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

I think Dash needs some changes

Still so much zealous support for devs that till this date still not have produced a feature-complete Platform on Testnet, are still introducing Platform Github feat. pull requests that have little to do the last remaining open feature Masternode Voting (making it doubtfull that Masternode Voting really is the last Platform feature to implement, before a code freeze). Which means we could be in this Platform not-feature-complete state for quite some time.

Devs who made countless promises to release Platform to Mainnet end 2022, end 2023 and now somewhere 2024 under their 'completely new team and new leadership', made the Dash Roadmap an embarrassment instead of an asset by constantly moving goalposts forward or removing them completely, caused a bloody chain halt on Mainnet, caused so many crashes / downtime of Testnet these last few years that i lost count, abandoned Testnet testing on dash.org/forum, to this day continue making unreliable project delivery estimates, can not even communicate to MNO's or the Dash community with which Core version Platform should activate on Mainnet, show zero results at actually improving their project delivery estimates and have shown to be late / too late when it comes to responding to changing market conditions, leading to a situation where those devs were basically out of funding during this bear market. Which they solved by asking and getting an increase of DAO budget and asking for more compensation, while still introducing additional budget funding requests which look to be an ongoing process, despite earlier statements that this was just for a few months (3 months ?).

The only thing i am looking forward to is the increase of APY that Evonodes will receive, once devs finally merge the mn_rr hard fork in some Core version, which will activate the Platform features. But if that happens during a Dash bull market / bullrun, then that increase of APY will be weighted against my need to this time take more profit during that (usually short) Dash bull market and the inevitable Dash bear market that follows. Unless devs manage to restore some of my lost trust in them by giving reliable project delivery estimates going forward and start providing a reliable and informative Dash Roadmap. But so far i have not noticed any signs of that.

From a project management point of view, this all has been a disaster for many many years now (even before the new team / new leadership), with one steady fixed outcome : delay & increased uncertainty.

#end_of_rant


Yes, qwizzie, the same team that re-wrote the antiquated platform from JavaScript to Rust, the team that threw out MongoDB and invented a new Database system called GroveDB https://www.grovedb.org/ the same team that linked AI into the generation of data contracts with https://dashpay.io/ the same team that brought us Quorum Rotations, updated the BLS schema, introduced HD wallets by default, refactored Sentinel into DashCore and much much more. Platform is now looking like a viable product, we have an explorer for it, we have an SDK for it, we have numerous dapps already developed for it and yes, we are closer than ever to a mainnet release.

I would put it back on you and the OP, do you really believe that the best thing for this project now is to fire the only devs we have? Do you think the muppets I listed above if reinstated could do a better job than the current team? Or are you just venting your valid and concerning frustrations?

I think all of us wish that things were moving along faster than they have been, but we've been following along with the story and we can see the PRs into Github, it just is a very big job and compared to other projects, we really don't have a big team to get things done, again, let's thank the previous administration for burning our resources and landing us here. I am interested to know in your solutions, Qwizzie. It is easy to stamp our feet and say fuck those devs! But even if we did, have you seen the calibre of people seeking employment with DCG? There are probably only a handful of people the world over capable enough to deliver this project, it's not as simple as webpage and that's kind of a good thing too, because it means the tech will stay with Dash even after release and thus we will retain or lead in market share.
 
I would put it back on you and the OP, do you really believe that the best thing for this project now is to fire the only devs we have? Do you think the muppets I listed above if reinstated could do a better job than the current team? Or are you just venting your valid and concerning frustrations?
Where did i mention i want to fire devs ? Lets just stick to what i actually wrote in that post.

What i want is simple : clarity to Dash users / Evonode owners / Masternode owners about which Dash Core version will activate the Platform features, a stop to the endless delays coming from the Platform teams and Platform needs to get feature-complete and put into code freeze on Testnet, where only bug fixes can be merged. And a reliable public Dash Roadmap needs to be put into place, a basic necessity.

This all is long long overdue and falls under Sam's responsebility.

Wake me up when this is done.
 
Last edited:
Where did i mention i want to fire devs ? Lets just stick to what i actually wrote in that post.

What i want is simple : clarity to Dash users / Evonode owners / Masternode owners about which Dash Core version will activate the Platform features, a stop to the endless delays coming from the Platform teams and Platform needs to get feature-complete and put into code freeze on Testnet, where only bug fixes can be merged. And a reliable public Dash Roadmap needs to be put into place, a basic necessity.

This all is long long overdue and falls under Sam's responsebility.

Wake me up when this is done.

Qwizzie, these are valid questions and you can address them to the team during today's sprint review, please tune in and ask them clearly and hopefully you get some answers.

I did already inquire about the MN_RR EHF and the answer is that v20 can still activate platform, if it were ready to ship today. We will need a v21 if there are breaking changes in Platform that also require a new version of the Dash L1 protocol. I hope that helps.
 
The only thing that will change the status quo of poor results is more no votes for DCG and other ineffective POs.

The small group of voting MNOs have proven their unwillingness to hold DCG and other POs accountable for lack of results.

We need to get more MNOs to pay attention to governance and demand better results. The only way to do that is to make it worth their time.

