I sold all my Dash. Here is why and my view on the state of Dash

[xdashguy]

I think they will keep it. Even if slips a bit. You can see the changes made to it here https://v.cash/forum/threads/12-month-timeline.349/

Development pace is very rapid and in general the team keeps to their roadmaps. It is not like Dash where it takes 6 months to get 12.1 out the door

 

[demo]

I think they will keep it. Even if slips a bit. You can see the changes made to it here https://v.cash/forum/threads/12-month-timeline.349/

Development pace is very rapid and in general the team keeps to their roadmaps. It is not like Dash where it takes 6 months to get 12.1 out the door

What makes you believe they will keep their roadmap regarding the "Vcash Decentralised Governance Protocol"?

According to their current timeline, the "Vcash Decentralised Governance Protocol" was 6th in the row. They implemented 1,2,3,4,5, they ignored the 6th, then they implemented 7,8,9,10 and they are currently stopped by finishing the 13th. With the 11th being "Fix any known bugs and memory leaks" and the 12th being "Patents and Trademarks".

Additionaly the current majority in Vcash seems to be against the Decentralised Governance Protocol.

 

[xdashguy]

Because the timeline is a todo list. It does not specify the exact order it must be completed. The poll you listed was whether it should be the first priority not whether it should be done. Even I don't think it should be the first priority. The coin is already progressing rapidly. The developer codes like a machine. Governance is good once its foundation is built as it will primarily be used for marketing. Give the track record of Dash's governance the value it offers is unknown and its value seems to be to attract development when development has stalled (which it has not been close to stalling at vcash) or in trying to create a marketing platform.

It will get done. Reserve your criticism for when the time line expires if it is not done.

 

[xdashguy]

Btw, I just want to add, I am not sure any of these coins (even vcash or dash) will ever be used mainstream. Right now the most important feature in crypto is scalability. I have not seen any coin that could scale to even a single state using it. So, ultimately, that is currently the bottleneck of crypto is its scalability. Dash does not solve this. Ethereum does not solve this. Vcash does not solve this. Ultimately, these coins can NEVER be used as "digital cash" because doing so would hit the limits of their scalability and they would become unusable Implying that they could be is being dishonest regarding the technology.

The only thing that might solve this is mimblewimble which would probably need to be its own alt-coin or side chain. However, a blockchain based on that would not have some of the more advanced features of bitcoin (like advanced smart contracts). On the other hand, it would be much, much more private than bitcoin.

 

[demo]

Give the track record of Dash's governance the value it offers is unknown and its value seems to be to attract development when development has stalled (which it has not been close to stalling at vcash) or in trying to create a marketing platform.

The governance is not created solely for marketing issues, the governance is the essence for every coin. The cryptocoins, whatever their design may be, they remain (or they aspire to become) money. And money cannot exist without some form of politics, and politics is of course almost the same as governance. Because the politics defines what is money, and the money that lack politics they cannot be considered as real money. Thats why governance should be the first priority. Cryptocoins without some kind of governance will not be able to survive in the future.

If Vcash people are unable or unwilling to define their governance system now that they are a few and their task is easy, how is it possible they will manage to define their governance system when they will become many and their task will be more hard? They will not have governance experience , and they will collapse.

Of course the Dash governance system is also imperfect. What is needed (in order to encourage development) is an alternative bounty enabled budget system.

 

[demo]

Because the timeline is a todo list. It does not specify the exact order it must be completed. The poll you listed was whether it should be the first priority not whether it should be done. Even I don't think it should be the first priority. The coin is already progressing rapidly. The developer codes like a machine. Governance is good once its foundation is built as it will primarily be used for marketing. Give the track record of Dash's governance the value it offers is unknown and its value seems to be to attract development when development has stalled (which it has not been close to stalling at vcash) or in trying to create a marketing platform.

It will get done. Reserve your criticism for when the time line expires if it is not done.

Even if it will get done, it will have nothing to do with governance!!

Have a look at the answer they gave in their forum. They voted down unanimously (like an army of orcs) the Decentralized Governance poll , they locked the thread and censored the discussion, and their priest said:

"Decentralized Governance has nothing to do with decision making"

...while at the same time everybody in the world (wikipedia included) defines governance as:

"governance is the processes of interaction and decision-making among the actors involved in a collective problem that lead to the creation, reinforcement, or reproduction of social norms and institutions."


Dashers are not very clever, but Vcashers are worse. So I stay in dash as the the less bad.

 

[xdashguy]

Read the threat again. Decentralized governance is coming. John is stating that decision making does not depend on it. He does not see value until the coin is at least $0.50. until then, decisions will be made via other models.

If you think decentralized governance is the most important thing, then certainly stay in Dash. IMO, it is not the most important thing though it is important. The reasons are as follows:

1) Coins without decentralized blockchain based governance have far less adoption and market cap than coins that do 2) The coin best known for it, Dash, has not really accomplished much with their decentralized governance. Considering decisions still come top-down (just look at this poll), it has the same effect.

