Reduction in proposal fee to 1 Dash (Pre-Proposal)

[TroyDASH]

Don't we already have an outreach programme that can get paid for doing it? The dash would go to whoever manages that I guess.

Yeah I think so -- but in order to have the proposal fee go to them instead of being burned, we would need to change the protocol, and I don't think we should do that especially if we are hardcoding who the recipient is. Unless this is one of the things we can handle with the new 12.1 governance objects features? But if we can just use the existing system to pay the current translation team to do the extra work that would be fine, imo

 

[demo]

No no, the proposer pays their five dash, submits their proposal and the five dash immediately goes to whoever manages the outreach programme (not after).

And what if someone posts 1000 troll proposals in the budget in order to earn the 5 dash translation fee from each one of them?
How do you prevent this flaw?

 

[demo]

And what if someone posts 1000 troll proposals in the budget in order to earn the 5 dash translation fee from each one of them?
How do you prevent this flaw?

I think those who speak the language they should be allowed to judge the importance of a proposal, before its translation starts. A "translation" vote should be introduced and a proposal should be translated if it passes a threshold.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Yeah I think so -- but in order to have the proposal fee go to them instead of being burned, we would need to change the protocol, and I don't think we should do that especially if we are hardcoding who the recipient is. Unless this is one of the things we can handle with the new 12.1 governance objects features? But if we can just use the existing system to pay the current translation team to do the extra work that would be fine, imo

Well yes, this is a technical problem but not insurmountable. Maybe it can be done with multi-sig / voted via sporks. You're right that a quick fix solution would be a translators proposal, but I think ideally the proposal fee should be voted and directed to the outreach team.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

I think those who speak the language should be allowed to judge the importance of a proposal, before it starts to be translated.
A "translation" vote should be introduced.

When we discussed MN only polls, you said there should be no exclusions! lol, now you're saying one group of people should get preference! :-D

 

[demo]

When we discussed MN only polls, you said there should be no exclusions! lol, now you're saying one group of people should get preference! :-D

I am against the artificial exclusions. But it is irrational to be against the physical exclusions.
This case is a physical exlusion, not an artificial one. Those who do not speak the language, they are physicaly unable to understand.

Of course someone, in order to have the "translation" voting right, he has to prove that he knows the language. And this proof is the difficult part. How can I prove that I know chinese? How can you prove that I dont?

 

[GrandMasterDash]

This is a physical exlusion, not an artificial one. Those who do not speak the language, they are physicaly unable to understand.

You're over complicating it, as usual! :-D Let's just stick to the idea that it would be more beneficial to everyone if the fee was directed to dash employment (outreach) than simply being burned. Indeed, those people in the outreach programme might choose to share the new wonderful proposals with like-minded people within their community.

 

[demo]

You're over complicating it, as usual! :-D Let's just stick to the idea that it would be more beneficial to everyone if the fee was directed to dash employment (outreach) than simply being burned. Indeed, those people in the outreach programme might choose to share the new wonderful proposals with like-minded people within their community.

The monster of bureaucracy feeds itself. If you hire employees to translate the proposals and be paid with a fixed monthly salary, those employees will secretly hire people to post troll proposals, in order for the employees to have work to do.

I over complicate it, because the world is over complicated. A solution to your otherwise nice idea, is to find a way to prove that someone knows a language, and that way get his "translation" voting rights. Additionaly, you need a proof of individuality among those who know the language, because someone may create multiple accounts in order to get multiple "translation" voting rights.

Let's just stick to the idea that it would be more beneficial to everyone if the fee was directed to dash employment (outreach) than simply being burned.

I personally cannot stick to the idea as long as the 1000 troll proposals (in order to get the translation fee) problem is not solved.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

The monster of bureaucracy feeds itself. If you hire employees to translate the proposals and be paid with a fixed monthly salary, those employees will secretly hire people to post troll proposals, in order for the employees to have work to do.

I over complicate it, because the world is over complicated. A solution to your otherwise nice idea, is to find a way to prove that someone knows a language, and that way get his "translation" voting rights.

If outreach submitted their own proposals, they would simply get their money back (or less), not a profit. Especially so if they were paid per word, which isn't unusual in translation work.

 

[demo]

If outreach submitted their own proposals, they would simply get their money back (or less), not a profit. Especially so if they were paid per word, which isn't unusual in translation work.

In that case, if the proposal fee is equal to the translation reward, this means that the proposal costs nothing. The spammers may use this as a backdoor , in order to spam and get their money back.

To solve this flaw, maybe an employee with a fixed monthly salary is the solution. This employee should be responsible to translate all the proposals, without any increase of his salary. That way he will not be able to secretly cooperate with the spammers, in order justify his work position.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

In that case, if the proposal fee is equal to the translation reward, this means that the proposal costs nothing.
The spammers may use this as a backdoor , in order to spam and get their money back.

Well no. it would just be an extension of whoever handles outreach now, I think it's @tungfa

 

[demo]

Well no. it would just be an extension of whoever handles outreach now, I think it's @tungfa

I dont think @tungfa is qualified to do translations. How many languages does he knows, and how can he prove this knowledge?

@tungfa is not currenly incentivized to encourage non-english proposals into the budget system, because this will result more work for him without any additional reward. IF he agrees to do the translation job without an increase of his salary, he will do it unwillingly and with as bad quality as he can without being in danger of being sacked .

Alternatively If you decide to increase @tungfa 's salary and assign to him (or to whoever may be hired in his position) the additional task of translation, you should have a reasonable number of non-english proposals already into the budget system. Otherwise the employee will be paid for nothing.

 

[stellabelle]

I replied yes because I know some extremely talented people who are very committed but don't have $500 to put forth. In a perfect world, I'd like to see it as 2 Dash, since you'll probably see a huge influx of proposals. But then again, that might not be a bad thing. Some of the most talented people in the world are not filthy rich.

 

[Michael Q]

Tying fee to some outside value would require everyone to agree on that value in the first place i.e. you need some trusted party/source. Or an oracle.

Doing something that will stand the test of time would be good. What about making the proposal fee proportional to the amount being requested, with 1 DASH indexed to a 50 DASH proposal (or some #)? For this example, that would be 2%. Then more expensive proposals would cost more to make (maybe with the fee ramp falling off with a log curve) and less expensive ones cheaper, with some baseline (which could be tricky in itself - maybe back to the same problem!).

 

[JZA]

I was thinking about this more recently and it starts to feel like it's our own "block size issue" - some hardcoded number which we (devs) use to guess some limits on how many and how large proposals MNOs are willing to review instead of a) asking them directly b) let market decide if their decision was wise. Having governance mechanism and falling into the same trap as bitcoin would be sad, so +1 for creating (pre-)proposal

Yup I mentioned that on the comments of the Roger Ver interview from Tao of Satoshi. Is becoming a Block size debate, althought is not only on this fee but also the overal availability of masternodes. I have defend the dash attack feeded by the notion of centralization, but as MN become more unaccesible, a certain 'old money MN elite' could be happening, along side with the centralization of power by other grows such as the proposed Funded Budget Holders and DASHForce like organizations that wil be in charge of funding the little guys proposals on a centralized and budget-driven manner. What's next? Taxes?

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Doing something that will stand the test of time would be good. What about making the proposal fee proportional to the amount being requested, with 1 DASH indexed to a 50 DASH proposal (or some #)? For this example, that would be 2%. Then more expensive proposals would cost more to make (maybe with the fee ramp falling off with a log curve) and less expensive ones cheaper, with some baseline (which could be tricky in itself - maybe back to the same problem!).

Why must the fee be proportional? The fee was only there to minimise spamming, increasing the fee (which currently gets burned), does not tackle the spamming problem any better.

 

[Gi01]

Is it me, or every time that there is a (hopefully) useful proposal some ppl here do their best to spam it to confusion, so that it's messed up and no one wants to discuss it anymore?

 

[JZA]

Why must the fee be proportional? The fee was only there to minimise spamming, increasing the fee (which currently gets burned), does not tackle the spamming problem any better.

The issue is not about spaming but the opposite the issue is about being accesible to people. I personally just saw 13 proposals. I think if it gets to 100 proposals there should be any FUD about a protocol to handle proposals 'en mass'. on the other side, I think this preproposals might outgrow the Forum format into something that allows more interaction between the community and the proposal owner.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

The issue is not about spaming but the opposite the issue is about being accesible to people. I personally just saw 13 proposals. I think if it gets to 100 proposals there should be any FUD about a protocol to handle proposals 'en mass'. on the other side, I think this preproposals might outgrow the Forum format into something that allows more interaction between the community and the proposal owner.

I totally agree about accessibility, I'm just saying it doesn't have to be more expensive simply because the requested amount is more. It's not like expensive proposals are more spammy.

 

[stan.distortion]

Something maybe worth bearing in mind, increasing the fee is much more difficult than reducing it because it basically means a fork and there's more incentive to keep the lower fee. That's something best avoided imho, I'd rather see folks grouping together with similar projects and splitting the fee or have major proposals to fund multiple minor projects and base a fee mechanism on how that pans out than to see a change made that could have harmful consequences and be difficult to reverse.