The problem with this is that it leads to the same issue as lowering the proposal fee: a total number of proposals that is too high to reasonably sort through, regardless of their value.
If We have a sub-dao, it needs to either be A)self contained and have discretion to spend funds on it's own, with some accountability afterwards that people can look at or B)mostly self contained, so that anyone who wants to vote on the sub-dao proposals can do so, but they don't take up the same space as normal proposals.
If you don't divert the attention needed to sort through the proposals, you're not solving the underlying issue.
Theoretically, it could be implemented in the code, but one of the largest advantages of a sub-dao is that it can be painlessly dropped if it is found to be under serving the network.
As soon as you are talking about protocol level structural changes, it adds months to any timeline to add the features safely, and we need something soon.
I think that the easiest interim solution will be a sub-dao that has discretion to spend its own funds on whatever project looks promising (like Dash Force for meet ups)
It would be simple to set up, and simple to defund if the community felt it was not serving it's needs.
From my point of view, this is one of the reasons why MNs have rewards, read understand and vote. It's their responsibility. They already have the means to have at least one co-worker to assist them.
Always from my point of view, soon each MN will have the means to be a sub-DAO to him all alone.
We already had an example of a SUB-DAO that does not work with DASH GLOBAL.
Dash Core, Dev Team, Dash Force New, ... are there for a reason, trust and work done. They all started by producing something that gave value to Dash, then they were funded to allow them to go further.
In the first they worked and gave results.
I think, as Evan himself says, if a person wants to invest funds as he or she wishes with discretion, he does it with his own funds.
Nothing is urgent, we have time. Until this is incorporated in the code, it remains the posibility for a proposal owner to be financed by donations if the project is really a matter of life or death for Dash.
On this point we have to make an important choice, either we share a model "LTC Lightning" out of the chain, or we continue to find solutions in our code as "instantsend"?
The first question is:
SUB-DAO in the chain YES / NO?
If it's a yes, then we have plenty of questions to ask ourselves.
We just need a SUB-DAO, or a descrow service, a smart contract. That in the main chain or in a secondary chain ....?
I'm not really a fan of having a generic sub-DAO act as a catch-all for any small proposals. The people best equipped to evaluate small or local proposals are the people closest to that location or area of expertise. I would be fine with funding regional teams or teams that have a clearly laid out mission/purpose, and then anyone who wants to do a small project that falls under those areas could solicit funds from those teams instead of soliciting funds from the masternodes at the protocol level.
I share your point of view, eventually in each country there will be a CORE TEAM agency.
It was in a first time started and helped by the CORE TEAM, then become autonomous (financially).
Co-ordination with CORE TEAM is important for everything to be coherent.
We need people in those countries that we can trust. This trust is built with time and actions.
It's a sharing of point of view, not an absolute truth
