vazaki3
Well-known member
It is amazing that nobody dares to answer to simple straightforward questions.
This reveals how sick the enviroment in incubator is.
Sartre : "L'enfer, c'est les autres"
Last edited:
Dash Incubator: Vote on Appointment of new Proposal Owner
- Thread starter AndyDark
- Start date
It is amazing that nobody dares to answer to simple straightforward questions.
This reveals how sick the enviroment in incubator is.
Sartre : "L'enfer, c'est les autres"
vazaki3
Well-known member
The Specification Tasks for the "Dash Incubator Restructure Requirements" cost 45 dash. There is an interesting snapshot of a talk at the incubator discord channel, which reveals @AshFrancis's proposal regarding the incubator's governance commitee. AshFrancis did not proposed a static five-member governance commitee as @Sam Kirby did , but rather a dynamic one. (Note that Sam was paid 7 dash for writing the flawed incubator governance commitee specs, compare these 7 dash to the 5.6 dash that have been given from 2017 until today to mnowatch for its development and hosting, and you will easily understand the absurd way the Dash community rates and rewards the tasks, you will also easily understand the reason why very few serious persons add proposals or work for the Dash community. These disproportionate compentations occur simply because voting the numbers is prohibited by the agents)
AshFransis said this:
AshFrancis's proposal does not irrevocably exclude the inactive admins from participating in the governance committe. The inactive admins can decide anytime to become active ones (by casting a vote somewhere) and thus they can be considered again as active members of the electorate and participate in the decisions of the governance committe . Unfortunately AshFrancis's proposal was not transcribed in the final specs that Sam Kirby wrote.
I also agree that the inactive voters (after X period of time) should temporarily (and as long as they remain inactive) lose their voting rights.
Of course the above idea to archive/exclude the decisions of the inactive voters after X period of time (and restore them in case they become active again) is yet another strict red line set by the agents that no one should cross. The entire world order of the agents is based on decisions made long time ago by the dead, and those decisions are strictly forbidden to be altered by the living. For example, the rules that govern your very physical body have been set by the deads/by your ancenstors, they are still active rules and you cannot alter them. They are called original sin. Another example, the rules that define the political regime of your country have also been set by the deads and cannot be altered. They are called constitution. And an example from our neighborhood, the rules of incubator, still standing although not voted by anyone except the inactive @AndyDark . No one in the Universe is allowed to try a system where old decisions cease automatically upon the death/inactivity of the decider (in case of course the alive/active desire that) because if that system succeeds it could threaten the world order of the agents. In that sense, AshFrancis's proposal has very few odds to be established even among the 11 admins of incubator. Similarly to voting the numbers and all the other red lines I have already described, the agents will not allow for this to happen also.
One rule to ring them all!
AshFransis said this:
AshFransis@discord said:
AshFrancis's proposal does not irrevocably exclude the inactive admins from participating in the governance committe. The inactive admins can decide anytime to become active ones (by casting a vote somewhere) and thus they can be considered again as active members of the electorate and participate in the decisions of the governance committe . Unfortunately AshFrancis's proposal was not transcribed in the final specs that Sam Kirby wrote.
I also agree that the inactive voters (after X period of time) should temporarily (and as long as they remain inactive) lose their voting rights.
The above means all the old votes of the inactives should be archived, and they should not be counted in the tally or in the calculation of the voting participation, until they come back. I would like this change to be applied both in incubator and for the masternode voters in the dash budget system. We have approximately 3218 inactive masternode voters. These voters should be excluded (until they show signs of voting activity) when calculating the number of votes required for a proposal to pass. Part of dash's bad luck is caused due to the irrational respect for the dead and for the inactive.
Of course the above idea to archive/exclude the decisions of the inactive voters after X period of time (and restore them in case they become active again) is yet another strict red line set by the agents that no one should cross. The entire world order of the agents is based on decisions made long time ago by the dead, and those decisions are strictly forbidden to be altered by the living. For example, the rules that govern your very physical body have been set by the deads/by your ancenstors, they are still active rules and you cannot alter them. They are called original sin. Another example, the rules that define the political regime of your country have also been set by the deads and cannot be altered. They are called constitution. And an example from our neighborhood, the rules of incubator, still standing although not voted by anyone except the inactive @AndyDark . No one in the Universe is allowed to try a system where old decisions cease automatically upon the death/inactivity of the decider (in case of course the alive/active desire that) because if that system succeeds it could threaten the world order of the agents. In that sense, AshFrancis's proposal has very few odds to be established even among the 11 admins of incubator. Similarly to voting the numbers and all the other red lines I have already described, the agents will not allow for this to happen also.
One rule to ring them all!
Last edited:
vazaki3
Well-known member
qwizzie
Well-known member
With only 3 hours to go before budget proposals voting closes, weejohnny is a wee bit late with voting this cycle.
