MN they do not) they can only guess if, for example, social shares data are available, as only one, highly inaccurate metrics. (on Fiverr, for $5.00, anyone can get gazillion “shares” and likes);
-- they already “calculated advertising equivalency” in the Excel sheet that’s on the same page which is neither a calculation nor it represents an equivalent of anything supported by hard data. There are gazillion factors in each metrics and they chose to present what looks good for an untrained eye;
-- they will provide links, well…
-- online / offline, well…
-- quantitative analyses is an interesting one.

Again, what are the matrices used? Number of hits to dash.org for example? Easy to follow. I am sure the DASH key people will provide our PR with such a key data, needed for measuring success / progress. Number of people signing for the dashtalk forums or an increase in the number of Masternodes? Which piece of marketing efforts corresponds with what desired results we all can track, measure and analyze?

What I see in that proposal is you give me $6,000.00 a month PLUS “crisis management” (if needed) PLUS “Newswire distribution, if desired, is billed separately and averages about $300 per release,” which does NOT state which news-wire services would be employed, where the “news” would be placed, what is a desired outcome of such releases PLUS “Any long-distance travel in support of trade shows or press tours (involving airplanes and/or hotels) will be paid for by Client, typically in advance.”

Well… I had a PR / SEO budget of $1,250.00 a month for a client whose measure were SERPS i.e. will his keywords appear in Google’s page 1 and or Google positions 1 – 3. These were the results:
http://postimg.org/image/oiaevp2hz/
http://postimg.org/image/cm1ut1dip/
http://postimg.org/image/esnoaua89/

I am not tooting my own horn here I am just giving you all an example of PRE-DEFINED measure: a keyword term and its SERP (search engine results position for the rare uninitiated here) and an easily measured outcome. No mambo-jumbo "reporting" of the hits on an website that disregards the number of pages on the said site and expected hits to it. For the PR in question we also had another measure (income increase) but I can’t share those data. (hint: it was even better than the SERP progress)

DASH is a totally different animal that requires a completely different approach. But if you’d really pay $6,000.00 a month (plus undefined, not foreseeable expenses) for “Through a hyper-targeted, aggressive, yet strategic approach, Transform will initiate the perfect storm of media coverage extending traditional outreach across the crypto, technology, and business verticals,” that does not provide you with any REAL ideas, any REAL plans or any REAL measurement of desired outcomes such an expensive campaign expects, than… well…
 
GreyGhost the lack of knowledge about Dash at d10e (which had we been working together I would have been able to get one of the Dash community leaders a speaking gig as I know the organizers quite well and they'd reached out to me for speaker suggestions, which I was in the midst of facilitating with Evan, Robert and Daniel re the best European spokesperson when our plug was pulled) is reason FOR the PR campaign, not against it.

Now that I see Evan had indeed put our three-month proposal up on a different thread, I will open a new thread to discuss it (assuming as a new forum member I can do that - I still cannot post links, and that also means I have to delete the links in the posts I'm replying to, which is highly annoying) It's overwhelmingly customized to what we perceive as the PR needs of the community and token over the next three months, but it also includes some boilerplate - which you are assuming the worst in your interpretation of select phrases (e.g., "perfect storm" generally is a good thing; we were not referring to the movie).

Re the Crisis Communications option, this is a template to show that if a true crisis happens (such as the SEC or any of the other 17 governmental bodies who think they need to regulate crypto issues a warrant to claim that Dash is breaking xx laws) that calls for a larger, immediate response. Since your governance system only pays for one month's retainer at a time - and since it already ignored that we already had a three-month agreement - obviously, we would need another approval to be the ones who helped handle the massive amounts of media that would transpire. I've had a lot of experience in crisis communication, including when my own company, Marketwired (then Internet Wire) was hacked in August 2000 and someone shorted a stock based on a fake press release they inserted into our distribution fraudulenty, causing a $1.5 billion decline in 15 minutes. Within an hour, we had CNN, CNBC, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, NBC, CBS and 100 other outlets calling and even showing up at our door (plus the FBI, SEC and DOJ). The company's existence was at stake and I was able to redirect the messaging to the fact that we were victims, not the bad guys. Four class action lawsuits later (all dismissed) and an arrest of the perpetrator based on evidence we helped them uncover, we had to rebuild the company's reputation. We did, and sold the company six years later for $35 million. Today, the company is owned by NASDAQ.

