Biltong
Active member
At the moment 4000+ MNO can’t handle 27 proposals per month. As the one MNO said: “If I see a long proposal I can’t be bothered – I just vote No”
Proposal Evaluation Committee
- Thread starter Biltong
- Start date
Biltong
Active member
Corruption – Really scary word. Possible – most definitely. Some scammer comes up with a 10,000 Dash proposal – finds out who the Evaluator and Master Evaluator will be who will evaluate his proposal – possible – Bribes them – really risky, but possible. Evaluator prepares an evaluation that skips over the naughty bits, gives it a glowing report and the Master Evaluator presents it to the Top Evaluator who just skims over it and includes it in the Short List. Possible… So far so good.
Except the whole time this proposal is posted on the forum. Everyone including all the MNO’s will see it and since it has to be a ‘expensive’ proposal to warrant covering hefty bribe money it will draw a lot of attention. Thousands of eyes will be on it and it will be discussed and dissected. And someone is bound to stumble across the ‘naughty bit’.
Then the questions will start: Why did the Evaluator and his superior not see it? Why was that bit skipped or underplayed in the Evaluator Report? Those two evaluators will find that the next PEC budget will not include them and the proposal will be voted down in any case. So, possible, but…
Biltong
Active member
The problem is to do a proper professional evaluation of a proposal you need to know what you are doing. You need training in all the aspects relevant to your assigned category. Few people know how to do an in depth checkup on a person to see if he’s a scammer; evaluate the promised results to check for overstatement; check if the code changes necessary is possible and do-able in the promised time frames etc etc.
It will turn into quite a professional job.
If you want to build a little shack in the bush, you can get your whole community to help you and it will be up in hours, but if you want to build a 30 story block of flats you better use experienced and trained bricklayers.
Nick
Member
At our current capacity one-three+ volunteer forum moderatos that approves posts for public viewing seems adequate for our needs. They'd just need to follow the general guidelines of helping users to shorten and optimize proposals and know how to check for likely scams, then make their concerns known in the thread or not allow it to post at all.
The more I think about it the more I don't see the need for something to elaborate. Something for the future perhaps.
Here's a compromise without all this unneeded structure: The committee can consist of MNOs and active and productive community members. These members act more like forum moderators and are given a badge.
When pre-proposals are submitted, they have a one week review period in which only members with the badge may view and discuss any concerns and help revise the proposal.
If the quorum is not reached after the first week, it is extended by another 7 days.
If it still has not passed the quorum by that time the proposal is public and the thread will only be given a vote of no confidence mark by the committee. Ultimately, the MNOs still decide.
The more I think about it the more I don't see the need for something to elaborate. Something for the future perhaps.
Here's a compromise without all this unneeded structure: The committee can consist of MNOs and active and productive community members. These members act more like forum moderators and are given a badge.
When pre-proposals are submitted, they have a one week review period in which only members with the badge may view and discuss any concerns and help revise the proposal.
If the quorum is not reached after the first week, it is extended by another 7 days.
If it still has not passed the quorum by that time the proposal is public and the thread will only be given a vote of no confidence mark by the committee. Ultimately, the MNOs still decide.
Last edited:
Biltong
Active member
Yes - definitely. I've mentioned that a couple of times. But I suspect that the fork/peace will be the decisive moment, and we need to get everything ready and go through most of the teething problems: Guidelines and recruiting and training and be ready when the proposals get out of hand. This will take a couple of months at least, if not longer. I just think it's better to prepare while it's quiet than wait for the storm. I still think my initial gut feel of one Master Evaluator and 2 evaluators to start with should be the way to go. But lets wait and hear what Mastermined has in mind
Last edited:
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
"Evaluators", "Master Evaluators", "Top Evaluators". Why do you think MNO's need that? You think they are stupid? simple? what?
So besides judging the proposals the MNO's also need to evaluate whether the "Evaluators", "Master Evaluators" and "Top Evaluators" do their jobs correctly?
The essence of masternode operator votes is being a bunch of independent decentralized investors.
This committee is just bureaucracy to try and get influence without being invested.
Vedran Yoweri
Active member
So, random people from the internet know better? And are going to explain al those confusing proposals to me so i don't make a stupid mistake? And get paid for being this awesome?
See? Bad proposals are usually not hard to spot.
Biltong
Active member
So, random people from the internet know better? And are going to explain al those confusing proposals to me so i don't make a stupid mistake? And get paid for being this awesome?
See? Bad proposals are usually not hard to spot.
Hi Vedran, 'Random'!? No idea where you got that from…
No, people from the community will apply and if they have the necessary skill set needed for an opening, e.g.: x number of years in marketing at a y level then they could be appointed as an evaluator in the marketing Category. They will still receive training because there will be more than just marketing info that they will have to look at, e.g. how to do a professional check for a con artist.
So, yes, obviously they will have more knowledge than the average MNO in their specific category.
I think you missed the main point: This is a service to make the MNO’s and the communities lives easier:
“MNO's (Master Node Owners) still have to vote on the proposals - still have the final say.
Good proposals are lost through MNO fatigue. Once we have hundreds of proposals per week more will be 'lost'" This will be a community effort to prevent that.
Part of the Evaluator duties will also be to make sure that EACH Pre-Proposal is logical, all clutter and fat removed – to the point so that they are fast and easy to absorb – saving the community and MNO’s time and frustration.
Another duty will be to point out obvious flaws to the Originator and to make sure that the Proposal has the best chance of passing. Some really good ideas get buried in clutter and down voted because they are simply badly presented.
During the Pre-Proposal forum period the Evaluator will point out relevant community feedback to the Originator, so that he can adapt his Pre-Proposal to take into account the new info, etc etc
Finally the Evaluator will prepare a concise Report which the community member or MNO can use as a quick reference when checking/voting on the final Proposal.
In other words: a Service.. Or we can just do nothing. Good ideas will be lost. Originators with good ideas will see that there proposals get no votes and leave in disgust.
I think post fork and especially post Evo we are going to have a hell of a lot of new proposals. There is a proposal right now with large support for reducing the 5 Dash proposal fee to .1 Dash. What do you think will be the result of that? 10%.. 20%... 30% increase in proposals?
We can prepare for it – while we have time. Or do nothing...
No - I don't think the MNO's are stupid. I just think checking a hell of a lot of proposals with a finetooth comb is exhausting and that MNO's are human. That is all
Last edited:
Biltong
Active member
...And get paid for being this awesome?
See? Bad proposals are usually not hard to spot.
I think, you think, I'm doing this to rip off the community? - Then you missed a small detail in the Pre-Proposal:
Cost - second line:
"My own contribution for designing the system (edit) is for free."
Last edited:
mastermined
Well-known member
I share a lot of your concerns and believe I have solutions. Anybody at anytime will always be allowed to disregard what we as a community agree are best practices and submit their proposal as they always have. However if a large group of MN owners agree on said best practices that would be unwise. Once we have a agreed upon structure it will be submitted for community discussion and feedback. We need to find a balance between centralization and decentralization. A oversight committee will also be randomly selected every month to watch the watchers/review committee. They will be totally independent and will report to the community.
Thanks to @oaxaca for insight into that last solution, I'm tweaking his idea a bit to incentivize this oversight jury rather than punish them for non participation. You can read his jury thread in the forum.
Dashriprok
New member
So you guys will get to decide which proposals will get voted on and which ones wont. Sound like a lot of power in the hands of a few people.
Everyone is still free to do their own research and vote as they please with their MNs, this is just guidance as more proposals and complex projects arise.
holgum
New member
As we get bigger, it just doesn't make sense to treat $500 proposals the same as $50,000 proposals. The smallest ones could be delegated to a smaller group (as proposed here) - the big ones should receive more scrutiny. I'm fine with trusting a small group to make decisions on small proposals. But I do care about bigger items. So maybe restructure this to only apply to proposals under a limited size threshold?
lynx
Active member
Why? It's only a recommendation... Why wouldn't you want the committee to evaluate if a big proposal is a scam, or is overcharging in comparison with market prices, or isn't cost-effective in comparison with other proposals?
holgum
New member
What I'm saying is that for the smaller/smallest proposals, I would be ok with just letting the committee approve/disapprove - not just 'recommend'.I don't need to micromanage that. Frees up masternodes to concentrate on bigger proposals. If they are just recommendations I still have to evaluate the proposal and then I have to evaluate the recommendation.
I think it would be a better first step to just let a group have the authority to make the more trivial decisions. Of course, given current governance structure, this would probably require us to give the new committee a budget and let them allocate it to small proposals directly (i.e. take those proposals off of the official voting mechanism).
I think it would be a better first step to just let a group have the authority to make the more trivial decisions. Of course, given current governance structure, this would probably require us to give the new committee a budget and let them allocate it to small proposals directly (i.e. take those proposals off of the official voting mechanism).
demo
Well-known member
You make me laugh. The Masternodes are hardly able to micormanage, and totally unable to decide for big projects.
Look whats happened to the Lamassu project, in order to understand the quality of the majority of the masternodes of the 2014-2016 generation. This stupid generation still holds the majority over here. So the only hope is to increase the number of the masternodes, in order to diminish the concentration of stupidity.
Last edited:
sasababy
New member
There is the easiest way，Directly marked on the post of the funded proposal，Unfinished annotation is in progress,Completed the markup for success，So that for unfinished projects, because of the special markings, will be node operators concerned about the progress of the project, and not because of the increase in the project caused by dazzling situation.