Vedran Yoweri
Active member
Trusting core obviously doesn't meen i always agree or default to a yes vote. They usually provide solid arguments. Silence from them contains no arguments.
Proposal: Adaptive Proposal Fees
- Thread starter GrandMasterDash
- Start date
From my observation, core have very much been taking a back seat regarding other people's proposals. I sometimes think this is intentional; they want to see if we can self-organise. That's entirely inline with Evan's vision and hence why he sold most of his masternodes.
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
I don't think so, there's nothing to 'organize'.
I read it as decency, they let the MNO discuss and form opinions without throwing their weight around to much. I salute them for it.
TroyDASH
Well-known member
If we pass this proposal and then core is unwilling to implement it because of *reasons*, then so be it. I am sure the MNs would understand if the experts say it is infeasible or too high a security risk. This proposal does not force anyone to do anything. But absent any present objections to the concept I think it is fair to use this proposal to inform them what the Masternodes would like to see happen.
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
I'm not against having a vote, but informing core can be done by just posting a strongly argument-ed proposal for discussion and inviting someone from core to join the discussion.
I am against the notion that the budget system should be a tool to change the code as if it's some kind of democracy. I'm invested in dash because i trust core to build a kick ass crypto. Why should i trust MNO with that? They have no experience in creating or coding a currency. They are savvy investors. They could convince me only by creating a better coin. I'll jump ship and inform them of my errors in judgement.
TroyDASH
Well-known member
As we have seen, a strongly argumented proposal for discussion could have the support of only a vocal minority of "5 guys" making trouble and there would be no way to prove that it has the support of a plurality of stakeholders. Using the budget is the only way to demonstrate that. As it is, anyone from core team is welcome to join the discussion but so far they seem to be holding back.
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
This, to me is a clear indications of the answer. If one want's to ignore this and spend 5 dash to force a vote, be my guest.
Think, what is a DAO? And what potential do they hold?
A Distributed Autonomous ORGNAISATION. I say core's lack of involvement is a test for self-organisation, whereas you say it's "decency". But regardless of who is correct, you, me and everyone else here has this opportunity right now to try and take some steps forward in self-determination. You say you would jump ship to another coin if it proved "better", but why do that when you have the opportunity to participate and bring about the changes you would desire?
Pietro Speroni
Active member
I understood you were trusting Evan and the core team.Now I am confused, are you saying that the 5 dash fee is legitimate because the majority of people would prefer 5 dash than any other value? Because if this is the reason, let me assure you that thanks to the theorem of Duncan Black, the median of the votes is the Condorcet Winner. Which means that is the winner of all pariwise comparison. In other words, the median will extract that one value that the majority will prefer against every other value. So if you think this value is 5 and you want it to be 5, then you should not be afraid. The median would be 5.
You, me, everyone here has the potential to take some responsibility and to try and make this our DAO.
TroyDASH
Well-known member
And that's exactly what we have here.
We wouldn't want to be asking core to waste their time on every little 5 guys thread would we
IMO, the arguments for doing this have been laid out sufficiently from the OP. This solution puts to rest a contentious issue, allows the fee to scale long term (we do not know yet whether the fee will need to rise proportionally to the size of the network, or higher or lower than that), the core team would still have heavy influence over the fee if they felt they needed to by recommending a value and reasoning to the Masternodes. It would mean changing the fee if needed would no longer require a big deal hard fork or masternode upgrade. Outside of feedback from core why would this not be a good idea?
I liken this to a business that has a choice of losing ground to the competition or the stakeholders becoming partners in the business. Look at the model of John Lewis department store; every employee is a stakeholder and they work hard to maintain things. They don't just make profits, they maintain good work ethics.
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
No, you're dreaming. The only options you have is investing or not.
It would be pretty stupid for me to invest in a coin and then trying to change it. I don't know sh*t about creating and coding a crypto coin, you neither.
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
Already done. It's called pivx.
Then sell one of your dash nodes and buy pivx nodes while you wait for another "better" coin to be created by someone else (not you or us).
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
Because principle.
MNO don't code or build coin, core does. We should let them and not bother them with pressure from votes to do stuff they don't want to or don't agree with.
TroyDASH
Well-known member
I don't agree that the core team should be an island. MNs are the ones who fund them, they should be made aware when the MNOs have an interest in doing something and should dialogue with them especially when there is something with a good amount of demonstrated support. Doing so helps maintain a positive relationship between MNOs and core, and improves job security for core
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
I strongly agree if it's on the forum. Obviously disagree if done through votes.
TroyDASH
Well-known member
In my opinion it has to be both. The vote is the mechanism for filtering out spam (proposal fee) and vocal minority trolls (negative support from MNOs). If there is no proposal or if the proposal has negative support then what reason does anyone have to waste time discussing on the forum? It is a fair way to call attention to a particular topic and a way to reasonably show that it deserves the core team's time of day relative to other ideas that have not gone through the trouble.
Last edited:
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
If we allow votes to influence the coding we expose core to the other side of the blade. It's double edge sword.
What happens if core say's "No, we won't do this because.."? Crisis in dash DAO! Will MNO fire core? Who will replace core!!!.
That's pressure we ( and core ) can do without.