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

Proposal: Hiring of Top-level Dash Chief Marketing Officer (CMO)

Thank you for your comments, @jimbursch, feedback is welcomed! If I may, I’ll quote some relevant sections of the PEC Pre-Proposal that I hope will explain my method of working:

"Benefits:
…Prevents MNO burnout. MNO’s receive a Prioritised Short List of Proposals as well as Reports which will enable them to concentrate on their areas of expertise and cut out wasting time on junk/high risk/scam proposals."

"Scope
…Whether MNO's should vote for or against a proposal is outside the scope.
The PEC will only highlight deficiencies/positive aspects we found and give a rating according to the PEC Evaluator Guidelines https://goo.gl/Futw1d
The MNO's must decide themselves how they vote."

"Success Criteria
Evaluators prevent scams and help to improve Pre-Proposals so that all necessary information is provided for the MNO's to make informed decisions.
Prioritised List and Reports give MNO's an idea of which proposals to concentrate on if their time is limited."

" Communication Strategy

Evaluator Reports will be posted on the relevant Pre-Proposal thread in Dash Forum and final Report below the actual Proposal in Dash Central.
Reports will contain the evaluator input regarding necessary changes and questions that the proposal owner needs to address.
Prioritised List of Evaluated Proposals will be published on Dash Forum and Dash Force News and links on all Dash media."


Regarding the “proposal owners who have risked a substantial amount of money to submit a proposal”, Pre-Proposals are advised to post on the forum first for at least one cycle, to give the community a chance to have a look and give their opinions. This is to prevent the old trick of posting just a couple of weeks or even days before the vote takes place. See the MNO’s instructions in Dash Governance: https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/...ed+Governance:+Proposals,+Voting,+and+Budgets:

"Select your funding cycle start block
Choose a block far enough in the future to allow time for your proposal to be discussed and gain support. Allow at least one cycle (calendar month) for most
proposals. Consider longer incubation periods for larger funding requests."


We are here to protect Dash. Nothing else.


If you are still concerned or feel changes should be made, please post your suggestions on the PEC Pre-proposal thread so that this thread is kept free for discussion of the relevant proposal.
 
TheSingleton said:
Not that I mind them Rating things as they see fit but if it differs from my opinion I am less likely to consider their Rating in the future. The first Rating I read was quite good but with seeing the rest I no longer put much weight on it.
Click to expand...

Please remember that opinions are highly subjective, which is why the PEC reports aim to be as objective as possible. Our evaluations do not aim to offer opinions nor to advise MNOs how to cast their vote. Again quoting from the PEC pre-proposal:

"Whether MNO's should vote for or against a proposal is outside the scope.
The PEC will only highlight deficiencies/positive aspects we found and give a rating according to the PEC Evaluator Guidelines https://goo.gl/Futw1d
The MNO's must decide themselves how they vote."

Of course, there is no obligation on the MNOs to consider our reports at all, but for those who don't have the time or resources to research every proposal in depth before voting, I hope they will find our reports useful: both the comments and the ratings, which are used to compile a "List of Prioritized Pre-Proposals to be delivered at the end of each cycle for scrutiny".

I hope it's clear that our ratings are given based on carefully crafted criteria, however since PEC is still fine-tuning these criteria and guidelines, feedback on how these can be improved is actively welcomed. Therefore if you have any suggestions as to how our ratings could be more helpful to you, I encourage you to post on the PEC Pre-Proposal thread so that this thread is kept free for discussion of the relevant proposal.
 
Ok, so there wasn't enough support for a CMO. That's really really unfortunate. ANYWAY. Moving along. Are there any tools that the current marketing team needs to better focus their campaigns. What kind of analytics are we currently using to track campaign effectiveness? What kind of return are we getting for the work that Amanda is doing? Is there any way to focus our goals to maximize our return on investment. How can we help Amanda market Dash most effectively? Thoughts?
 
-crypto said:
Ok, so there wasn't enough support for a CMO. That's really really unfortunate. ANYWAY. Moving along.
Click to expand...

Actually the voting for this proposal shows strong support so far with over 8% net yes votes and the voting period isn't over yet. Even if this does not pass with 10% I think we are seeing a consensus starting to emerge on what kind of things the MNs are deeming valuable on this subject.
 
The PEC report was a surprise to some people. I think a lot of people (including myself) support the CMO idea.
However: As the Pre-proposal stands now an unknown entity will choose one of the most important positions in Dash. As Tallyho clearly stated at the top of the report.
Don't shoot the guard! She is protecting Dash!

If the PO changed the Proposal, as he was asked a number of times, the Report will disappear and the Categorised and Prioritized List updated accordingly.
It is a simple and logical action to follow on his promises in this thread!
It is causing unnecessary controversy while all of us should rather get behind the idea of a CMO (In my personal opinion)

Come-on dashdisciple: fix it so we can concentrate on the real issue.
You don't want to do the choosing anymore do you?