Give all remaining funds at the end of each cycle to the MNOs, causing a shift in perspective. Instead of seeing the treasury as free money to be handed out, they will see it as their money, and will be more careful with it. Watch as they begin to participate, ask questions, and start to vote no, ending the easy money for all the ineffective POs. It will also slightly improve MN ROI.

This is *the* key missing piece of the incentive structure. Somehow the community still has not understood and accepted this.
 
The only thing that will change the status quo of poor results is more no votes for DCG and other ineffective POs.

Defunding core will not get Evo delivered sooner, instead it will kill the project and cause mass panic selling.
 
Platform releases are temporary crutches, but in the long term, DASH is a zombie, neither alive nor dead, uninteresting and cheap.
Limit the coin supply to 12 222 222, this will increase the value!
Digit is beautiful and raises questions and interest.
The magic number will save the project!
This is the only way out of the terrible state of affairs and we can count on $500 and perhaps even 0.01 BTC for 1 DASH
 
Last edited:
Because Dash is such a well established and viable cryptocurrency, it is considered a coin that is here to stay. I sometimes thinks like you and the above person said. I need to discuss it more because of its future price.
 
Defunding core will not get Evo delivered sooner, instead it will kill the project and cause mass panic selling.

I think a little exaggerated. How could it possibly lead to mass panic selling when many here believe - and underscored by the dash.org website - that dash is "digital cash"?

The Dash Platform primary function has nothing to do with "digital cash". Not delivering on a secondary unrelated function doesn't seem so disastrous to me.

Projects like Thorchain are more cash related than Dash Platform.

The logic is simple, to me at least. If Dash Platform really is so necessary and centric to dash's future, then the "digital cash" message and identity is completely wrong. Providing storage related tools doesn't make the chain token "digital cash", for if it did, then RUNE is also digital cash.
 
Defunding core will not get Evo delivered sooner, instead it will kill the project and cause mass panic selling.
Defunding DCG will cause the separation of the DCG departments.
Thus, in the next budget, the pure core will be voted again, while Platform and all the rest unnecessary DCG departments will be rejected.

So defunding DCG for a month is a very good idea.

SEPARATE THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAF, NOW......





......and vote the Numbers! (also vote for Encointer, the real EVO)
 
Last edited:
Defunding DCG will cause the separation of the DCG departments.
Thus, in the next budget, the pure core will be voted again, while Platform and all the rest unnecessary DCG departments will be rejected.

So defunding DCG for a month is a very good idea.

SEPARATE THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAF, NOW......





......and vote the Numbers! (also vote for Encointer, the real EVO)

Yep, I think this would happen too.
 
Yep, I think this would happen too.
So are you finally starting to see why more MNOs participating would be a good thing? Your fear of this change is puzzling, given your enthusiastic support of far, far more drastic changes. Get on board. Help the community put in the missing piece. Watch us finally get results from the treasury!!
 
So are you finally starting to see why more MNOs participating would be a good thing? Your fear of this change is puzzling, given your enthusiastic support of far, far more drastic changes. Get on board. Help the community put in the missing piece. Watch us finally get results from the treasury!!

So are you finally starting to see why more MNOs participating would be a good thing?

This a bit harsh. I've always been a supporter or more people voting in the DAO and I am supporter of the MNO plan where the DAO is funded from the MNO pay directly and exclusively.

What I objected to above, is defunded the DCG proposal. I did agree what if it were defunded and splinter team of Core and Mobile would emerge to request direct funding. Even so, given that Platform is close to readiness (did you watch the sprint review?) I think we should support to the end and see the product finished and deployed to mainnet. What I don't like is the platform team cannabalising Pasta and Ody to work for them and neglecting Core. That is a dog act and if it keeps up, it could be something that would cause me to pull the pin on my DCG support.
 
This a bit harsh. I've always been a supporter or more people voting in the DAO and I am supporter of the MNO plan where the DAO is funded from the MNO pay directly and exclusively.

What I objected to above, is defunded the DCG proposal. I did agree what if it were defunded and splinter team of Core and Mobile would emerge to request direct funding. Even so, given that Platform is close to readiness (did you watch the sprint review?) I think we should support to the end and see the product finished and deployed to mainnet. What I don't like is the platform team cannabalising Pasta and Ody to work for them and neglecting Core. That is a dog act and if it keeps up, it could be something that would cause me to pull the pin on my DCG support.

Incentives matter. That is a fundamental point to why MNs exist, and something that was well-understood by the Dash community. "Skin in the game" is another one.

Where is the incentive for DCG and other proposal owners to do better, or to be more responsive to the community, when they know they will probably be funded over and over?

Really think about that.

The majority of MNOs don't participate in governance. We must directly incentivize them to participate and vote. Give them the leftover funds at the end of each cycle. They will come.


They will bring questions and ideas with them. Their participation will put good, positive pressure on proposal owners, which will cause POs to be more responsive and effective, to the benefit of the entire project.

What is so hard to understand about this? How does this community still not get it?

When will you, who clearly has time to do so, help popularize this simple, clear, missing piece of the puzzle?

Dash will benefit from this change. This needs to happen. Evo alone will not save Dash.

Shout this from your megaphone. Help me help this dying community!

You, quizzie and the other OGs ought to be ashamed of yourselves and only have yourselves to blame for the current state of things for not getting this through your heads and helping me with this.
 
Back
Top