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

Proposal: Business Development (January)

Ryan Taylor

Ryan Taylor

Well-known member
Foundation Member
This is a cross-post from www.dashcentral.org/p/bsdev-general-201701

After a temporary break in business development funding in December, this proposal seeks continued funding for our ongoing business development activities, adjusted to current exchange rates.

The Business Development budget funds development support and other business integration expenses to incentivize the adoption of Dash through deal-making and direct support of our business partners.

By setting aside a small amount of funding available to capture opportunities as they arise, we are able to act quickly and nimbly to grow our ecosystem of businesses integrating Dash. We are beginning to attract much larger-impact opportunities, but these opportunities appear to require more substantial support, so we may increase the monthly allotment in the near future if specific opportunities begin regularly exceeding the available budget.

Requested funding is as follows for the January 4th budget cycle:
Total: 607.41 Dash

Note: Funding from this proposal will be reserved for business development purposes.

Manually vote YES on this proposal:
dash-cli mnbudget vote-many d51d314eece0c5e1e0c810335902a2ecd7d294b4d8045fce849935a7ee3e1296 yes
OR from the qt console:
mnbudget vote-many d51d314eece0c5e1e0c810335902a2ecd7d294b4d8045fce849935a7ee3e1296 yes

Manually vote NO on this proposal:
dash-cli mnbudget vote-many d51d314eece0c5e1e0c810335902a2ecd7d294b4d8045fce849935a7ee3e1296 no
OR from the qt console:
mnbudget vote-many d51d314eece0c5e1e0c810335902a2ecd7d294b4d8045fce849935a7ee3e1296 no
 
Last edited:
Who is heading up Business Development activities and managing these funds? @Minotaur has not posted here on the forum in over four months and no one seems to be able or willing to respond to repeated requests about a certain large business development project of ours. I don't think I can support additional open-ended funding for busdev without an explanation/clarification from the team on this.
 
As much as I hate saying this, I will be voting no against @babygiraffe and the core team proposals.

They keep asking for money but have zero responsibility and accountability to provide updates.

If there are no updates throughout January, I will start offloading my masternodes as continual behaviour like this will never result in a successful project.

@kot @babygiraffe many people have been asking for updates for months for projects you are running. Stop ignoring us.
 
Last edited:
1whoLikesDash said:
@TroyDASH how would Minotaur be involved ?
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.dash.org/team/
He is the only person listed as "Business Development" and he has been referred to many times as the Business Development lead.

There have been reports on some projects, which is great, but the one we are referencing (lamasssu Dash ATM) was funded with over 6000 DASH over the course of 12 months, and we still don't seem to have anything to show for it, with nobody providing updates or even an ETA for an update. AFAIK, Minotaur was the main contact person for that, as the business development lead, and he seems to be MIA.
 
Last edited:
Projects with no communication or updates except for ambiguous comments or excuses:

1) Legal work Part I - 1492 Dash - (Masternode rewards etc for IRS) https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-legal-sept.10457/
2) Legal work Part II - 1728 Dash - https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-legal-part-ii-oct.10786/
3) ATM Master Compliance Program Phase 1 - 748 Dash - https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-dash-atm-master-compliance-program-phase-i.10312/
4) Marketing - Brand & Design - 350 Dash - https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-marketing-brand-design.11279/
5) Lamassu epic failure of a project - 7327 Dash - Multiple threads on forums, slack etc asking for updates and silence for months and months!
6) Proton Mail Integration - countless developer hours with many meetings and travel and nothing?
7) Mycelium Integration - ditto as above?

Thats 11645++ Dash gone into thin air?? anyone? @kot @babygiraffe @eduffield
 
Stealth923 said:
Projects with no communication or updates except for ambiguous comments or excuses:

1) Legal work Part I - 1492 Dash - (Masternode rewards etc for IRS) https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-legal-sept.10457/
2) Legal work Part II - 1728 Dash - https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-legal-part-ii-oct.10786/
3) ATM Master Compliance Program Phase 1 - 748 Dash - https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-dash-atm-master-compliance-program-phase-i.10312/
4) Marketing - Brand & Design - 350 Dash - https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-marketing-brand-design.11279/
5) Lamassu epic failure of a project - 7327 Dash - Multiple threads on forums, slack etc asking for updates and silence for months and months!
6) Proton Mail Integration - countless developer hours with many meetings and travel and nothing?
7) Mycelium Integration - ditto as above?