The only benefit that may be seen is that Dash has a bounty program. Which is what the governance model has turned into. Core makes all the decisions, but masternodes pay people who have interesting projects in a bounty-type system.

This, to me, is not actually a benefit. As previously stated, the end result has been few people want to volunteer. Why volunteer my time if I can be paid for it? If people refuse to pay me, then I feel cheated as they pay others or I feel demotivated as they must not like my idea, etc. Hell, I see governance proposals that are using it like kickstarter "Hey, fund my startup because I am not even passionate enough to fund it myself".

So, decentralized governance while a great theory has not proven itself in practice.

 

[demo]

Read the threat again. Decentralized governance is coming. John is stating that decision making does not depend on it. .

No he didnt said that. He said :

"Lastly, Decentralized Governance has nothing to do with decision making so you are very confused here."

and he locked the thread.

It is an obvious wrong quote, and as long as it remains like that and he does not delete it, it shows the quality of his brain, and the brain of his followers that tolerate him when talking nonsense and locking threads so that nobody can answer to him and reveal his wrong way of thinking.

 

[xdashguy]

Just some current example of showing the governance model corruption and these are just from current funded ones (not previously funded):

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/localbitcoins4dash - Why is Dash governance being used to fund a private commercial venture? Did localbitcoin need funding from bitcoin in order to start? Nope! Because a motivated person who sees an opportunity will do it on their own if they see profit. What a misallocation.

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/lamassu-integration - Why is Dash paying Lammasu to do something that is Lammasu's best interest? Did Ethereum have to pay Lammasu to integrate Ethereum? Of course not! This is just a company robbing the Dash network.

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/bsdev-wocoins-201611 - Again, why is the Dash network funding this private companies development? You know they will use the Dash money to abstractize their code to more easily add any alt currency. Then, they will add a lot more than just Dash. This company is exploiting the governance system to make $$$. In addition, the site is a privacy mess. It refuses to work unless you give permission to let it access your location via the browser and it requires your phone number. Definitely against the ideals of Dash, IMO. Something like bitsquare.io would have been a much better decentralized exchange to fund. But, you know what, there is no reason to, Dash is already supported!

 

[xdashguy]

It is an obvious wrong quote, and as long as it remains like that and he does not delete it, it shows the quality of his brain, and the brain of his followers.

I am not sure if english is not your first language or if you are trolling. You asked him "In the absence of governance, who takes the decisions here?" and he correctly replied "DG has nothing to do with decision making so you are very confused here." Meaning, without saying it, HE is the one that makes decisions.

Just like with Dash, the decision model of VCash is the core (John in this case) makes the decisions. People accept it or not by whether they use the software or fork it. If other people want to do work they can do work independently. They can also compete competing clients if they want.

 

[splawik21]

I`m sure you are awared that since yesterday evening you`ve already posted 6 times on the same thread?(In fact it was 7 as you`ve posted already another one during my writing)
Quite spamming for a person who "sold all his dash" and does not care anymore even if you have some more or less valid points to say, in your opinion.

 

[demo]

I am not sure if english is not your first language or if you are trolling. You asked him "In the absence of governance, who takes the decisions here?" and he correctly replied "DG has nothing to do with decision making so you are very confused here." Meaning, without saying it, HE is the one that makes decisions.

Governance has to do with decision making. Period. Everybody knows that, native english speakers or not.

The one who claims the opposite, either he is stupid or he is trying to change the meaning of the words, in order to confuse and obfuscate the communication.

Meaning, without saying it, HE is the one that makes decisions.

If he is the one who makes the decisions, why he does not saying it clearly? Is he ashamed?

 

[xdashguy]

Read it again slowly. He said DG has nothing to do with decision making. DG = decentralized governance. His point is that there are different models to decision making. Vcash currently has a model that works good and it is the same model employed by all the largest coins. When vcash gets to a price of $0.5, then he sees value in adopting a DG model.

 

[xdashguy]

New I`m sure you are awared that since yesterday evening you`ve already posted 6 times on the same thread?

Quit being an idiot. I never said I was leaving the community. I believe I even said the opposite.

 

[demo]

Just some current example of showing the governance model corruption and these are just from current funded ones (not previously funded):

Nobody said that the governance model of dash is perfect.
But dash has a governance model. It is not an enlightened absolutism like Vcash.

 

[demo]

Read it again slowly. He said DG has nothing to do with decision making. DG = decentralized governance. His point is that there are different models to decision making.

I read it again.

Saying: "decentralized governance has nothing to do with decision making"
is totally different than saying: "there are different models to decision making."

And most important, even if it was a typo, even if he said something and he meant something else, we will never know. He locked the thread. So we cannot ask him for clarification of what he really meant, so that we will understand whether his tongue is a mess or his brain.

 

[demo]

The only benefit that may be seen is that Dash has a bounty program. Which is what the governance model has turned into. Core makes all the decisions, but masternodes pay people who have interesting projects in a bounty-type system.

The Budget system of dash is imperfect. It is not a pure bounty system, as long as the masternodes are not allowed to vote with numbers (as proposed in the alternative budget system.). The one who gives the tip, should be able to define it. Dash budget system claims that the one who receives the tip should define the tip amount, and the one who gives the tip is only allowed to answer a yes or a no. And this is absurd.

This, to me, is not actually a benefit. As previously stated, the end result has been few people want to volunteer. Why volunteer my time if I can be paid for it? If people refuse to pay me, then I feel cheated as they pay others or I feel demotivated as they must not like my idea, etc. Hell, I see governance proposals that are using it like kickstarter "Hey, fund my startup because I am not even passionate enough to fund it myself".

The deficiencies you are mentioning could be diminished or solved, if dash decides to implement the alternative bounty enabled budget system.

 

[demo]

Just some current example of showing the governance model corruption and these are just from current funded ones (not previously funded):

1. https://www.dashcentral.org/p/localbitcoins4dash - Why is Dash governance being used to fund a private commercial venture? Did localbitcoin need funding from bitcoin in order to start? Nope! Because a motivated person who sees an opportunity will do it on their own if they see profit. What a misallocation.
2. https://www.dashcentral.org/p/lamassu-integration - Why is Dash paying Lammasu to do something that is Lammasu's best interest? Did Ethereum have to pay Lammasu to integrate Ethereum? Of course not! This is just a company robbing the Dash network.
3. https://www.dashcentral.org/p/bsdev-wocoins-201611 - Again, why is the Dash network funding this private companies development? You know they will use the Dash money to abstractize their code to more easily add any alt currency. Then, they will add a lot more than just Dash. This company is exploiting the governance system to make $$$. In addition, the site is a privacy mess. It refuses to work unless you give permission to let it access your location via the browser and it requires your phone number. Definitely against the ideals of Dash, IMO. Something like bitsquare.io would have been a much better decentralized exchange to fund. But, you know what, there is no reason to, Dash is already supported!

The cases you mention are not considered as problems of the model of the governance of dash. These are problems of the quality of the electorate. This is always the case, the governance models are not wrong or right, the people who implement the models are. Even when there is a lack of a predefinited governance model (which is defined either as absolutism, despotism or as anarchy) it can also be considered as ok, in case the despot or the people are enlightened (which is a very rare case of course).

If the electorate and the decision makers are corrupted, you should not blame the governance model. Whatever the governance model may be, a corrupted electorate will destroy everything, and there is not any governance model that can fit well to corrupted people. In that case you have better either replace the electorate with a new one, or (even better in order to avoid conflicts) to slowly invite more people to participate to the electorate so that the corruption will diminish. Which in dash means in practice, either allow people with less than 1000 dash to be able to vote, or alternative switch from the current dash timocracy to the real democracy.

 

[Solarminer]

Btw, I just want to add, I am not sure any of these coins (even vcash or dash) will ever be used mainstream. Right now the most important feature in crypto is scalability. I have not seen any coin that could scale to even a single state using it. So, ultimately, that is currently the bottleneck of crypto is its scalability. Dash does not solve this. Ethereum does not solve this. Vcash does not solve this. Ultimately, these coins can NEVER be used as "digital cash" because doing so would hit the limits of their scalability and they would become unusable Implying that they could be is being dishonest regarding the technology.

The only thing that might solve this is mimblewimble which would probably need to be its own alt-coin or side chain. However, a blockchain based on that would not have some of the more advanced features of bitcoin (like advanced smart contracts). On the other hand, it would be much, much more private than bitcoin.

Actually, Vcash is able to scale. They already have a variable blocksize. And with the better management of traffic between nodes, they don't spam each node will all the network traffic. They also plan to have 0 fee transactions.

If you look at sending crypto with usernames(emails) coinbase and circle already do this. Oh you want to add escrow like Paypal too, add 1.5% to the transaction and head over to safepaybtc.com. Still, if you look at retail usage, you just scan a QR code and go - no need to mess with usernames for mass adoption. Only online stuff needs usernames.

 

[Solarminer]

The Budget system of dash is imperfect. It is not a pure bounty system, as long as the masternodes are not allowed to vote with numbers (as proposed in the alternative budget system.).

Demo, you think distributed governance is some sort of magic bullet, but it isn't. It is a good way to determine which direction to go, but that only works if the people voting have a clue of consequences and benefits. If the same people with all the voting power are the development team it doesn't make it decentralized. The user doesn't care about the governance structure of a currency. They only care if it is easier, faster, or more secure than what they use today.

Do you go to walmart because of their just in time delivery? No, you go to walmart because they have low prices(which is partly because of their just in time delivery and reduced space for store inventory). Don't try to fix the thing nobody cares about, focus on the stuff that actually makes users prefer your idea.