02 Decentralised Decision Making: What Are Dash's Core Values?

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,145
1,242
1,183
@DeepBlue I didn't bother to read beyond the first few lines. I'm not interested in yours or anyone elses nitpicking. Submit your own proposal, put up or shut up.

I have not edited this proposal, please provide evidence. There may of been a few type corrections during the Concept stage (unsure) and that's all. I have repeatedly stated, I give permission for Dash Nexus to release all relevant logs. There has been no intention on my part to lie or mislead people, any suggestion of this kind should be regarded as a personal attack in order to derail the proposal. If anyone is in doubt of my intention they should vote No.

Frankly, the efforts you and others are going to, to derail this proposal is disgusting. So far, DCG has made zero contributions to this proposal and discussion; apparently, my 5 dash isn't worthy enough. Why you don't spend your time writing long posts to them, or am I just an easier target?

But yeah, it is telling that DCG have excluded themselves from Dash Watch, and it is telling that Dash's senior staff and directors have refused to take a lie detector test. Now, it seems, an independent security audit is also out of the question. You was looking for "core values", well ACCOUNTABILITY might be important.
 

vazaki3

Active Member
Jul 1, 2019
438
163
113
33
apogee.dynu.net
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Problem is not the Dash Core Wallet codebase review in combination with the Dash Platform code base review, you are also talking about Dash Core Group needing to be audited through an independent auditor like Dash Watch.
And you brought that into this poll when you stated that like this :

''independent security audit and code review of both Dash Core and Dash Platform''
Which you later clarified even more by stating in a comment : ''Dash Core Group has repeatedly excluded themselves from Dash Watch reports and has, to my knowledge, never contracted an independent review.''

Which makes this much more then just a security audit and code review for Dash Platform and the Dash Core code base.
You actually want both a security audit and code review on Dash Platform and the Dash Core codebase & you want a budget / security audit on Dash Core Group.
That is a no go in a single poll. It is either the first or the last, not both.

Despite your efforts to obfuscate things, the question is clear:

https://app.dashnexus.org/proposals...ndent-security-audit-and-code-review/overview

"By voting Yes on this proposal, you are signalling to Dash Core that an independent audit should be initiated."

Obviously, the agents who control Dash since the beginning, do not want an independent security audit.

This is a message to all the agents who sabotage Dash. We are watching you!
https://beta.dashwatch.org/
https://mnowatch.org/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GrandMasterDash

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,145
1,242
1,183
It boggles my mind. You'd think a company working within blockchain, cryptography and finance would automatically decide for themselves that perhaps a fresh set of eyes, an independent security audit, might be beneficial. Professionals in the IT space - and especially this space - know that bug bounties and testing is just one element of security. They're not stupid, I mean, why must it take a proposal to take such action? - can they not make such decisions off their own fruition?
 

qwizzie

Well-known Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,781
919
183
It boggles my mind that people these days can just create polls with such a demanding undertone, while not having collected any substantial (and visible to the public) pre-proposal feedback of the community
and giving little attention to the specifics of the poll itself. This is not the first polling proposal with this problem and i am sure it will also not be the last.
Must be the low Dash price causing it. Or impatience. Or both.
 
Last edited:

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,145
1,242
1,183
It boggles my mind that people these days can just create polls with such a demanding undertone, while not having collected any substantial (and visible to the public) pre-proposal feedback of the community
and giving little attention to the specifics of the poll itself. This is not the first polling proposal with this problem and i am sure it will also not be the last.
Must be the low Dash price causing it. Or impatience. Or both.
The inventor of an object can not dictate how it will be used, for the people will decide regardless of the inventor's wish. The harnessing of nuclear fission was not to build bombs that will exterminate all mankind.. but it's possible.

By all means, put in a proposal to raise the proposal fee.
 

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
119
103
@DeepBlue I didn't bother to read beyond the first few lines. I'm not interested in yours or anyone elses nitpicking. Submit your own proposal, put up or shut up.
The feeling is mutual. It is clear to me that you don't want to listen to others, even when they are providing you will constructive feedback. Then you complain that MNOs "couldn't be bothered" as you put it.

I don't have time for people who don't want to listen, have a closed mind, and take things all too personally when the feedback was aimed at helping the poll to get voted through.

It's clear you want to act on your own within a decentralised environment. Feel free to do as you want in your world. However this is a DAO we make decisions based on consensus and through collaboration. I took the time to give you feedback to help your poll go through but I can see now I'm wasting my time trying to assist. My feedback is shit, irrelevant and nitpicking and designed to make your poll fail of course. Wake up man, we are on the same side! We are trying to support you!

The poll won't get the votes unless you reword it. You cannot see that we are supporting you because you don't want to listen and you seem to believe I, and other MNOs, providing constructive feedback on your poll are against you in some way.

You, you, you there is no place for this type of behaviour in a decentralised organisation. Good luck with your poll.
 
Last edited:

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
119
103
Obviously, the agents who control Dash since the beginning, do not want an independent security audit.
Well I can assure you I don't control DASH, and I've said several times in my posts above ( please read my posts) I actually do want a security audit for the source code. I just don't want it immediately because the code is not ready yet. Doing a code review before the code is actually ready is a complete waste of time and money because bugs and issues will be found before it is ready to be released. This is not nitpicking as @GrandMasterDash is claiming. It is a fact. We should do an independent code review when the code is ready and fully bug checked and ready for a code review.

Why are people asking for an immediate security code review on incomplete code that is not even ready to be released? Someone explain the logic of that when the code is not ready?

Even if we did do a code review immediately, as the poll owner is requesting, we would still have to do another code review again when it's ready to be released. That is why it is a waste of time and money to do it immediately as the poll owner is requesting. But @GrandMasterDash does not want to listen to these comments and the comments of others that are saying the same thing.

I've made comments that would have helped the poll to go through but these comments are falling on dead ears as "nitpicking". Instead of taking our feedback constructively, to assist the poll to go through, @GrandMasterDash appears to have taken it all personally and is interpreted the constructive feedback as an attack on him personally, or nitpicking or whatever. Sorry he has to take it that way. It is clear he has his mind made up about everyone's motive that is trying to help the poll to go through. He is not open to constructive comments to help his poll go through. So all I can say is Good Luck GrandMasterDash with your poll!

Oh, and if DASH gets hacked because this poll does not go through @GrandMasterDash is responsible because you did not post an effective poll that could have been voted through.
 
Last edited:

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,145
1,242
1,183
Why are people asking for an immediate security code review on incomplete code that is not even ready to be released?
There's a lot of new code already running on the mainnet masternode network. Usernames and the DAPI are a part of Dash Platform, on evonet and scheduled for mainnet this year. Most, if not all the DIPs are complete, the blueprints from which Dash Platform is built. Dash Platform will go live using third party tools outside of Dash Core's control. The Microsoft virtual machine / JIT compiler was instigated when Dash Core realized there was security issues without it, so now this third party machine becomes the new threat i.e. security has been shifted to an external entity. Not your code, not your masternode.

The wording of the proposal is one thing, for sure, not to your standard and didn't receive your royal approval, but the message is clear. Security is everything and it shouldn't require a proposal - written poorly or not - for DCG to act. Formal independent audits are quite normal within this space, and why wouldn't it be when you're dealing with blockchain, cryptography and finance? If you had never seen my proposal, and if DCG had submitted a proposal for an independent audit, would you of voted for it? - I think so. So yes, I'm sorry to say, you're nitpicking.

I don't care if the proposal fails as I have an exit strategy... but fail or not, ridicule or not, I simply hope DCG does the right thing.
 

rion

Member
Aug 26, 2016
54
52
58
I read the post, but I didn't read all the comments, so forgive me if this was already discussed there.

How would we "agree" on the core values of Dash in a practical sense?
  • Would somebody propose a list to be voted on by MNOs?
  • Would we assume the normal 10% supermajority constitutes "agreement"?
  • Would we assume that anyone who still maintained an MN after a list was approved "agreed" to the values?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhkien

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
119
103
How would we "agree" on the core values of Dash in a practical sense?
  • Would somebody propose a list to be voted on by MNOs?
  • Would we assume the normal 10% supermajority constitutes "agreement"?
  • Would we assume that anyone who still maintained an MN after a list was approved "agreed" to the values?
There would need to be a new type of decentralized decision making system developed. This would be a new custom-made voting system for making governance decisions that are not associated with project funding requests. Currently decisions are being made through the Governance centre however this is not really designed for making such decisions - it is more for voting in projects. The new system would be low cost to put forward a suggestion for voting and only MNOs could vote. Since the MNO would need 1000 DASH this would act as a strong barrier to spammers and trolls that are not part of the Dash community. The reason we currently need a relatively high fee of 5 Dash is for putting forward a project or a decision in the current governance system is because anyone can put forward a proposal - including non MNOs.

MNOs could put forward a value for suggestion with their reasoning for that particular value. A discussion would take place on the pros, cons and reasons why this value is/is not important for the network then a vote would take place if the Value would be regarded as a core value and entered into the Dash Decentralization Charter or not.

The new voting system would also be useful for making other governance decisions. If only MNOs were permitted to use the new system then there would be no need to have the 5 Dash payment fee but rather a smaller fee e.g. $10 in Dash which would go towards the upkeep of the decentralized voting system. Therefore to enter a new decision the poster would need to have a MNO (1000 dash) preferably held for at least 3 months or more (this is to prevent the likes of Monero infiltrators spinning up a MNO to attack the system and then sell it off once they have done their damage). It also ensures that the people contributing to the decision making system are long term holders of Dash that have a vested interest in supporting Dash for the long run.

I have spent some time to think through most of the components for this decentralized decision making system as well as how it would operate however at this stage I do not wish to disclose the specific details.

We clearly need a simple, low cost and efficient way to make everyday Governance decisions that are not associated with funding projects. The current governance system is not suitable as we have seen many times previously where it is ambiguous as to how the vote should be made to come to the correct decision. There are many examples of this including the recent decision votes for modifying the Governance system. I was involved in research for many years and one discipline that was drilled in was that you should only change one factor at a time to decide if something will work. To change more than one factor will lead to confusion into determining what the actual outcome was down to not only this it is then unclear what people have actually voted for even if there 2nd stage vote is for determining the budget size. This occurred in the recent vote for changing the governance system. Ryan Taylor's explanation of changing 2 factors at the same time was necessary in the first round of votes does not make much sense or is in fact the explanation Ryan gave is not even a logical one. It is not logical because we don't know exactly what the Dao was voting for and therefore we don't know what the outcome was because 2 factors were changed. Some may have been voting for one thing, the others may be voting for another aspect and others may be voting against both. The correct way to have done the vote would have been to change just one factor and get the decision clear on just one component first with the understanding. Ryan's explanation that people would not have voted if 2 factors were changed simultaneously simply does not make sense because it is confusing as to what people would have actually voted on in the first round.

The new decision voting system I have in mind would be designed to minimise such issues from arising. In that multiple options could all be posted simultaneously. In reality clear decisions are made from deciding between two options and then choosing which option is best. Then taking that option and comparing against another option then making a decision about that. Only one factor should be changed at any one time. Confusion and unclear results will inevitably happen when more than one factor is changed at one time.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,145
1,242
1,183
HI, Is there any dash product using a closed source virtual machine?
I'm not sure but, in general, even if it's open source, special care needs to be taken with third-party code. It bothers me that the security of so many projects are dependent on VMs.
 

echovid

New Member
Aug 5, 2021
3
2
3
31
there are many ways to sort and define the five cornerstone values: integrity, accountability, diligence, perseverance, and, discipline vidmate instasave
 
Last edited: