09: Decentralized Decision Making: Proactively Building Dash Decentralization

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
09: Decentralized Decision Making: Proactively Building and Protecting Dash Decentralization

"“The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.” Albert Einstein

14/02/2021 Please note I have edited this post to remove mention of Mark Mason of Dashnewsroom because I had inaccurately stated he was part of the DIF. My sincerely apologies to Mark for my error.


History has shown time and time again, with all but a very few exceptions, (Gandhi being one), that people in power strive for more power. This is unfortunately built into human nature and described in Darwinian evolution. It is an immutable law of nature that the strongest will survive. People in a position of power know that they could lose that power at any time. Therefore, in order to secure their position in power, they strive for more power.

If the Dash community does not take proactive steps now to build and protect Dash decentralization then it will be taken away from us piece by piece by those that have the most power in the project. This will continue until there will eventually be a point when we can never claim it back again. It has already stated to happen in my opinion.

Power is becoming centralized in Dash and we must stop this now. Here is a breakdown of current essential activities for the network:

1. DCG headed by Ryan Taylor has a monopoly on building the Dash code. DCG management also took responsibility for marketing and PR - I think the results in that area speak for themselves. Code great (although 3 years late) however we could do with more decentralized dev teams.

2. DCG marketing - again Ryan Taylor has an strong influence in this area. It is also noted that the DCG management marketing has not been successful, leaving Dash practically unknow for its world-class blockchain innovations which means people will not buy into Dash because they simply don't know about our innovations. Marketing / PR and awareness of DASH innovations - just one word sums up DCG marketing: CRAP.

Ryan Taylor has an MBA from Colombia university he also has a background in traditional finance. MBAs are basically advanced accountancy degree based primarily on theory and case studies - not real world experience. The problem with MBAs is they inevitably fall back on their training when making decisions instead of falling back on real world experience of running a business funded by their own money, sweat and tears. The problem with this is theory does not cut it in the real world however MBAs tend to think that it does..

Here is what Elon Musk has to say about MBAs



I agree with Elon Musk's points of view. I have always strived to encourage DASH projects to focus on treasury proposals that improve the actual Dash product and have actual practical applications for Dash as a viable functional payment system in the countries of the world where dash can be used as a feasible payment system. These include Venezuela, Argentina, Africa, Turkey all of which have serious hyperinflation problems.

In addition cryptocurrency is classified as "property" in the USA. This means that if a DASH user spends their DASH in the USA they would have to calculate the appreciation in value of each purchase and pay capital gains tax on every single purchase with Dash. So good luck if you want to buy coffee with Dash in the USA. It is not practical to use Dash to pay for services in the USA due to these tax issues. I raised this concern in the DIF funding proposal after I found out that the DIF had made a decision to invest in Craypay without getting network approval but I received no reply from the DIF on my comments about Tax. You can check this out here:


I'm still waiting for an intelligent answer from the Ryan Taylor or any DIF supervisor on the tax concerns I raised but so far no replies. Note that if the MNO network had been given an opportunity to comment on the proposed investment in Craypay this comment would have been raised but we were not given this opportunity.

Therefore I'm asking again directly to Ryan Taylor @babygiraffe, who holds an MBA and therefore should know the answer, to explain exactly how a Dash user can legally buy goods with Dash in the USA and not account for capital gains tax on every single Dash expenditure? If Ryan Taylor stays silent and does not answer this question then it calls into doubt his ability to make sound business decisions.


3. Legal - again DCG headed by Ryan Taylor

The problem here is that Ryan Taylor has major influence in all of the above crucial areas of Dash. Ryan Taylor has proven not to have much business sense even though he has an MBA. Evidence of this was his backing of KuvaCash - which I stated right from the beginning was not a good project to back - they even spent valuable time helping Kuvacash integrate their app - which is now using Bitcoin and not Dash. Ryan Taylor's decision to claim 55,000 USD for an office space at Arizona state University. This funding went through not just once but several times. A trusted member of the Dash community visited that DCG office multiple times to find it completely empty. Basically DCG using treasury funds on an office that clearly was not being used most of the time.

An MBA is an academic qualification -basically it is an advanced accountancy related degree with no real-world practical experience. I'm not saying that it is completely without value but what I am saying is don't be blinded by qualifications alone.

4. DIF - which includes Ryan Taylor, Darren Tapp and Rodrigo . The DIF recently took it upon themselves to overturn the democratic vote cast by the MNO network in a previous DIF decision / funding vote. The vote was for the DIF to get approval first from the network to make funding. At the time in the proposal that did not pass therefore the MNO network democratically voted that the DIF cannot make investment decisions without a vote from the MNO network.