Maybe weejohnny can vote a wee bit more early next cycle ?
vazaki3
Well-known member
He did voted early in this cycle. Mouseover to see the tooltip and click at his IP_HASH= 299144620837994073223044015375074058627769282716 at the collumn ( HIST:IP_HASH ) in the report that reveals his last vote, and you will discover that he initially voted in this cycle at 2022-07-10 , 14 days before.
The below is weejohnny's initial vote for this cycle, at 2022-07-10 15:12:23 :
| YES_VOTES | NO_VOTES |
|---|---|
| BrazilQ42022 CrowdNode-jun2022-aug2022 DashElSalvador DCG-COMP-JUL-SEPT22 DCG-Infra-Aug-Sept-2022 | DashNext2022-2 |
...and he changed his vote 2022-07-24 13:42:31 to this:
| YES_VOTES | NO_VOTES |
|---|---|
| BrazilQ42022 CrowdNode-jun2022-aug2022 DashElSalvador dash-incubator-2022-q3 DCG-COMP-JUL-SEPT22 DCG-Infra-Aug-Sept-2022 DCG-Sup-Fund-July22 | DashNext2022-2 |
You may also discover the history of the votes of weejohhny, in this report , as long as he keeps the same set of IPs. Because weejohhny changed his IPS. Once upon times many of his IPs resided in Russia, thats why I initially named him the Tsar , but this is not yet proved and @xkcd should investigate it more.
You have all this info in front of you and you have tip mnowatch.org only 5.6 Dash , since 2017! While at the same time the dash community, the mnos and the incubator are giving thousands of Dash to other failed projects. I really wonder, why @xkcd and myself still support the dash community? Is it maybe because the agents that are ruling the Universe are similar to the agents that are ruling the Dash community, so it is a good and safe practice to attack them here?
Last edited:
We can also see Weejohnny's votes come through on this table.
and here.
Reports impacted by whale votes are labelled on the MNOwatch homepage and connect to us using the onion link for improved privacy.
and here.
Reports impacted by whale votes are labelled on the MNOwatch homepage and connect to us using the onion link for improved privacy.
As far as if it is safe here, yes, you will not be banned for your opinions on the Forum again, like you were under previous Admins.
vazaki3
Well-known member
Lets vote the numbers!
Furthermore we should also be allowed to vote the numbers by using sliders , because a reward for a task is reasonable if it is correlated and compared (within the context of a budget) to the rewards given for other dissimilar tasks (also correlated and compared to the rewards given for similar tasks, but funding similar tasks although good for the competition can also be considered as a waste of money of the budget)
Last edited:
Your method to "vote the numbers" deserves further study. Until it becomes adopted and used, it is not unreasonable to ask the people doing the work what they think it is worth.
There are many methods to arrive at a value, and it is wise to use more than one method anyway.
There are many methods to arrive at a value, and it is wise to use more than one method anyway.
vazaki3
Well-known member
If you ask a single person how much he thinks his work worths, then this person votes the numbers. Then you as a sponsor also vote the numbers, there is a compromise, a method to extract the result, an average, and the compensation of the worker is defined.
But here in Dash, there is not only you and me, we are not alone. We have 5000 masternodes (not allowed by the agents to vote the numbers). So after I will consult @xkcd we may vote the numbers the two of us, we will propose a subjective reward (because a reasonable reward occurs only when many people vote the numbers) and we will ask a yes from the masternodes (the masternodes are censored by the agents and can only respond yes or no). Note that we have not until now proposed something into the dash budget system, because the incomes of mnowatch were until recently below the 5 dash that are required as a proposal fee in order to propose. We hope that this will be resolved with the upcoming v18 release.
On the other hand we cannot ask a reward from the 11 admins of the incubator, at least I cannot ask it, because I am initially banned there by @AndyDark . So if you think mnowatch deserves a reward and incubator should pay us, maybe @xkcd should be involved in this.
Finnaly, there is also the tip, but this is a private initiative.
Tips for Hosting mnowatch: Xhf1d5nmRreWC3YkvQXWswFbPdpGyU6rRB . Tips for Developing mnowatch: Xy7bXZd5BE8XrtHNUvUd6WfHhai8fozfxy
Defining what is a reasonable or a subjective reward is an ontopic theme because it also refers to the incubator's reward methods.
But the specific rewards of mnowatch are off topic into this thread, so lets stop the mnowatch specific discussion or move it elsewhere.
Last edited:
As the OP, would you like the thread locked now, or are you good? I have unstickied the thread.
AndyDark
Well-known member
Hey Agnew it's cool I don't think we need to lock it, thanks.
vazaki3
Well-known member
Weejohnny is out of the game now.
Why his votes for dash incubator still count?
The one who is supposed to have voting rights, is the one who runs a masternode. Not the one who just keeps a collateral.
I think the one who keeps a collateral but shut down his masternodes should have the right for his votes to be stored and wait for a possible return, but his votes should not be counted.
Vote here.
Last edited:
vazaki3
Well-known member
Last edited: