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

Proposal for Testnet Contributors Fund

As moli pointed out : https://dashtalk.org/threads/v12-testing-thread.5484/

After this anyone can vote on the proposals. The network will use the “Finalized Budget” logic automatically to consolidate the proposals into one object that will allow them to be paid at the end of the month. You can see these with “mnfinalbudget show”. For a proposal to make it into the finalized budget, it will require 10% of the masternode votes on mainnet. This should help combat masternode voting apathy, if masternodes don’t want something with that little support to be paid, they’ll have to vote on a competing proposal.


Budgets are paid each 50 blocks on testnet/regtest to allow us to make lots of changes and have many pay periods to test with. On mainnet it will be every 16616 blocks.
Click to expand...

edit : i do think mnfinalbudget got replaced with mnbudget projection in the end.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand...

Let's say somebody offered "bad proposal", OK.

It gets 1% of "Yes" and 9-99% of "No" (so more than 10% altogether - so it is active). And there is no other "good" competing proposals...
So... this "bad" proposal will be funded with current voting logic? :confused:
 
Please note Dash Ninja Budgets page considers that if a budget isEstablished is at true it means it will be paid on next super-block.
This seems to not be the case so I will need to change it... First I need a complete explanation of how it works. It is just so unclear for me atm...
 
Considering:

Voting status:
Proposal:core-team Yes: 1475 No: 8
Proposal:public-awareness Yes: 1440 No: 38
Proposal:compensate-testers Yes: 176 No: 139
Proposal:reimbursement Yes: 1452 No: 13

So, now, in order that a new proposal (say, of 1,000 DASH) be approved today it would need at least 177 "yes" (replacing, thus, compensate-test proposal)?

Now, lets say, if today 1453 masternodes decide to vote "no" for reimbursement: is it eliminated from the budget, thus its 2,529 DASH slot would be freed?
 
Please somebody - explain how exactly "No"s works?

Do "No"s help to cross 10% limit? (This is not a good idea!)
Do "No"s eliminate the number of "Yes"s during proposal's comparison (This is a good idea!)
 
alex-ru said:
I don't understand...

Let's say somebody offered "bad proposal", OK.

It gets 1% of "Yes" and 9-99% of "No" (so more than 10% altogether - so it is active). And there is no other "good" competing proposals...
So... this "bad" proposal will be funded with current voting logic? :confused:
Click to expand...

There's a kind of "checks and balances" here, if we consider that "bad proposals", if approved, will "hurt" DASH. Masternode owners will not want to "hurt" their investment ∴ "Bad proposals" will not be accepted.
 
Voting No on a budget proposal will get it delisted if enough voters will vote no (so it gets below 10%)
Voting Yes on budget proposal will get it listed if enough voters will vote yes (so it gets 10% or more)

Yes voters can always change their mind and vote No
No voters can always change their mind and vote Yes
 
according my wallet using mnbudget projection so far only three budget proposals made it :

14:28:02


cmd-reply



{
"core-team" : {
"URL" : "goo.gl/V52wZd",
"Hash" : "eac6392cd0d63e4b2ebd3c60da2d3e13137c892cd4cd1a8f3885077ac86b7487",
"BlockStart" : 332320,
"BlockEnd" : 2002228,
"TotalPaymentCount" : 100,
"RemainingPaymentCount" : 100,
"PaymentAddress" : "XtspXMnoGt4RF23CZ7MQQ7NFmkAebMUNME",
"Ratio" : 0.99468085,
"Yeas" : 1479,
"Nays" : 8,
"Abstains" : 0,
"TotalPayment" : 117600.00000000,
"MonthlyPayment" : 1176.00000000,
"Alloted" : 1176.00000000,
"TotalBudgetAlloted" : 1176.00000000,
"IsValid" : true,
"IsValidReason" : "",
"fValid" : true
},
"reimbursement" : {
"URL" : "goo.gl/V52wZd",
"Hash" : "428438998eeb3234b232a3609d2e0f1122049241e5ecad972554ad163772a109",
"BlockStart" : 332320,
"BlockEnd" : 357244,
"TotalPaymentCount" : 1,
"RemainingPaymentCount" : 1,
"PaymentAddress" : "XmxCEosWmtgDLS4BpAS8MnwYSEnsyMLbRF",
"Ratio" : 0.99125168,
"Yeas" : 1456,
"Nays" : 13,
"Abstains" : 0,
"TotalPayment" : 2529.00000000,
"MonthlyPayment" : 2529.00000000,
"Alloted" : 2529.00000000,
"TotalBudgetAlloted" : 3705.00000000,
"IsValid" : true,
"IsValidReason" : "",
"fValid" : true
},
"public-awareness" : {
"URL" : "goo.gl/V52wZd",
"Hash" : "cbafad18687045bb72fae611078fac09c3ec09c8379e357c36901ce84891f189",
"BlockStart" : 332320,
"BlockEnd" : 2002228,
"TotalPaymentCount" : 100,
"RemainingPaymentCount" : 100,
"PaymentAddress" : "XxTqjYd4bpkTA6yP1gmo5maMkPynT6YvbG",
"Ratio" : 0.97464977,
"Yeas" : 1444,
"Nays" : 38,
"Abstains" : 0,
"TotalPayment" : 215600.00000000,
"MonthlyPayment" : 2156.00000000,
"Alloted" : 2156.00000000,
"TotalBudgetAlloted" : 5861.00000000,
"IsValid" : true,
"IsValidReason" : "",
"fValid" : true
}
}


So í'm not totally sure Moli's proposal got into the final budget or not.
 
So 10% proposal is needed to be active is:
(Number of "Yes" minus number of "No"s) ?

(not only "Yes"? not "Yes+No"?)


And "rating" of every proposal (to compare all of them) is:
(Number of "Yes" minus number of "No"s) ?
 
buster said:
I like that idea. Maybe it would be wise for people who want to propose a budget to make an unofficial-proposal before the official-proposal. People can hash out some issues which the proposer can take into consideration, then we get something concrete and make an official proposal. I'm sure there was discussion that took place about this proposal before it was posted but maybe an entire thread and a few days could have helped. Discussion about the proposals is key and it would also help save time voting on proposals that are similar with slight differences. (e.g. if this proposal is re-proposed and we have to vote on it again).

We can use the current proposal as an example. Lets assume Moli made a post 2-3 days ago letting us know she was going to make this proposal. Lets assume we spent 3 days discussing all the things we have discussed since she made the proposal. Moli could refine her proposal to her liking and then make it official if she is satisfied with the discussion. She could even come to the realization that the proposal might not be a good idea.

All I'm saying is it might help you get your proposal passed if you give the community an unofficial proposal and a few days to discuss it.

*edit some typos and added some stuff to last sentence.
Click to expand...
Hi buster,

Thank you so much for your support and encouragement... You understand very well how many of us feel. Your suggestion is excellent, so if you and the guys would like to open a discussion about this, please do so. As for me, I need a break, as I also have many real-life obligations to finish.

You've helped the community a lot and we love you. :smile:
 
alex-ru said:
So 10% proposal is needed to be active is:
(Number of "Yes" minus number of "No"s) ?

(not only "Yes"? not "Yes+No"?)


And "rating" of every proposal (to compare all of them) is:
(Number of "Yes" minus number of "No"s) ?
Click to expand...

We definitely need a new, specific, thread to introduce these official voting rules to the community, and to answer all our questons and doubts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Respect to Moli for standing her ground, she had my vote (and for doing a hell of a lot of testing work for the last year).
Better luck next time, Moli!
 
moli said:
Hi buster,

Thank you so much for your support and encouragement... You understand very well how many of us feel. Your suggestion is excellent, so if you and the guys would like to open a discussion about this, please do so. As for me, I need a break, as I also have many real-life obligations to finish.

You've helped the community a lot and we love you. :smile:
Click to expand...

moli I think your post opened the discussion already so it might be a good idea to keep it going here. Also it looks like your proposal passed but I'm not 100% sure. Making this proposal took a lot of courage and people will certainly learn from the experience.

I would like to make an argument for passing this proposal with the 12 payments and not just 1. If we pass it with the 12 we can test the down-vote system after the testers receive one or two of the 12 payments. After that happens masternode owners vote it out. We are bound to vote a proposal off the budget in the future so why not test the system with this proposal. A few of you guys made this point already but we haven't talked about doing it intentionally.
 
buster said:
moli I think your post opened the discussion already so it might be a good idea to keep it going here. Also it looks like your proposal passed but I'm not 100% sure. Making this proposal took a lot of courage and people will certainly learn from the experience.

I would like to make an argument for passing this proposal with the 12 payments and not just 1. If we pass it with the 12 we can test the down-vote system after the testers receive one or two of the 12 payments. After that happens masternode owners vote it out. We are bound to vote a proposal off the budget in the future so why not test the system with this proposal. A few of you guys made this point already but we haven't talked about doing it intentionally.
Click to expand...


?? Proposal:compensate-testers Yes: 176 No: 147
 
buster said:
moli I think your post opened the discussion already so it might be a good idea to keep it going here. Also it looks like your proposal passed but I'm not 100% sure. Making this proposal took a lot of courage and people will certainly learn from the experience.

I would like to make an argument for passing this proposal with the 12 payments and not just 1. If we pass it with the 12 we can test the down-vote system after the testers receive one or two of the 12 payments. After that happens masternode owners vote it out. We are bound to vote a proposal off the budget in the future so why not test the system with this proposal. A few of you guys made this point already but we haven't talked about doing it intentionally.
Click to expand...
Hey, thanks for this suggestion. Funny that it was another idea i had in mind when i put in "12"... (Like after the first distribution and we don't need for it because of no testing, i would just ask for it to be voted down...) I guess i'm such an addicted tester that i wanted to even test this on mainnet.. haha...

My original thought was i wanted some reward go to testers not just for version 12 but for people who also did a lot of work even before, if they wanted. You have to wonder why they stopped helping... so i had a lot of conflicted thoughts in my mind.. At the same time who should be paid and how much... The spreadsheet i put up was just a tentative plan, subject to change, anyone didn't want to be rewarded or anyone felt they should be rewarded..all subject to be changed, (and the names on that spreadsheet were taken from the list of the V12 Release OP, I didn't pick the names myself, just to make it clear one more time for people who don't know this.) Also, another reason why "12" was i was thinking of long term for testnet.. It should be another discussion between the devs and testers on another thread, but seriously Testnet needs an established, allocated fund. The costs of testing are as real as the costs of marketing, if we're serious about this project software. People do not want to keep updating after updating after every release. So that was another reason for number 12 because I figured we would need testing for a while. Also, and this is another blind side from me: I thought everyone knows by now how this system works, I am appalled to see some members put up their posts on forums talking about this number like it's set in stone. Another reason for them to do testing on their own.

This budget didn't pass, it needs at least 10% of the mn count and one for each 'no' votes. But I'm glad it's raising awareness for how important testing Dash software is.. We're in the digital age, if people still don't care about how safe their software/wallet should be or do not agreed to this, they should not be involved in crypto .. just my 2 duffs :wink:

EDIT; edited for clarity..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you Minotaur & Elbereth, the https://dashninja.pl/budgets.html site makes things a lot more clear now as well.

Moli : sorry about my earlier post about your budget proposal having passed, i should have checked through my wallet earlier.
I did vote yes on your proposal so there is that, good luck next time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
alex-ru said:
Moli, I understand you!

I just want to remind that budgeting system isn't only the great opportunity, but the great danger also,
let me quote old tungfa's post here:
"I really want to emphasise the importance of our volunteers !
This is an Open Source Project, and everybody is encouraged as always to do their part.
We need you (volunteers) as much as always and probably even more in the future as the project is
growing and more work will come our way !
We can NOT do it without you !"

And when we start paying some people, we really "open Pandora box" that will be hard to close. There are always problems with people - they (in general) too often think they do the most important job, but get less than others... (and no budget distribution can satisfy everybody - so some people will start feeling unhappy... :( )

So I would advice not to pay to people at these first stages (except super-trusted team members with absolute trust) - but to pay direct expanses in crucial processes.

It'll be great if Evan create the list of infrastructure we need to support regularly: hosting for dashtalk, dashninja, and so on, hosting for testNet Masternodes and so on - with detailed calculations so everybody can check (and offer optimizations) and vote to support it.
Click to expand...

I would like to express my support for Alex's statements in general. I too feel like we have to keep as many aspects as possible running on a volunteer basis. I myself went through several of the iterations on testnet and contributed to the best of my ability; but I did it because I felt it was the appropriate thing to do. Paying people for this kind of thing feels like the wrong move.

Pablo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top