I realize you still feel that SEO and paid press release distribution around keywords is better than a true PR campaign - and you're a bit conflicted in your criticism because that's what you do for a living. I believe I addressed the fundamental difference in my initial post.

Michael
 
raganius said:
I didn't know about this... I may need to update myself on all that's going on here.

Could someone, please, guide me further on "Evan recognized a flaw on the budget system and asked otoh to change his votes back".

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Anybody please feel free to correct me, because there are parts that I only generally know or specifics that I may not recall exactly. But here's a basic overview:

1) Transform PR proposal passes with roughly a 75% majority. Otoh mentioned on BCT that he cast his 400+ votes against it, as he felt like the proposal terms were essentially too vague (iirc).

2) Solarminer/Camosoul make a proposal to basically extend their work on the Dash'n'Drink vending machine to make Dash readily available to retail stores. Proposal is controversial for several reasons, people on both sides of the issue get very hyped up and agitated.

3) Evan posted a proposal to fund Dash's presence at Satoshi Roundtable.

4) There wasn't enough budget funds to pay Transform PR, Solarminer's proposal, and Satoshi Roundtable. Peopled started lobbying for their favorite projects. People started questioning the efficacy of Transform PR (IMO, in some cases it was because they were lobbying, not because they were actually concerned.) Huge controversy blows up on the forums over both the Solarminer proposal and Transform PR.

5) As a result of all this posting and lobbying, enough masternodes (a few hundred, iirc) change their vote on Transform PR from "yes" to "no" so that even though it's still technically passing, it will receive fewer net "yes" votes than either Satoshi Roundtable or Solarminer's proposal, and so will not be funded.

6) Solarminer's proposal is going to be funded. Camosoul starts making extremely aggressive and hostile comments all over the place, and eventually the vote flips to "no."

7) Now Solarminer's proposal is no longer going to be funded. Oaxaca makes a proposal to pay the Dash'n'Drink team back for their unforeseen expenses. This payment will result in there not being enough budget money to pay Transform PR. Oaxaca's proposal is highly popular (more net "yes" than Transform PR).

8) Another person lobbies Otoh, asking him to rethink his original "no" on Transform PR in light of numerous comments by the Core Team about how well Transform PR is doing. Otoh reconsiders, and swings the Transform PR vote by 800+ (400+ "no" changing to 400+ "yes"). Transform PR now has enough votes to be funded, but will cause Oaxaca's proposal not to be funded.

9) At this point, Transform PR has over a 75% "yes" vote and will easily pass.

10) Evan reveals on BCT that after the Transform PR vote initially flipped to "not being funded" status, he had a talk with Michael Terpin and let him know that the PR contract would not be funded, and we were very sorry. Then the vote flipped back, and Evan believed it would be ridiculous to subject this contract to the constant risk of being unfunded, and that we'd look crazy going back and forth to Michael saying "Yes we're on...no, now we're off. Wait, we're on again." As a result, Evan asked Otoh to vote "no" so as to keep Transform PR from being funded until the new budget system can be introduced. He then asked everybody else to vote it down as well.

As you see, the final vote itself was over 75% approval of Transform PR (until Evan asked that it be voted down). The ones who oppose it are a very vocal minority of masternode owners.
 
David

You are repeating yourself. You have already stated this earlier.

It wasn't a vocal minority. Please don't spread disinformation. Even before the release of those metrics, Terpin PR proposal had lots of NO votes. It was very controversial since the very beginning.

I am pretty sure even more masternode owners will vote against Terpin's proposal following the release of those metrics, that were released rather late, after most of the votes were cast.

I know you were involved in this PR effort, facilitating contact between some parties. Your efforts were not in vain. Even if this proposal fails, which it probably will (I hope it does), you have helped start a dialogue about the best way forward when it comes to raising awareness efforts. Don't fall in the sunk cost fallacy trap.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is so much here I could call out and rant on, but what good would it do?

The budget fix and terpin deal are not going to be separated because the whole point is to force you to do both just to get the one you want. Force you to swallow the poison pill along with the chocolate cake, which is also a poison pill in disguise... The cake is a lie, too! This should raise an eyebrow, at least.

Evan is a brilliant coder, but he knows precisely dick about real-world use promotion. Most everyone in the corecteam can be described that way. Be mad. Don't care.

The only things that coincide with price rises are substantive examples of DASH's capacity to be used in the real world.

PR is a thing company's waste money on when they have nothing better to do. Press Releases are the way of the dinosaur. Everyone wants free advertising. The world is numb to this game. Its an addiction of silly ponzi-heads who can't get out of a pattern because they don't think.

The moment you start trying to rationalize how X might, somehow, maybe have had an effect, you're already lost. Impacts are exactly that. The last time a giant meteorite crashed into the Earth, did you have to wonder? Or was there a big explosion? Correlation != Causation anyway... You're hunting for evidence of a thing that proves nothing even if its true.

Its much simpler than you're making it. Hate me for "insulting the community" if you must fraudulently misrepresent me as doing such, but the world is watching you act like a bunch of stupid pussies with no experience in how to win.

Its not name-calling when its true. If I see a squirrel over there and I say "Hey, look! A squirrel!" I'm not calling names, I'm identifying it. Its a squirrel. DASH is mired by a bunch of morons addicted to a pattern of failure that are too afraid to break from the comfort of the pattern and go win.

The whole world sees it. Why can't you? Confirmation Bias. Echo Chamber. You're so busy convincing each other about how great you are that you refuse to listen to anything coming from outside your bubble.

Its a combination of psychological problems, not technical problems. DASH is the tool. But its people are broken. Like a clueless pothead with a flat fire, jack, tire iron, and functional spare. Still stuck on the side of the road because he's fuckin' retarded even though he's got it all... But chicks dig him because he gives them free weed, so how can he be wrong? He knows how great he is, because he gets laid and that's all that matters, right? But still can't change a damn tire...

DASH is unique, for the moment... But if you people don't pull your heads out of your asses, these ideas will be copied elsewhere. Even in an inferior manner, if capitalized upon, you'll never catch up.

IX could easily be slapped on top of BTC with no master nodes. Locks would be slower, but still faster than 180 days! 1 second, 4 seconds... Still faster than half a year! Do you yhink you can sell masternodes after that happens? Woo, 3 seconds difference, ditch the installed base for our new thing nobody understands, quick!

You think Evan won't be bribed or threatened to do this? Dur, its open source, why bother?

It is one thing to be the first mover, another to fail to be when the only thing stopping you is you...

Did nobody see The Walking Dead S6E9 on Sunday?

Faith without works is dead.

You believe. You talk about it. But you do nothing, and cut down anyone who does. The world is watching you. And the breaths that were being held are exhaling on the market as they watch you fail to take action. Again. Still. Some more... The pattern is obvious when you stop trying to see what you want to see instead of what obviouslyvis... Impacts are not hard to find. They're impacts.

Live in denial of reality just because you don't like the guy who points it out to you? If someone wanted lessons on how to snatch failure from the jaws of success, all they have to do is look at DASH. A more perfect example has never existed.
 
Now, we are back on topic ;)

David said:
(...)
8) Another person lobbies Otoh, asking him to rethink his original "no" on Transform PR in light of numerous comments by the Core Team about how well Transform PR is doing. Otoh reconsiders, and swings the Transform PR vote by 800+ (400+ "no" changing to 400+ "yes"). Transform PR now has enough votes to be funded, but will cause Oaxaca's proposal not to be funded.

9) At this point, Transform PR has over a 75% "yes" vote and will easily pass.

10) Evan reveals on BCT that after the Transform PR vote initially flipped to "not being funded" status, he had a talk with Michael Terpin and let him know that the PR contract would not be funded, and we were very sorry. Then the vote flipped back, and Evan believed it would be ridiculous to subject this contract to the constant risk of being unfunded, and that we'd look crazy going back and forth to Michael saying "Yes we're on...no, now we're off. Wait, we're on again." As a result, Evan asked Otoh to vote "no" so as to keep Transform PR from being funded until the new budget system can be introduced. He then asked everybody else to vote it down as well.

As you see, the final vote itself was over 75% approval of Transform PR (until Evan asked that it be voted down). The ones who oppose it are a very vocal minority of masternode owners.
Click to expand...

Thank you, David, I didn't know this part of the story. Now things are a bit more clear for me.


David said:
(...) Evan believed it would be ridiculous to subject this contract to the constant risk of being unfunded, and that we'd look crazy going back and forth to Michael saying "Yes we're on...no, now we're off. Wait, we're on again."(...)
Click to expand...

Evan's belief here, from my point of view, should not be the cause to change the rules of the game per se. Of course,it would make things "easier to drive", but at the cost of taking away some "power" from the community.

As I have already said here, from what I can see, our voting system is working great. The problem, it seems, is "the community is still learning" to use this powerful tool responsibly, avoiding looking crazy, and by not making decisions out of pure emotions.


edit: InTheWoods, David was helping me understand his point. I wish you'd help me understand yours.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
David thank you for the explanation of the inner workings, and glad to know that I continue to have the support of the majority of node holders, but not enough yet to outpace things like funding for the Satoshi Roundtable (which, ironically, I got Evan invited to via my direct recommendation to the organizer). I'm happy to have our proposal considered, debated and voted on whenever Evan, the Dash team and the Dash community agree is the right time.

Michael


David said:
Anybody please feel free to correct me, because there are parts that I only generally know or specifics that I may not recall exactly. But here's a basic overview:

1) Transform PR proposal passes with roughly a 75% majority. Otoh mentioned on BCT that he cast his 400+ votes against it, as he felt like the proposal terms were essentially too vague (iirc).

2) Solarminer/Camosoul make a proposal to basically extend their work on the Dash'n'Drink vending machine to make Dash readily available to retail stores. Proposal is controversial for several reasons, people on both sides of the issue get very hyped up and agitated.

3) Evan posted a proposal to fund Dash's presence at Satoshi Roundtable.

4) There wasn't enough budget funds to pay Transform PR, Solarminer's proposal, and Satoshi Roundtable. Peopled started lobbying for their favorite projects. People started questioning the efficacy of Transform PR (IMO, in some cases it was because they were lobbying, not because they were actually concerned.) Huge controversy blows up on the forums over both the Solarminer proposal and Transform PR.

5) As a result of all this posting and lobbying, enough masternodes (a few hundred, iirc) change their vote on Transform PR from "yes" to "no" so that even though it's still technically passing, it will receive fewer net "yes" votes than either Satoshi Roundtable or Solarminer's proposal, and so will not be funded.

6) Solarminer's proposal is going to be funded. Camosoul starts making extremely aggressive and hostile comments all over the place, and eventually the vote flips to "no."

7) Now Solarminer's proposal is no longer going to be funded. Oaxaca makes a proposal to pay the Dash'n'Drink team back for their unforeseen expenses. This payment will result in there not being enough budget money to pay Transform PR. Oaxaca's proposal is highly popular (more net "yes" than Transform PR).

8) Another person lobbies Otoh, asking him to rethink his original "no" on Transform PR in light of numerous comments by the Core Team about how well Transform PR is doing. Otoh reconsiders, and swings the Transform PR vote by 800+ (400+ "no" changing to 400+ "yes"). Transform PR now has enough votes to be funded, but will cause Oaxaca's proposal not to be funded.

9) At this point, Transform PR has over a 75% "yes" vote and will easily pass.

10) Evan reveals on BCT that after the Transform PR vote initially flipped to "not being funded" status, he had a talk with Michael Terpin and let him know that the PR contract would not be funded, and we were very sorry. Then the vote flipped back, and Evan believed it would be ridiculous to subject this contract to the constant risk of being unfunded, and that we'd look crazy going back and forth to Michael saying "Yes we're on...no, now we're off. Wait, we're on again." As a result, Evan asked Otoh to vote "no" so as to keep Transform PR from being funded until the new budget system can be introduced. He then asked everybody else to vote it down as well.

As you see, the final vote itself was over 75% approval of Transform PR (until Evan asked that it be voted down). The ones who oppose it are a very vocal minority of masternode owners.
Click to expand...
 
michaelterpin said:
GreyGhost the lack of knowledge about Dash at d10e (which had we been working together I would have been able to get one of the Dash community leaders a speaking gig as I know the organizers quite well and they'd reached out to me for speaker suggestions, which I was in the midst of facilitating with Evan, Robert and Daniel re the best European spokesperson when our plug was pulled) is reason FOR the PR campaign, not against it.

Now that I see Evan had indeed put our three-month proposal up on a different thread, I will open a new thread to discuss it (assuming as a new forum member I can do that - I still cannot post links, and that also means I have to delete the links in the posts I'm replying to, which is highly annoying) It's overwhelmingly customized to what we perceive as the PR needs of the community and token over the next three months, but it also includes some boilerplate - which you are assuming the worst in your interpretation of select phrases (e.g., "perfect storm" generally is a good thing; we were not referring to the movie).

Re the Crisis Communications option, this is a template to show that if a true crisis happens (such as the SEC or any of the other 17 governmental bodies who think they need to regulate crypto issues a warrant to claim that Dash is breaking xx laws) that calls for a larger, immediate response. Since your governance system only pays for one month's retainer at a time - and since it already ignored that we already had a three-month agreement - obviously, we would need another approval to be the ones who helped handle the massive amounts of media that would transpire. I've had a lot of experience in crisis communication, including when my own company, Marketwired (then Internet Wire) was hacked in August 2000 and someone shorted a stock based on a fake press release they inserted into our distribution fraudulenty, causing a $1.5 billion decline in 15 minutes. Within an hour, we had CNN, CNBC, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, NBC, CBS and 100 other outlets calling and even showing up at our door (plus the FBI, SEC and DOJ). The company's existence was at stake and I was able to redirect the messaging to the fact that we were victims, not the bad guys. Four class action lawsuits later (all dismissed) and an arrest of the perpetrator based on evidence we helped them uncover, we had to rebuild the company's reputation. We did, and sold the company six years later for $35 million. Today, the company is owned by NASDAQ.

I realize you still feel that SEO and paid press release distribution around keywords is better than a true PR campaign - and you're a bit conflicted in your criticism because that's what you do for a living. I believe I addressed the fundamental difference in my initial post.

Michael
Click to expand...

See, Michael what you wrote here is the reason why I am getting strongly against your involvement with the DASH PR efforts. You can't know what I feel is better or not, I kind of detest assumptions, presumptions and suggestions, but aside that, in my previous post I asked what I see as real problems with your proposal and you chose to disregard them. Instead you are selling us your (interesting one might add) own story, NASDAQ etc.

I could not care less about your business being hacked some 16 years ago, and the outcome, I wanted to know what is:
a) your crisis management rate;
b) an outline what such a crisis might entail. Say, the IRS changes its ruling crypto are assets to they are not and the Senate makes all crypto illegal. Can you tell me your crisis management will be able to take care of it?
c) do you fly coach, business or first is what I'd like to know. Do you stay in 3, 4 or 5 stars hotels;
d) what PR services you use;
e) what "about $300 per release," really means. Where the releases go and what is expected outcome;
f) Which piece of marketing efforts corresponds with what desired results we all can track, measure and analyze etc., etc. ,all of which is just several posts above.

Dash could've been on d10e without your "connections."

Alas you, again, use it as your pitch here ("I know the organizers quite well" -- yet again without telling us who is that you know) like the currency constantly lingering in between 5th and 7th space on the coinmarketcap and has its founder on Satoshi Round-table. (I know you're also there and that makes me feel a tad uneasy; it's a bonding thing among the "new crypto elite" where all the deals might end up cemented behind the closed doors, precisely like in the detestable old world ruled by the Financial Crime Cartel and its shenanigans) needs any "connections" to attend an event like d10e. DASH is not an unknown entity in the overall space of the key people organizing the event. All that's needed for such attendance is Evan's email to Tiffany and, given how busy he must be, a volunteer, Google News alert or a low-paid virtual assistant would do. (to alert him of such possibilities)

I am really sorry to say this but it must bear repeating, your response makes me cringe and I lost any hope of having a real, based on hard data, conversation with you. If you end up selling your services to the DASH community, well, good for you. DASH will succeed on its own merits anyway and if you'll be a part of that glory everyone will be happy.

However, for now, I am voting resolutely against your involvement because you are not providing us the answers to real concerns. And your document titled Three-Month Public Relations Proposal February 7 – May 6, 2016 is an insult to any thinking entity and as such does not support the narrative of a successful PR venture it is selling. But than, I guess, this is the PR that you do at its best :)))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top