If this proposal passes you'll have carteblanche to choose the CMO - is that what you still want?!
 
So far as I know, you can't change the actual proposal. Can you? OK, if you can't change it, now what? He has publicly stated that he won't be directly involved in the process and certainly does not want the position for himself. I guess he could state it again here. He recognizes that his newness and anonymity does not produce truckloads of trust in a short time.
 
solarguy said:
So far as I know, you can't change the actual proposal. Can you? OK, if you can't change it, now what? He has publicly stated that he won't be directly involved in the process and certainly does not want the position for himself. I guess he could state it again here. He recognizes that his newness and anonymity does not produce truckloads of trust in a short time.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if he can change it in DC, but he can certainly ask @rango. Even if he just changed it here (Which he definitely can) Core will be able to do what needs to be done.
I personally think it's an excellent idea and hate the controversy.
However voting yes for it, as it stands, is dangerous:

" Dashdisciple, in combination with the DashTreasury.org team, will ... locate potential candidates. "
It will mean a couple of new and anonymous guys will choose one of the most important positions in Dash.
Dashdisciple promised to “ I will not interfere or get in the middle.”, but the proposal has not changed. He has been asked a number of times to change it, but has still not done so.

Some implications:
If it passes as is, the community and Core can hardly let them go ahead and choose a $200, 000 dollar person who will have immense power in shaping the future direction of Dash.
Which will open a can of worms....

All that daschdisciple has to do is amend “How will this magical CMO be found?” here, as promised, and the problem will disappear, but so far he’s ignored this request.

I expected a flood of yes votes, but this is not happening - I suspect the MNO's have the same problem with the proposal. Remove those offending lines and it will sail through to the benefit of Dash. (In my personal opinion ;))
 
Last edited:
kot said:
There will a response to many questions from this thread soon. Core Team works on many things in parallel at the moment and our presence on the forum is limited due to the amount of work (and issues connected with them [emoji4]).
Please be patient.
Click to expand...
What I hear in this statement is what most people supporting this proposal don't seem to be considering: That marketing must be coordinated with the rest of the operation! You can market like crazy, but if you then don't deliver on whatever independent ambitions that CMO communicates, you disappoint the market. That is not a 'cohesive marketing strategy.'

We do seem to be quite impatient right now, for whatever reason, so I hope you can say something to keep us all from a 'Ready, shoot...aim' impulse on the eve of no-doubt critical developments.
 
@Biltong ,
I would appreciate if you would not suggest any actions taken by the Core Team (especially ignoring votes).

@c3works
Patience my Padawan ;)
 
Biltong said:
I'm not sure if you can change it in DC, but if he changed it here (Which he definitely can) Core will have a way out to ignore a positive vote and do what needs to be done.
I personally think it's an excellent idea and hate the controversy.
However voting yes for it, as it stands, is dangerous:

" Dashdisciple, in combination with the DashTreasury.org team, will ... locate potential candidates. "
It will mean a couple of anonymous guys will choose one of the most important positions in Dash.
Dashdisciple promised to “ I will not interfere or get in the middle.”, but the proposal has not changed. He has been asked a number of times to change it, but has still not done so.

Some implications:
If it passes as is, the community and Core can hardly let them go ahead and choose a $200, 000 dollar person who will have immense power in shaping the future direction of Dash.
Which means Core will have to ignore a valid MNO vote.

This will open a can of worms:
Our governing system will become a joke and if this gets into the press…?

All that daschdisciple has to do is amend “How will this magical CMO be found?” here, as promised, and the problem will disappear, but so far he’s ignored this request.

I expected a flood of yes votes, but this is not happening - I suspect the MNO's have the same problem with the proposal. Remove those offending lines and it will sail through to the benefit of Dash. (In my personal opinion ;))
Click to expand...

Despite the error in the PEC report, I am not the proposal owner on this one (DashTreasury is). I have rescinded my offer to assist with recruitment here officially, and I've done the same thing on DashCentral and at https://www.dashtreasury.org/p-2010.prop.

Please keep in mind that DashTreasury offered me up only to assist, but that the MNOs always had the "carte blanche" to pick the CMO, not any individuals. (Recruitment is a nasty, time-intensive job, which is why we didn't want to put up a plan without backing it up with some donated resources of our own.)

I'll put the CMO governance question here again to re-iterate. This is what is being voted on, the rest are logistics:

"We would like the Dash DAO to begin the immediate search and recruitment of a high-level Chief Marketing Officer, to be paid entirely in Dash, by the Dash DAO. Vote in favor of this proposal if you agree that the Dash DAO should begin this recruiting process."
 
dashdisciple said:
Despite the error in the PEC report, I am not the proposal owner on this one (DashTreasury is). I have rescinded my offer to assist with recruitment here officially, and I've done the same thing on DashCentral and at https://www.dashtreasury.org/p-2010.prop.

Please keep in mind that DashTreasury offered me up only to assist, but that the MNOs always had the "carte blanche" to pick the CMO, not any individuals. (Recruitment is a nasty, time-intensive job, which is why we didn't want to put up a plan without backing it up with some donated resources of our own.)

I'll put the CMO governance question here again to re-iterate. This is what is being voted on, the rest are logistics:

"We would like the Dash DAO to begin the immediate search and recruitment of a high-level Chief Marketing Officer, to be paid entirely in Dash, by the Dash DAO. Vote in favor of this proposal if you agree that the Dash DAO should begin this recruiting process."
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying @dashdisciple. Are you able to do this??

Biltong said:
All that daschdisciple has to do is amend “How will this magical CMO be found?”
Click to expand...
 
Thanx Dashd...
That makes your position clear, but the offending lines are still there and your name still features prominently.
Nothing has changed in the proposal.
Might be a good idea to talk to Dashtreasury?
BTW: No error in the report: We use the name of the person who posts the proposal, which was you.
 
kot said:
There will a response to many questions from this thread soon. Core Team works on many things in parallel at the moment and our presence on the forum is limited due to the amount of work (and issues connected with them [emoji4]).
Please be patient.
Click to expand...

That sounds like we will get meaningful feedback to influence the current voting cycle.
Looking forward to the additional information.
Yes, we recognize that the Core Team has 87 important things going on at the moment.
 
I think we're fast approaching a scenario where the rigidity of the PEC process could potentially cause much more harm than good. This may be a good opportunity to consider PEC's mission.

(Does the PEC committee evaluate proposals based on metrics that would help Dash, or is this unintentionally going in the direction of a standard bureaucracy - similar to the pitfalls of standardized testing). I don't mean for this to be an inflammatory statement, but this type of rigidity can be more than a simple hassle - it can damaging to Dash.

The PEC process has rated the branded sailboat proposal at 91%, Peter Eralith's professional video and youtube advertising proposal at 66%, and the hiring of a professional CMO at 0%. Is this how a rational veteran business person would also rank these proposals, or is the PEC already leading the MNOs in a harmful direction?

The CMO vote we're all discussing here is very clearly to see if the MNO's would like to hire a CMO. It has to nothing to do with me, abob54, or DashTreasury, aside from the fact that we paid to post the proposal, and provided an outline that anyone can use. If the MNOs can find and hire the right CMO, we might all be able to kill a lot of birds with one stone. If we trust the integrity, skill and judgment of the CMO that the MNOs hire - is it possible that we can unite and move on from this temporary treasury evaluation dilemma immediately?
 
I assure you I'm as keen to get past this block as you are :) I'm certainly not aiming to make this any more difficult than it already is, in fact the whole idea is to facilitate. To answer your question, the key is in the question:

dashdisciple said:
Does the PEC committee evaluate proposals based on metrics that.....
Click to expand...
(my bold)

The PEC committee evaluates PROPOSALS, not the comments posted after proposals nor statements posted elsewhere on the web. It's the proposal itself that will be saved on the blockchain and that is the closest thing to a contract the Dash governance system has at this time. I am perfectly satisfied with the comments you have made. I am only asking that you fix the conflicting details in the proposal (I'm pretty sure text can be added to proposals after submission) and the pre-proposal (by editing the first post in this thread) in order to avoid any risk of you being held to obligations that you have already stated you have rescinded.

That really is all :)
 
Tallyho said:
I assure you I'm as keen to get past this block as you are :) I'm certainly not aiming to make this any more difficult than it already is, in fact the whole idea is to facilitate. To answer your question, the key is in the question:


(my bold)

The PEC committee evaluates PROPOSALS, not the comments posted after proposals nor statements posted elsewhere on the web. It's the proposal itself that will be saved on the blockchain and that is the closest thing to a contract the Dash governance system has at this time. I am perfectly satisfied with the comments you have made. I am only asking that you fix the conflicting details in the proposal (I'm pretty sure text can be added to proposals after submission) and the pre-proposal (by editing the first post in this thread) in order to avoid any risk of you being held to obligations that you have already stated you have rescinded.

That really is all :)
Click to expand...


Thanks, Tallyho. As you've requested, I've made that update to the first post in this discussion, and I'll try to have the same update made elsewhere.

To clarify, there is no official proposal description text saved to the blockchain. The information about a proposal that is attached to the blockchain is:

-Payment amount of proposal
-Start date of proposal
-End date of proposal
-Abbreviated title of proposal
-Payment address of proposal owner
-URL of proposal
 
@dashdisciple now that you have stepped aside on the recruitment process, we are left with an open ended situation where we need to re-answer the "where does this magical CMO come from?" question. If this proposal passes, what would be a reasonable way forward? Is the core team willing to handle the recruitment process, or is there someone else?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top