Thats 11645++ Dash gone into thin air?? anyone? @kot @babygiraffe @eduffield
Click to expand...
I cannot provide an update on all of these projects, because I am not the owner of any of them. I do own Wall of Coins, the Office Space project, the Miami conference, and of course financial activities from planning to payments. But I will do my best to provide you with what I know about the various projects. Also, it is not yet publicly viewable, but we've actually created a new section of the Forum for project updates that will have a thread for each of the projects you listed and other major ones. That was just completed today, so next step is to start populating it which should happen within the next week.

I know that Robert publishes monthly core team updates, which may contain more up-to-date information on status. To the extent the following conflicts with those reports, the reports are probably more accurate because the below is my own understanding.

Legal Work - This project was delayed because the lawyer we hired (Marco Santori) left Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, and joined Cooley LLP. Because of the change, we had to transfer our already-funded retainer from Pillsbury to Cooley in the fall. Work finally began last month, and the law firm completed the first document call the "Statement of Facts" this month. I do not have an updated completion date yet, but I have requested one. The funding for "Legal Work Part II" has not been distributed to Cooley (it remains in our wallet), and we are still using the initial retainer funded with "Legal Work Part I", most of which is still unspent.

ATM Master Compliance Program - I do not have a current status update on this. The latest I know is quite stale. There was as issue with Cogent Law's BitPay account that prevented us from funding the retainer for several weeks before they managed to resolve it, but this was way back in September and October. It was finally funded in October and to the best of my knowledge, the work began at that time.

Marketing - Brand and Design - This funded in November with the intention of kicking off the work in December. I know the project was kicked off, but is not yet complete. I will be sure to request an update on tomorrow's core team call.

Lamassu - The project is obviously delayed, but I do know work continues on it. Multiple issues have caused the delays, from major changes to Lamassu's official stack to unforeseen technical limitations of that new software that caused the entire architecture / approach to require changes. I prefer to not provide the full update on this project myself because I'm frankly not exposed / familiar enough to the details. I understand that an update is in the works on what issues were encountered and what the effects were. This project predates my involvement with management of the finances. I know that in addition to the project delays, there is a lot of concern over the amount paid as Dash appreciated. Two tenants I've followed since taking over the finances are 1) no Dash denominated contracts lasting more than three months (because of potential price appreciation), and 2) no payments directly to vendors (the core team should be the intermediary unless the network decides otherwise). This approach is working well with Wall of Coins, which is on budget and on time right now.

ProtonMail - There are delays in the project, but they have all been on ProtonMail's side. We were working with them on updated documentation as of last month and I'm afraid I don't have any updated information on the status this month. To the best of my knowledge, it is still ProtonMail's intent to integrate Dash.

Mycelium - The original estimate for this project was publicly published in the press release as October. It was Mycelium's best estimate at the time of the news release back in July. We continue to work with them and in fact I know we were supporting them just last week. The delays are not specific to Dash... the entire release in which Dash will be included is delayed. So we continue to work with Mycelium and they continue to plan to include Dash in the next version.

I recognize the need to provide more information, and as soon as I get the Miami conference, office lease, and liability insurance stuff complete, I plan to use that freed-up capacity to dig into some of these stale / partially completed projects to hopefully figure out what can be done to bring them to completion. We've put a lot of time and effort into all of them, so finally closing them and gaining the associated benefits is important to me, and I'm sure to the entire community.

I'm sorry for not being more responsive and I hope this is sufficient until a more comprehensive update can be gathered.
 
babygiraffe said:
I cannot provide an update on all of these projects, because I am not the owner of any of them. I do own Wall of Coins, the Office Space project, the Miami conference, and of course financial activities from planning to payments. But I will do my best to provide you with what I know about the various projects. Also, it is not yet publicly viewable, but we've actually created a new section of the Forum for project updates that will have a thread for each of the projects you listed and other major ones. That was just completed today, so next step is to start populating it which should happen within the next week.

I know that Robert publishes monthly core team updates, which may contain more up-to-date information on status. To the extent the following conflicts with those reports, the reports are probably more accurate because the below is my own understanding.

Legal Work - This project was delayed because the lawyer we hired (Marco Santori) left Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, and joined Cooley LLP. Because of the change, we had to transfer our already-funded retainer from Pillsbury to Cooley in the fall. Work finally began last month, and the law firm completed the first document call the "Statement of Facts" this month. I do not have an updated completion date yet, but I have requested one. The funding for "Legal Work Part II" has not been distributed to Cooley (it remains in our wallet), and we are still using the initial retainer funded with "Legal Work Part I", most of which is still unspent.

ATM Master Compliance Program - I do not have a current status update on this. The latest I know is quite stale. There was as issue with Cogent Law's BitPay account that prevented us from funding the retainer for several weeks before they managed to resolve it, but this was way back in September and October. It was finally funded in October and to the best of my knowledge, the work began at that time.

Marketing - Brand and Design - This funded in November with the intention of kicking off the work in December. I know the project was kicked off, but is not yet complete. I will be sure to request an update on tomorrow's core team call.

Lamassu - The project is obviously delayed, but I do know work continues on it. Multiple issues have caused the delays, from major changes to Lamassu's official stack to unforeseen technical limitations of that new software that caused the entire architecture / approach to require changes. I prefer to not provide the full update on this project myself because I'm frankly not exposed / familiar enough to the details. I understand that an update is in the works on what issues were encountered and what the effects were. This project predates my involvement with management of the finances. I know that in addition to the project delays, there is a lot of concern over the amount paid as Dash appreciated. Two tenants I've followed since taking over the finances are 1) no Dash denominated contracts lasting more than three months (because of potential price appreciation), and 2) no payments directly to vendors (the core team should be the intermediary unless the network decides otherwise). This approach is working well with Wall of Coins, which is on budget and on time right now.

ProtonMail - There are delays in the project, but they have all been on ProtonMail's side. We were working with them on updated documentation as of last month and I'm afraid I don't have any updated information on the status this month. To the best of my knowledge, it is still ProtonMail's intent to integrate Dash.

Mycelium - The original estimate for this project was publicly published in the press release as October. It was Mycelium's best estimate at the time of the news release back in July. We continue to work with them and in fact I know we were supporting them just last week. The delays are not specific to Dash... the entire release in which Dash will be included is delayed. So we continue to work with Mycelium and they continue to plan to include Dash in the next version.

I recognize the need to provide more information, and as soon as I get the Miami conference, office lease, and liability insurance stuff complete, I plan to use that freed-up capacity to dig into some of these stale / partially completed projects to hopefully figure out what can be done to bring them to completion. We've put a lot of time and effort into all of them, so finally closing them and gaining the associated benefits is important to me, and I'm sure to the entire community.

I'm sorry for not being more responsive and I hope this is sufficient until a more comprehensive update can be gathered.
Click to expand...

Thank you @babygiraffe for taking the time to at least respond

You say many times that you have no status update for many of these projects as you were not the owner or stale information. So the question is - WHO WAS RUNNING THESE PROJECTS, and why was there not even questions asked internally from the Dash core team?? We have Project Managers like @kot and other PMs that we had working, why did no one ever care to keep these projects on track or accountable?

The big lesson learned here is each time a proposal is passed it should be made public who the PM is, how many projects they are currently managing and have a visible weekly updated status report. Not monthly.

Secondly I don't think you should be submitting all the proposals, this is why you are the one being hunted for information. The PM for that project should initiate the proposal from start to finish so that we can see transparency as to who is managing etc.

I hope you follow through on your promise to get these projects back on track and hope that the Core team stops trying to bite off more than it can chew. FINISH a few projects to completion with high quality is better than having many sitting there unfinished with wasted money and no momentum.
 
Stealth923 said:
Thank you @babygiraffe for taking the time to at least respond

You say many times that you have no status update for many of these projects as you were not the owner or stale information. So the question is - WHO WAS RUNNING THESE PROJECTS, and why was there not even questions asked internally from the Dash core team?? We have Project Managers like @kot and other PMs that we had working, why did no one ever care to keep these projects on track or accountable?

The big lesson learned here is each time a proposal is passed it should be made public who the PM is, how many projects they are currently managing and have a visible weekly updated status report. Not monthly.

Secondly I don't think you should be submitting all the proposals, this is why you are the one being hunted for information. The PM for that project should initiate the proposal from start to finish so that we can see transparency as to who is managing etc.

I hope you follow through on your promise to get these projects back on track and hope that the Core team stops trying to bite off more than it can chew. FINISH a few projects to completion with high quality is better than having many sitting there unfinished with wasted money and no momentum.
Click to expand...

I am ok with monthly status updates, speaking from my own work projects I think a weekly frequency has diminishing returns and can negatively affect performance. It depends on what the project is though, if the duration of the project is not even expected to be more than a month obviously then it makes sense to have more frequent updates and have a higher expectation for responsiveness. Agree on your other points though. I suspect that @kot and other PMs may be doing some work internally that they have not always decided to share information outside the team with the MNOs and wider community. I'd be interested to have @kot weigh in on this, though.

Still interested about Minotaur (Daniel Diaz) though, is he still the business development lead and if so, when we can expect him back? Is he going to be managing the funds for this particular proposal?
 
babygiraffe said:
I cannot provide an update on all of these projects, because I am not the owner of any of them. I do own Wall of Coins, the Office Space project, the Miami conference, and of course financial activities from planning to payments. But I will do my best to provide you with what I know about the various projects. Also, it is not yet publicly viewable, but we've actually created a new section of the Forum for project updates that will have a thread for each of the projects you listed and other major ones. That was just completed today, so next step is to start populating it which should happen within the next week.

I know that Robert publishes monthly core team updates, which may contain more up-to-date information on status. To the extent the following conflicts with those reports, the reports are probably more accurate because the below is my own understanding.

Legal Work - This project was delayed because the lawyer we hired (Marco Santori) left Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, and joined Cooley LLP. Because of the change, we had to transfer our already-funded retainer from Pillsbury to Cooley in the fall. Work finally began last month, and the law firm completed the first document call the "Statement of Facts" this month. I do not have an updated completion date yet, but I have requested one. The funding for "Legal Work Part II" has not been distributed to Cooley (it remains in our wallet), and we are still using the initial retainer funded with "Legal Work Part I", most of which is still unspent.

ATM Master Compliance Program - I do not have a current status update on this. The latest I know is quite stale. There was as issue with Cogent Law's BitPay account that prevented us from funding the retainer for several weeks before they managed to resolve it, but this was way back in September and October. It was finally funded in October and to the best of my knowledge, the work began at that time.

Marketing - Brand and Design - This funded in November with the intention of kicking off the work in December. I know the project was kicked off, but is not yet complete. I will be sure to request an update on tomorrow's core team call.

Lamassu - The project is obviously delayed, but I do know work continues on it. Multiple issues have caused the delays, from major changes to Lamassu's official stack to unforeseen technical limitations of that new software that caused the entire architecture / approach to require changes. I prefer to not provide the full update on this project myself because I'm frankly not exposed / familiar enough to the details. I understand that an update is in the works on what issues were encountered and what the effects were. This project predates my involvement with management of the finances. I know that in addition to the project delays, there is a lot of concern over the amount paid as Dash appreciated. Two tenants I've followed since taking over the finances are 1) no Dash denominated contracts lasting more than three months (because of potential price appreciation), and 2) no payments directly to vendors (the core team should be the intermediary unless the network decides otherwise). This approach is working well with Wall of Coins, which is on budget and on time right now.

ProtonMail - There are delays in the project, but they have all been on ProtonMail's side. We were working with them on updated documentation as of last month and I'm afraid I don't have any updated information on the status this month. To the best of my knowledge, it is still ProtonMail's intent to integrate Dash.

Mycelium - The original estimate for this project was publicly published in the press release as October. It was Mycelium's best estimate at the time of the news release back in July. We continue to work with them and in fact I know we were supporting them just last week. The delays are not specific to Dash... the entire release in which Dash will be included is delayed. So we continue to work with Mycelium and they continue to plan to include Dash in the next version.

I recognize the need to provide more information, and as soon as I get the Miami conference, office lease, and liability insurance stuff complete, I plan to use that freed-up capacity to dig into some of these stale / partially completed projects to hopefully figure out what can be done to bring them to completion. We've put a lot of time and effort into all of them, so finally closing them and gaining the associated benefits is important to me, and I'm sure to the entire community.

I'm sorry for not being more responsive and I hope this is sufficient until a more comprehensive update can be gathered.
Click to expand...

You claim that you are not the project owner but you are the one who posted some of these proposals into the budget. 116000 USD have been given, and still no results for the dash community. Are you proud of your Job? Are you proud to serve them as an intermediate?
 
Last edited:
I want to thank @babygiraffe for this update on these lingering projects. I find both he and @kot do an admirable, professional job in communicating to the community to the best of their ability. And for longer-term projects, I think monthly updates is fine, unless there is some pressing information that needs to get out sooner. I also am glad to hear Ryan has instituted some financial controls, like no longer-term Dash-denominated contracts and no payments directly to vendors.

However, I do think it is a problem that Ryan (and Evan before him) submits all the core-sponsored proposals, when he is not the PM of them. As the proposal submitter, he does "own" them and is therefore responsible for them (just like Amanda is responsible for any proposal submitted under her name, etc.). It would be better if each proposal were submitted by the actual person responsible for seeing it to completion. Along with giving the public knowledge of who is running the proposal, it will also allow MN owners to see which owner's proposals have been the most successful, and vote accordingly. As it is now, both successful and not-so-successful projects are all lumped under Ryan, which is unfair to him, and to MN owners.
 
ericsammons said:
I want to thank @babygiraffe for this update on these lingering projects. I find both he and @kot do an admirable, professional job in communicating to the community to the best of their ability. And for longer-term projects, I think monthly updates is fine, unless there is some pressing information that needs to get out sooner. I also am glad to hear Ryan has instituted some financial controls, like no longer-term Dash-denominated contracts and no payments directly to vendors.

However, I do think it is a problem that Ryan (and Evan before him) submits all the core-sponsored proposals, when he is not the PM of them. As the proposal submitter, he does "own" them and is therefore responsible for them (just like Amanda is responsible for any proposal submitted under her name, etc.). It would be better if each proposal were submitted by the actual person responsible for seeing it to completion. Along with giving the public knowledge of who is running the proposal, it will also allow MN owners to see which owner's proposals have been the most successful, and vote accordingly. As it is now, both successful and not-so-successful projects are all lumped under Ryan, which is unfair to him, and to MN owners.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the kind words. I do think there is something to be said for specialization within the core team... let the coding teams focus on coding, Daniel focus on Business Development, moocow focus on infrastructure, etc. I think expecting everyone to submit their own proposals would take away from productivity, and make simple tasks like creating quarterly financial statements a real challenge. However, I agree that transparency over ownership of the projects is lost when everything is submitted by me on behalf of the entire team. Perhaps a happy medium that addresses both concerns would be to include the information in the proposal over who the "owner" is for delivering the project, managing the vendor, or otherwise responsible for overseeing the team executing it. I will start providing this information going forward if that would be helpful.
 
babygiraffe said:
Thank you for the kind words. I do think there is something to be said for specialization within the core team... let the coding teams focus on coding, Daniel focus on Business Development, moocow focus on infrastructure, etc. I think expecting everyone to submit their own proposals would take away from productivity, and make simple tasks like creating quarterly financial statements a real challenge. However, I agree that transparency over ownership of the projects is lost when everything is submitted by me on behalf of the entire team. Perhaps a happy medium that addresses both concerns would be to include the information in the proposal over who the "owner" is for delivering the project, managing the vendor, or otherwise responsible for overseeing the team executing it. I will start providing this information going forward if that would be helpful.
Click to expand...

That would most likely be sufficient. I think the two most important things to know are:
  1. Who is the true "owner" of this proposal? I.e., who is responsible for seeing it to completion.
  2. Who is responsible for the funds associated with this proposal? I.e., who is in control of the payout address, and how is he/she distributing the funds?
Of course, those two people (or one person, if the same) would then be responsible for regularly updating MN owners what has been done on the project.
 
ericsammons said:
That would most likely be sufficient. I think the two most important things to know are:
  1. Who is the true "owner" of this proposal? I.e., who is responsible for seeing it to completion.
  2. Who is responsible for the funds associated with this proposal? I.e., who is in control of the payout address, and how is he/she distributing the funds?
Of course, those two people (or one person, if the same) would then be responsible for regularly updating MN owners what has been done on the project.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree with your two main points. The only part I would question is whether my role should entail updating the community on the status of projects (at least the ones I don't "own" personally). First, it divides responsibility between two people (which could cause overlaps and gaps in reporting). Second, as whomever fills my role doesn't actually own the projects, it would require obtaining the information from the project owner, an unnecessary "middleman" step. Even if I obtained updates directly from the vendor myself, that would create frustration and confusion with our vendors whom are now reporting to two Dash representatives.

That said, I think to the extent my role involves steps in the project's completion, I could do a better job reporting the status of those steps even though I don't own the overall project delivery. In the case of Wall of Coins - which I do "own" - I have been reporting regularly, including the most recent API demo. But in the case of the Legal project (which I don't own), I could have done better reporting the payment status... While I did report in the Q3 2016 Conference Call that the retainer was funded with Pillsbury, I could have 1) posted that information on the forum, and 2) when our lawyer switched to Cooley LLC, I could have reported that we needed extra time to transfer our retainer to the new firm.

What I want to avoid is unneeded administrative overhead. We are still a bootstrapped startup with far too little staff to keep up with everything. This whole "episode" comes down to prioritizing communication, both within the team and with the community. It doesn't need to take a long time... it just needs to be made a higher priority. I told the guys on the core team call on Thursday, "This isn't rocket science. It just comes down to good old fashioned communication."

EDIT: One thing I would add is that there's also the Project Management function, which compiles status information for the monthly and quarterly reports as well, so I think as long as the "owner" of each proposal keeps their own status up to date, and Robert up to date, there should be sufficient communication channels in place.
 
Last edited:
babygiraffe said:
I definitely agree with your two main points. The only part I would question is whether my role should entail updating the community on the status of projects (at least the ones I don't "own" personally). First, it divides responsibility between two people (which could cause overlaps and gaps in reporting). Second, as whomever fills my role doesn't actually own the projects, it would require obtaining the information from the project owner, an unnecessary "middleman" step. Even if I obtained updates directly from the vendor myself, that would create frustration and confusion with our vendors whom are now reporting to two Dash representatives.

That said, I think to the extent my role involves steps in the project's completion, I could do a better job reporting the status of those steps even though I don't own the overall project delivery. In the case of Wall of Coins - which I do "own" - I have been reporting regularly, including the most recent API demo. But in the case of the Legal project (which I don't own), I could have done better reporting the payment status... While I did report in the Q3 2016 Conference Call that the retainer was funded with Pillsbury, I could have 1) posted that information on the forum, and 2) when our lawyer switched to Cooley LLC, I could have reported that we needed extra time to transfer our retainer to the new firm.

What I want to avoid is unneeded administrative overhead. We are still a bootstrapped startup with far too little staff to keep up with everything. This whole "episode" comes down to prioritizing communication, both within the team and with the community. It doesn't need to take a long time... it just needs to be made a higher priority. I told the guys on the core team call on Thursday, "This isn't rocket science. It just comes down to good old fashioned communication."

EDIT: One thing I would add is that there's also the Project Management function, which compiles status information for the monthly and quarterly reports as well, so I think as long as the "owner" of each proposal keeps their own status up to date, and Robert up to date, there should be sufficient communication channels in place.
Click to expand...

That sounds good, but I'm still not clear on the answer to the second question. For this particular proposal, are you the person who is controlling/distributing the funds, and is Daniel Diaz still involved with business development or this proposal somehow?
 
babygiraffe said:
I definitely agree with your two main points. The only part I would question is whether my role should entail updating the community on the status of projects (at least the ones I don't "own" personally). First, it divides responsibility between two people (which could cause overlaps and gaps in reporting). Second, as whomever fills my role doesn't actually own the projects, it would require obtaining the information from the project owner, an unnecessary "middleman" step. Even if I obtained updates directly from the vendor myself, that would create frustration and confusion with our vendors whom are now reporting to two Dash representatives.

That said, I think to the extent my role involves steps in the project's completion, I could do a better job reporting the status of those steps even though I don't own the overall project delivery. In the case of Wall of Coins - which I do "own" - I have been reporting regularly, including the most recent API demo. But in the case of the Legal project (which I don't own), I could have done better reporting the payment status... While I did report in the Q3 2016 Conference Call that the retainer was funded with Pillsbury, I could have 1) posted that information on the forum, and 2) when our lawyer switched to Cooley LLC, I could have reported that we needed extra time to transfer our retainer to the new firm.

What I want to avoid is unneeded administrative overhead. We are still a bootstrapped startup with far too little staff to keep up with everything. This whole "episode" comes down to prioritizing communication, both within the team and with the community. It doesn't need to take a long time... it just needs to be made a higher priority. I told the guys on the core team call on Thursday, "This isn't rocket science. It just comes down to good old fashioned communication."

EDIT: One thing I would add is that there's also the Project Management function, which compiles status information for the monthly and quarterly reports as well, so I think as long as the "owner" of each proposal keeps their own status up to date, and Robert up to date, there should be sufficient communication channels in place.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that unnecessary administrative overhead is to be avoided, especially in a small team.

Just to be clear, here is how I would see it happening in practice:
  • The true owner of the proposal would give regular (most likely monthly) updates on the progress of the project. This could be done either directly to the community, or given to Robert to include in the overall status reports, whatever is most efficient.
  • The controller of the payout address (is this always you, Ryan, for core proposals now?) would give an update when funds are spent on the project, either by updating the proposal owner, or by updating Robert to put in the overall status report. In practice, the proposal owner probably would already know about this and include it in his/her regular report anyway. I don't think that the controller of the payout address, if different than the proposal owner, should do much other than just report when funds are spent.
 
TroyDASH said:
That sounds good, but I'm still not clear on the answer to the second question. For this particular proposal, are you the person who is controlling/distributing the funds, and is Daniel Diaz still involved with business development or this proposal somehow?
Click to expand...

@babygiraffe thanks for the updates, I am happy that you are willing to improve communication and transparency. This needs to be done not only for investors but to keep projects on track and accountable from a delivery perspective.

I second @TroyDASH in saying what on earth is going on with Daniel Diaz and his projects!
 
Stealth923 said:
@babygiraffe thanks for the updates, I am happy that you are willing to improve communication and transparency. This needs to be done not only for investors but to keep projects on track and accountable from a delivery perspective.

I second @TroyDASH in saying what on earth is going on with Daniel Diaz and his projects!
Click to expand...
@TroyDASH & @Stealth923 We discussed the lack of communication this Thursday on the core team call, and Daniel and all other project owners committed to getting full updates out to the community this week.

Daniel is still our business development manager, but to answer TroyDash, he does not unilaterally control the funds. Any expenditures from BD funding requires the consensus of the rest of the core team.

I also play a lesser role in business development along with Daniel (generally working on standalone projects I deem worth spending my time on). Shake debit card and Wall of Coins are examples of projects I took upon myself. We are also adding a new still-unpaid member to the business development function that will also be pursuing opportunities.

I agree that there has been woefully inadequate communication on many of the projects and I am personally coordinating an update across all the owners of each of those projects.

I know the community is concerned with the lack of communication, and the vote tallies this month are a manifestation of that frustration. I take it seriously and am doing what I can to address it quickly. I know patience has worn thin, but we have a large specific opportunity coming up that the community will need to specifically vote on, but in the meantime, it would be very helpful to set some funding aside for the expense (one I'm confident will be approved by the community) to make the remaining costs more digestible. Consequently, I strongly encourage all to vote yes on this proposal while we work through the communication void.
 
I agree with sentiments expressed here that it would be ideal for the PM of each project to also be the one making the proposal itself. This provides the network with "one throat to choke," so to speak, as so eloquently put by @babygiraffe in his excellent IOHK response writeup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top