The DIF is now making autonomous decisions without getting voting approval of the network. i.e. the DIF unilaterally decided to stop asking for approval from the MNO network for obtaining voting approval of proposed investments. See the link below for the DIF declaration on unilateral investment decisions:

https://blog.dashinvests.org/posts/change-of-process/

However a few weeks before the above DIF declaration Darren Tapp of the DIF had posted a public notice stating that the DIF would post a vote proposal to get network approval before investing DIF treasury money. Then 2 weeks later a 180 degree turnaround with the above statement.

Note that the new declaration made by the DIF came about only when Ryan Taylor got involved with the DIF. Ryan Taylor had stated in an early vote at Dashcentral the following. The quotes below are taken from the DIF funding proposal that did not pass:

Ryan wrote this:

" I don't feel that the network should be weighing in on this in the first place. This is not a decision that should be crowdsourced from MNOs... "

A few other quotes from Ryan in the same proposal are below and you can see the match exactly with the current position that the DIF has taken on autonomy on funding decisions.

" I think we either entrust them to do their jobs or we don't. Personally, I will be supporting their decision and evaluating them based on the outcome. "

This following statement also shows Ryan himself confirms he does not have experience in early stage investing.

" This is an early-stage investment, which I have limited experience as an angel / early-stage investor. I have far more experience in Series B+ funding or public markets "

You can look up all Ryan's comments here;

There was an early voting/ funding proposal posted by the DIF at Dashcentral where they combined a funding request with the request to make autonomous investment decisions without getting approval of the network. That vote did not pass with the required 10% clear votes and the DIF subsequently published a statement that they would ensure to get an approval vote from the network going forward before making any investment.

Since the DIF combined a decision vote with a funding request and it did not pass this was a valid vote by the MNO network stating clearly that the DIF cannot make an investment decision without getting approval first from the MNO network. Therefore why is it now that the DIF unilaterally made a 180 degree turn around and posted a statement, without getting an MNO approval vote, that they would take full control of making investment decisions without a vote from the MNO network.

Note that new decision to invest without approval of the MNO network coincides with what Ryan Taylor had stated previously as shown on the quotes given above. The question then arises why would Darren Tap publish a statement that the DIF would get approval of the MNO network to get a vote and then a few weeks later change that to not getting a vote from the MNO network?

It is noted that DCG headed by Ryan Taylor paid a substantial amount of money to Arizona state university to undertake research on the Dash network on transactions speeds. I believe Darren Tapp, who is also at Arizona State university was involved with that research project. This means that Arizona state university had received funding from DCG to undertake this project - in otherwords a past financial investment.

What therefore could have got Darren Tapp to change his opinion so quickly?

The DIF has now taken on Ryan Taylor's previously published ideas that the DIF should not get a vote from the MNO network. It seems clear that Ryan's influence has taken over the DIF and in effect the DIF is now under the control of Ryan Taylor.

I have to say that I'm disappointed with Rodrigo from Dash Brazil in going ahead with voting for no MNO vote. This shows to me that either Rodrigo does not value decentralized decision making, or he was overpowered by the influence by Ryan Taylor. I'm hoping it was the later. Anyone that does not value decentralized decision making in my book should not be funded by the network as it is a core value of Dash. Therefore going forward I will not be voting for Rodrigo at Dash Brazil. If Rodrigo thinks again and changes his opinion then I will re-consider my votes going forward.

In addition I will not vote for DCG funding proposals because it is also clear that Ryan Taylor does not believe in Decentralized decision making by voting to take away MNO voter approval for DIF funding.

If the DIF changes it's position and makes a public and irrevocable statement that they will again give MNOs voting right on investments then I will reconsider my voting for these projects however I do not support individuals that do not hold the value of decentralized decision making in all of their activities with the network.

Decentralization values have to be fought for. I, for one am getting really tired of MNOs sitting quietly and passively voting in DCG projects without standing up for the values rights of the network. This is apathy to the "nth" degree and will eventually result in Dash losing its power as a decentralized project.

We must vote against any decisions where decentralization decision making is removed. This is absolutely critical. If MNOs keep passively letting these issues go by where decentralization is taken away piece by piece one day you will have DASH as a centralized project. We must nip these issues in the bud now. All it takes is for MNOs to vote accordingly. Just one month of non funding of these projects is enough to send the message to the DCG and other community members that we value decentralized management above all else.

Therefore for the current voting cycle I'm voting no to the DIF, No to DCG, No to Dash Brazil. The reason I'm doing this is as a vote of objection against these members of these projects that do not uphold the values of the DAO and decentralized decision making. If you value Dash as a Decentralized project I encourage you to do the same. Vote NO to these projects until the DIF changes to restore back the democratically elected vote by the MNO network for the DIF to get MNO voting approval for any investment.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vampyren

vampyren

New Member
Feb 1, 2021
12
10
3
33
Wao i was not aware of this. If true (that Ryan dont think fund should be voted on) then i dont think Ryan is the right man for the job.
Whats the meaning of a DAO if some decisions (financial ones which are very important) are going behind the network.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepBlue

Mark Mason

Well-known Member
Feb 24, 2017
1,683
549
183
newsroom.dash.org
This is slander and inaccurate. It's based on zero substance with no supporting evidence.

Please do not pass speculation as fact.

To be clear I'm not a DIF Supervisor.

There is a DIF proposal up now that clearly details who the DIF Supervisors are:

Hytham Adbel-Karim
Rodrigo Ambrissi
Michael Lewis
Darren Tapp
Ryan Taylor

I'm not on that list.

This is complete sabotage.

I can only conclude that your intentionally trying to damage my good reputation by spreading lies or very misinformed.

I would like an apology.
 

Hilawe

New Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 24, 2017
8
7
3
Deepblue: I don't know what's going on in your IRL nor is it my business, but it is the network's business to call out unhinged behavior like this, especially when it's used slanderously against a highly reputable and productive member like Mark Mason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark Mason

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
This is slander and inaccurate. It's based on zero substance with no supporting evidence.

Please do not pass speculation as fact.

To be clear I'm not a DIF Supervisor.

There is a DIF proposal up now that clearly details who the DIF Supervisors are:

Hytham Adbel-Karim
Rodrigo Ambrissi
Michael Lewis
Darren Tapp
Ryan Taylor

I'm not on that list.

This is complete sabotage.

I can only conclude that your intentionally trying to damage my good reputation by spreading lies or very misinformed.

I would like an apology.

Hello Mark, my sincere apologies, I was going off memory. I have deleted my comments with respect to your involvement with the DIF and put a full apology in bold at the top of my article. In addition I have changed my vote from NO to YES on your proposal. Thanks for raising this to my attention and once again I offer my sincere apologies without reservation.

My comments regarding Ryan Taylor and other DIF members however stand.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mark Mason

Mark Mason

Well-known Member
Feb 24, 2017
1,683
549
183
newsroom.dash.org
Hello Mark, my sincere apologies, I was going off memory. I have deleted my comments with respect to your involvement with the DIF and put a full apology in bold at the top of my article. In addition I have changed my vote from NO to YES on your proposal. Thanks for raising this to my attention and once again I offer my sincere apologies without reservation.

My comments regarding Ryan Taylor and other DIF members however stand.
Thank you. Apology accepted.
 

Geert

Member
Aug 26, 2015
226
64
88
DeepBlue, your Jihad against Ryan Taylor is getting tiresome. It brings to mind a famous quote...

"When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him." -- Jonathan Swift
 

awesomedash

Member
Feb 5, 2021
44
20
48
Hi @DeepBlue,

I disagree with your approach and tone. There is no value in personal attacks. Please stop that! Instead let's ensure that we have a better structure in place for improving the high-level decision making and holding leads accountable. Here is the ref issue for addressing this problem and currently there are a few MNOs are working on a proposal. If you are interested please join and help.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: qwizzie

Darren

Active Member
Aug 3, 2016
167
128
103
New Hampshire
www.darrentapp.com
Anyone reading this should check with their accountant, but I believe that CrayPay saves on taxes too. Say I have 1 DASH I bought forever ago at $5. I then want to buy $50 of items at CVS. Assume the Dash price is $250 for discussion.

1. Before CrayPay I might sell .2 Dash for $50. Then I would purchase the the item.
2. After CrayPay, CrayPay will secure a discount for me so I pay $48 (In fact I think the savings will be greater).

So in scenario 1 there is $0 of savings and a Capital Gain of $49 to report
In scenario 2 there is a $2 savings and a long term capital gain of $47.04 to report

It's not clear what you're suggesting @DeepBlue . Would you rater

1. People not have capital gains?
2. People not use Dash as digital cash?
3. People use a very centralized payment processor like VISA.

The Dash/CrayPay solution does not rely on VISA or MasterCard.

When I moved to New Hampshire I met this fellow who identified as a voluntarist. He also had a personal view against the social voluntary norm of tipping. He spent so long railing against tipping that it was not really clear what he was doing to oppose coercion in society. I guess the DIF does not pass your rigorous conception of what a decentralized project looks like @DeepBlue . But are you going to support your idea of what a decentralized project should look like to the point of driving people to use centralized services like VISA and MasterCard?

Separate thought process in next post.
 

Darren

Active Member
Aug 3, 2016
167
128
103
New Hampshire
www.darrentapp.com
The argument by @DeepBlue against Ryan is very shallow being based on degrees. You also invoke an argument from authority about MBAs (and not directly related to Ryan)

@DeepBlue can you disclose which degrees you have that make you so relevant? Please link to a third party site.

By your own argument from authority logical fallacy I'm a higher authority that Elon Musk as he just has a BS in Physics and a BS in Economics. I have a BS in Physics, BS in Mathematics, MA in mathematics, and Ph.D. in Mathematics.

The fact that you care so much about Ryan's degree but discount my degrees is another example of a logical falicy. This one is called confirmation bias.

It is your job to check the logic of what you write. If you spew nonsense don't be offended if people don't respond.
 

Darren

Active Member
Aug 3, 2016
167
128
103
New Hampshire
www.darrentapp.com
Oh the fact I invoked degrees is an example of reductio ad absurdum. I assume your premise and make an absurd conclusion (In this case the absurd conclusion is that everything I say is right because I am a higher authority because degrees are important).

Since your premise implies an absurd conclusion, your premise must be wrong.

In more formal math settings this is called a proof by contradiction.
 

DASHISGOOD

New Member
Sep 30, 2020
9
2
3
34
Criticism is a kind of progress. If no one dares to criticize, it will be terrible. The price trend of DASH in recent years shows the team's deficiency (either attitude or ability). I support the discussion
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepBlue

Lttrickson

New Member
Jun 2, 2017
6
1
1
32
Agree. Although I don't talk about price, it is no responsibility or domain of media/marketing. None of the team behind the project should be responsible for or shill the price.
 

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
@DarrenT, I'm going to focus on one specific topic at a time because you've avoided the most important point I raised in my forum post. I will address all your points mentioned once you address this point I am making here. That is that the DIF have gone against a democratic decision polling vote by the MNO network. The network voted that the DIF cannot make an investment without first getting approval from the MNO network with a polling vote.

I encourage every MNO to visit the following page that shows the polling vote. You need to click the button that says "Show full description" because the DIF put the poll below the button - which is therefore not visible if you don't click on it. (I have created a screenshot of this polling vote)


I am copying and pasting the exact text from the MNO network polling vote here:

=================================================================================
"IMPORTANT: Material change request

After much internal discussion between the DIF supervisors we believe it’s in the DIF and the Dash network’s best interests to request a change to the current agreement that we submit decision proposals to the MNOs for approval on any investments, the requested change is to remove this requirement going forwards. In exchange for the proposed increase in autonomy, we propose an increased transparency of decision-making down to the individual level. In this way, the MN network can have further insight into each individual supervisor's thought processes, contributions and performance.

By voting Yes or No to this proposal you will also be voting on whether you agree to this change or not."
====================================================================================

The polling vote was NOT voted through in favor of what the DIF wanted which was to make decisions without network approval. Therefore the DIF are obliged to post a decision vote to the network before they can make any investment. That is what was agreed by the Decentralization MNO network.

However the DIF have disregarded this polling vote and made an investment *without* getting Network approval via a polling vote by the network. Therefore the DIF have gone against what the network voted for in a democratic vote. The polling vote is still valid and was a democratically voted decision by the network. It was a decentralized decision. We are a decentralized project - right? This vote *cannot* be overturned without getting a separate polling vote that overrides it. Therefore Darren can you provide the network with a link to a polling vote that overrides the polling vote shown above.

Note that the DIF is now behaving in line with what Ryan Taylor wanted but did not get. Ryan's comments are as follows:

"" I don't feel that the network should be weighing in on this in the first place. This is not a decision that should be crowdsourced from MNOs... "

Here is the link where Ryan posted these comments:

Dash is a decentralized project. We have previously voted that the DIF cannot make an investment without approval. The DIF needs to adhere to what the network voted on. PERIOD to do anything other than this undermines DASH as a decentralized project.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vampyren

forro

Member
Apr 13, 2019
93
29
68
I agree that the DIF should be approaching the MNOs before signing any contracts or spending money.

I agree that power tends to want to preserve and expand its power, that the people must remain ever vigilant, and that voter apathy helps those in power to stay there. I believe MNO apathy is the greatest problem in Dash and that is why I am solely focused on solving it.

Only by solving MNO apathy can the MNOs rally the numbers required to exert their will. Only by more directly incentivizing their participation will anything improve.

I believe we can cure MNO apathy with direct incentives to participate in the treasury voting process. What I want to do will help accomplish what you want to see.

While I am frequently unhappy with Ryan's general lack of communication, I find myself generally supportive of him once he does make an appearance and shares his point of view. I believe he is well intentioned, but even so, the appearance of concentration of power will have (and maybe already had) a negative effect on how Dash is perceived.

Ryan's recent comments during the Q4 presentation have, as usual, reinvigorated my support for him. If he actually follows through on raising awareness and support for giving leftover funds to MNOs, it will be a clear signal that he is putting the good of the project first, due to the fact as a proposal owner, he will likely face more no votes in the future and will be expected to be more responsive and transparent. However, as politics are a natural part of a CEO's position, lets see if it actually happens, and in a timely manner.

Granting MNOs the leftover funds will surely cure the apathy. Their participation will breathe new life into the treasury. Accountability will improve, and following that, responsiveness, transparency, and effectiveness.

MNO apathy is the root cause to many of Dash's troubles. We must solve the apathy. Direct incentives to participate will do that.
 

qwizzie

Well-known Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,669
809
183
Terrible and slanderish way of doing a 'discussion'.
Making wrong accussations, that then need a formal apology when the accused respond with facts.
Maybe gather facts first before expressing yourself like this on the forum and on Dash Central.

With regards to DIF, i am okay with the DIF making their own decisions about how to allocate the funds they receive. I always got the impression that the DIF would end up doing that at some point anyways, meaning they would initially consult the network a few times to gather some feedback from the network and then do the decisions on how to spend those DIF funds themselves.

Masternode operators just approving or denying funding to the DIF is enough for me. If the DIF is mishandling the funds, then we choose different DIF members. So far i don't have a problem with how the DIF has been allocating its funds. This may change in the future, but not now.

Also i would like to point out that masternode operators do not have the same detailed information as DIF members, with regards to potentially interesting DIF investment opportunities. Hard to make decisions on DIF opportunities for masternode operators, when the DIF members are bound to a NDA agreement and can't fully disclose all information to masternode operators.

With regards to everything else in the first post, it just reads as a personal witch hunt against Ryan Taylor. Which is why i don't even feel a need to reply any further on that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nyk and Darren

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
I'm sorry @DeepBlue .

I don't think you understand.

Both @Mark Mason and I have identified that you are ether lying or not researched well.

I'm dumbfounded as to why you still act as though you deserve respect.

A decent person would be embarrassed.
What I care about most Darren, is that the DASH project remains a decentralized project. To protect you, me and all humanity in the future. That is what I care about. I don't care about respect from you or anyone else.

You have not answered the question I asked. So I am going to repeat again.

There was a polling vote cast that the DIF cannot make investments without MNO approval. The DIF ignored this polling vote and made an investment without getting approval of the dash network. Show evidence Darren that this polling vote has been superseded. If you cannot do that then your comments about me are there to deflect the truth that the DIF is acting unlawfully from what the network

Show evidence Darren that this polling vote was overturned by the network.

MNOs can check out the polling on the link below

You need to click the button that says "Show full description" because the DIF put the poll below the button - which is therefore not visible if you don't click on it. (I have created a screenshot of this polling vote)

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DIF-FUNDING-PROPOSAL-APR-JUN-3MONTHS

The polling vote DID NOT PASS. WHICH MEANS THE DIF HAVE NOT RIGHTS TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT WITHOUT THE MNO NETWORK APPROVAL.
 

awesomedash

Member
Feb 5, 2021
44
20
48
@DeepBlue,

You are objecting about centralized decision making and your solution is more participation from MNOs by voting NO to DCG/DIF proposals in order to send a signal to the leads about MNOs unhappiness.

* I only agree with part of the problem you describe but agree that MNOs participation can be a solution.
Re the problem (centralized decision making), I don't think MNOs should be involved in every decision, it is not practical and does not work. In fact it creates a huge disadvantage for the Dash network because of its inefficiency and ineffectiveness. MNOs do not have the time and knowledge (in most cases are not qualified) for making specific decisions. There are too many of them and an overall common deep strategical thinking is missing. However I do agree that MNOs should keep the power and be able to directly decide about important matters (like treasury ratio updates) and enforce changes in any Dash org whenever necessary. So, I'm also against centralizing power. I don't think it is a big problem though since as long as Dash orgs (DCG, DIF, etc.) are transparent and receive their regular budget from MNOs they should preserve MNOs support. One reason the same people are in DCG and DIF is lack of enough participation form MNOs. They can ask to join DIF, they can introduce new proposals for new orgs or reach out to the trust holders.

* I strongly disagree with the approach and tone. (I mentioned it in the previous post but I'd like to expand on it a bit)
A negative and toxic atmosphere is very harmful to Dash. Ryan, Darren and others in DCG/DIF/etc. are individuals who are passionate about Dash and spend a huge amount of time and effort for its success. Starting these threads, where instead of describing the problem/solution in a neutral way, individuals are attacked in public can have a material negative impact on their motivation, energy, health, etc. and therefore their overall performance. And for what benefit?! It is completely unnecessary. If you are an MNO, you are also responsible to ensure that Dash has and preserves a good thriving culture. This is not just a fancy quality to have. It impacts everything bottom up in a big way. It also impacts Dash credibility. If Dash people cannot behave well with each other how others can trust Dash as their money or payment method.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nyk

qwizzie

Well-known Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,669
809
183
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DIF-FUNDING-PROPOSAL-APR-JUN-3MONTHS
The polling vote DID NOT PASS. WHICH MEANS THE DIF HAVE NOT RIGHTS TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT WITHOUT THE MNO NETWORK APPROVAL.
That was not a polling vote, it was a budget proposal. It was the DIF asking for 500 Dash for three months. I think i voted NO on this specifically because i found the amount too high for three months.

qwizzie - 10 months ago
I decided to vote NO on the funding part of this proposal, as i think the amount per month (500 Dash) is too high, particularly taking into account the 7,1% block reward reduction that will take place within this month.
I also gave this comment :

qwizzie - 10 months ago
Unfortunately this budget proposal has transformed from being just a budget proposal seeking funding, to being both a budget proposal and a polling proposal seeking approval for the included 'Material change request'.

This is awkward to say the least.
As you can see I decided back then to ignore the polling part and just focus on the funding part of the budget proposal.
It really should have been left out of the budget proposal completely and either announced to the Dash community seperately or polled separately.

With regards to material change request :

After much internal discussion between the DIF supervisors we believe it’s in the DIF and the Dash network’s best interests to request a change to the current agreement that we submit decision proposals to the MNOs for approval on any investments, the requested change is to remove this requirement going forwards. In exchange for the proposed increase in autonomy, we propose an increased transparency of decision-making down to the individual level. In this way, the MN network can have further insight into each individual supervisor's thought processes, contributions and performance.
Well, not really a surprise to me. I always figured the DIF would go this way at some point.
They consulted the network a few times, and are now on their own. As i said before it would have been better if they announced this separately, but whats done is done.

When the DIF was created it was not created with the notion that every single decision about how to spend the DIF funds, is suppose to be voted upon by masternode operators. For the first few times yes, but at some point the idea has always been that the DIF would make their own decisions on how to spend the DIF funds. That is how i remember it at least from the early days, when the DIF was introduced to us.
 
Last edited:

Geert

Member
Aug 26, 2015
226
64
88
The polling vote DID NOT PASS. WHICH MEANS THE DIF HAVE NOT RIGHTS TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT WITHOUT THE MNO NETWORK APPROVAL.
You're forgetting one thing DeepBlue. That proposal was created by the previous group of DIF supervisors. The latest DIF funding proposal passed even though the DAO was well aware of the "change in process," and so I would posit that the change in the DAO's attitude towards this question is a reflection of the DAO's high level of confidence in the current supervisors.
 

Hilawe

New Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 24, 2017
8
7
3
Agree. Although I don't talk about price, it is no responsibility or domain of media/marketing. None of the team behind the project should be responsible for or shill the price.
To say this in 2021 means we're still stuck in 2017 mentality when people just found us easily on the market cap rankings (the one a lot of people say are meaningless). Sitting back and waiting for something to happen MNO-style, when it comes to the social media side of marketing, is fatal for the network. It's a "if you build it they will come". You hear more of this when the prices go up. The only bright spot for the network is that Mark gets the external audience. I do think the community needs to do more organically on social media with big thanks to FoxTrot - Fruit Salad Panda for killing it. Mark's actually showing leadership in taking the bull (run) by the horn, no one else will consistently (with few exceptions).
 

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
It's not clear what you're suggesting @DeepBlue . Would you rater

1. People not have capital gains?
2. People not use Dash as digital cash?
3. People use a very centralized payment processor like VISA.

The Dash/CrayPay solution does not rely on VISA or MasterCard.
My point is that using Dash as a form of payment for general (no specialized goods) in the USA, where cryptocurrency is dealt with as property is a non starter, that is, if people spending DASH actually wish to stay within the IRS US Tax law. Under the current US law cryptocurrency is treated as property which means that every transaction, no matter how small, the user would have to calculate if they have to pay capital gains tax on it when they buy something. Bearing in mind the price of Dash is constantly fluctuating on an hour by hour basis and people would need to keep track of when they bought and sold the dash holdings for each hour of each day and calculate the capital gains on every single purchase. If they make a few hundreds purchase on a year that would be a huge amount of work.

It is for this reason it does not make sense to use Dash as form of payment for general goods and services in the USA under the current tax and legal system. Not unless the user is prepared to spend a considerable amount of time doing tax calculations and reporting. This makes the Craypay investment a poor quality investment and a non starter for this reason in my opinion for the reasons given. If Dash users wish to stay within the tax laws of the USA they have a legal obligation to do these tax calculations on every purchase. No such problem of calculating capital gains tax is necessary however when paying with USD, unless that came from the sale of an asset - which under most circumstances is not the case.

This makes USD a better form of payment in the USD over DASH due to the Tax complications involved. Yes, that means using a centralized body to make payments - absolutely correct. But I think most people want to stay within the tax laws or face the very real possibility of heavy fines or possibly even imprisonment for tax evasion.

Capital gains calculations on purchases with Dash is not the case however in many other countries where they either do not charge tax on capital gains or the government themselves have mandated that use of cryptocurrency is classified as cash payments and not property.

What I'm advocating is don't make investments in a country such as the USA where Dash is to be used a cash, because it is not getting treated as Cash. It will be treated as property and cause an nightmare situation in calculating capital gains tax on every purchase, compounded with fluctuating Dash price on a day to day basis.

Dash investments should be made preferentially in countries were tax issues are not incurred.

I don't understand how Craypay can be classed as an intelligent investment due to these tax issues mentioned above. What it can provide is only PR.

The second reason that Craypay in the USA is a poor investment is because Dash holders in the USA are buying Dash primarily as an investment. They don't want to spend their Dash. Why don't they want to spend their Dash - because the USA uses the USD which is the world reserve currency and it works better than Dash for payments. There are no Tax issues and all merchants in the US accept USD. The USD is going down in value which makes it ideal for spending. Dash is going up in value which makes it nonsensical to spend it in the USA - why would people want to spend an appreciating asset? People want to spend depreciating assets, not appreciating ones e.g. the USD.

The places where DASH can be used as a currency are in countries where there is hyperinflation. I've already written several reports on this previously at the forum. Spending money in the USA on payments is nonsensical when were could be spending it where Dash can actually gain traction due to is usefulness e.g. Venezuela, Africa, Turkey etc. It seems the DIF think its a great idea. So, I would be most interested to see the numbers of transactions going through craypay for DASH in the USA. I suspect it would not be very high - if at all. And the members that will be spending their Dash will be people with a lot of Dash e.g. DCG and other libertarians. One solution might be to develop an app that automatically calculated the capital gains on every purchase - however even with this it does not make sense to sell an appreciating asset in the USA.

How could Dash users in the USA spend their Dash without Tax implications or calculating capitcal gains on every purchase?

Disclaimer: The following information is not intended as tax advice. Everyone should get their own tax advice from a specialist tax advisor in their own country. This is only my opinion with the information that I have.

Answer:

If DASH users wanted to spend their appreciating Dash investment what would be a more intelligent and tax efficient way would be to get a secured USD loan on their Dash holdings up to 20% to 30% of their asset holdings. Then they would have no tax to pay on the loan and they would not have to calculate capital gains tax on every purchase. This is the most tax efficient way to spend Dash in the USA. This strategy is exactly what wealthy people do. They buy appreciating assets then finance those assets with a loan of 20% of the assets with a 2 - 5% interest rate. If the underlying asset is increasing considerably more than the interest rate on the loan then they are relatively safe and they pay no tax on the loan and they do not have to do capital gains tax calculations on every purchase with their loan.

Conclusion

Therefore I do not see the logic of the Craypay investment in the USA. It is neither tax efficient nor logical in terms of spending an appreciating asset. The money could have been better spent in a country where Dash is needed as a currency and there are no capital gains tax issues when spending Dash.


If Dash investments were focused on converting just one country to using Dash we would have far greater success with the money. In my opinion the best country for this would be Venezuela because they have passed laws encouraging the use of cryptocurrency as a day to day payment method and the Bolivar is useless as a currency. USD is hard to come, and small denomination purchases are impossible with USD, which leaves leaves the path open to Dash being established there. Once Venezuela is converted to using Dash the other South American countries would be likely to follow because many of them also have problems with their currencies e.g. Argentina.

The DIF undertook the investment without notification to the MNO network and therefore we did not get an opportunity to comment on it.

I would like to see the numbers of monthly DASH translations on the Craypay investment.
 
Last edited:

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
When could Dash be used as a form of payment in the US?
Where Dash could be used as a form of payment is for specialised goods and services which require the blockchain aspects of DASH as well as the payment e.g. with Alt36 and cannabis, or for document registrations etc. These could be justified forms of payment with crypto. However for general goods it is not a good idea unless the purchase was for very large items such as a car or house where the numbers of transactions are small and therefore the tax calculations are not considerable. However lots of small purchases for small denominations in the USA with DASH is not practical on a tax basis as explained in the post above.

I want to clarify what I mean by Alt36 was not a good investment. The idea of Alt36 and DASH was a reasonable idea however the investment was not a good one not because of the quality of the idea. It was the quality of the investment - which includes consideration of other factors such as legislation.

Alt36
If Alt36 could establish a reputable bank to work with them then that project could eventually work out for DASH. If Alt36 could be made to work with a crypto-friendly bank. My concerns about the ALT36 project have always been due to the requirement for legislation to be able to handle crypto payments in the USA and the amount of time we would have to wait for the legislation to change.

Eventually the US should make legislation for ALT36 to accept crypto payments but the question, is when? I do not see the logic of making speculative investments when there are investments that can be made that have much greater certainty of success in a shorter time frame and in a jurisdiction that has more favourable tax laws for crypto. The money invested in Alt36 project could have already lead to other projects being completed successfully e.g. the entire country of Venezuela being converted to using DASH with that amount of money. Alt36 should be able to work with DASH if the legislation changes but we could have done so much more with that money and have those projects successfully completed by now in countries such as Venezuela and that is why I claim that the ALT36 project was not a good investment. Successful projects completed early would have boosted Dash's reputation higher and created more positive PR for DASH as a payment service.

For these reasons I say that the Alt 36 was not a good choice - even if we eventually get Alt36 to work out and it is rolled out across all of the US. We could have had more success earlier with other projects with that amount of money. That is why I say it was a poor investment. No considerations were given to the legislation at the time in the country involved.

In summary: Investments should consider the legislation and tax laws in the country of investment at the time of investment, and not invest in speculative investments where the laws may or may not change.
 
Last edited:

Geert

Member
Aug 26, 2015
226
64
88
You want to wait until America is a failed state with a collapsed currency in order to start marketing Dash here? You might not have to wait long. Also, there are already many people in America who are "unbanked" and many who earn so little they don't need to file a tax return. For those who need to account for their use of crypto, it's not as onerous as you make out. There are software products available that can handle it.
 

awesomedash

Member
Feb 5, 2021
44
20
48
@DeepBlue I appreciate your new approach in the last two posts.

Re "Dash as a form of payment in the US", there are people who are already using Dash for payment in US and willing to use it even more. I think more people will join if the Dash payment option availability increases. Existing US tax laws are an important issue but I don't think that it stops an increasing number of people from using Dash as a form of payment and there is a chance that if more and more people use crypto as a form of payment those laws are revisited. What I'm saying here is not based on data but only random observations.
 

Nyk

New Member
Mar 31, 2017
38
14
8
35
As far as i know the tax laws when referring to payments with crypto in the USA are unclear at best. May be wrong, but I asked a CPA i know personally. This was a few years back.
 

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
As far as i know the tax laws when referring to payments with crypto in the USA are unclear at best. May be wrong, but I asked a CPA i know personally. This was a few years back.

The US tax laws are now clearly laid on on the IRS website. You can review them on the link below. IRS state that cryptocurrency is dealt with as property and that the gain or loss must be accounted for as a capital gain on sale of the coin. Refer to Q4 on the link below.

IRS website Cryptocurrency and taxes:


Bearing in mind that multiple purchases of coins could be made over a period of time further completing the tax calculations. Yes, people in the US can spend their Dash but it if it is not reported correctly they can be tracked down and fined or more. The US is famous for its rigor in collecting taxes. It is one of the few countries in the world that tax citizens on citizenship - meaning even if they have left the country they are subject to US tax law.
 

DeepBlue

Active Member
Feb 2, 2018
158
116
103
You want to wait until America is a failed state with a collapsed currency in order to start marketing Dash here? You might not have to wait long. Also, there are already many people in America who are "unbanked" and many who earn so little they don't need to file a tax return. For those who need to account for their use of crypto, it's not as onerous as you make out. There are software products available that can handle it.
Regarding the unbanked and the USA this is something I definitely agree with. Dash would be useful in that circumstance. Six months ago I had thought of a novel marketing strategy for targeting these people that would at the same time raise good PR for Dash. However, I don't have enough knowledge in the US law regarding accepting payments from the unbanked and how this could be made without getting into legal issues. e.g. In the EU anyone accepting payments from someone else would have to undergo a KYC procedure in order to accept the payment. The marketing concept I had been investigating would also be best implemented after the Dash platform is released because there are features in it that would be required.

I do not wish to disclose details here on this marketing concept because it is novel and nobody in the crypto space is doing this. However I think it could work in the US if the people receiving the Dash could cash out their DASH e.g. ATM machines or some other place where they can buy essential supplies in exchange for Dash.

This is an example where DASH would actually be useful as a currency in a place like the US and this would be a good area to make a financial investment. My previous comment on why Dash is not a good payment system currently is directed for people that are within the US tax system through craypay - not for unbanked people. For people outside of the US tax system then definitely Dash is a good option to be used as a working currency.

If there is anyone within the Dash network that understands the Law regarding sending DASH to individuals and organizations that may be outside of the tax system and what the KYC requirements I would be grateful if they could send me a message so that I can develop this concept further.