A Call for tungfa to Heed the Masternodes' Vote

[demo]

The crucial thing is not when the property was created, it's whether it has to do with the reason the person is being paid. Although technically, the MNs can stop funding a project for any reason, whether reasonable or not. Regardless, if the masternodes were to actually defund a project because it failed to obey a request, then they would have to deal with the consequences of that. If the project was still delivering more value than not, even though it did not obey a request, then the MNs would risk losing that value by trying to de-fund it.

This is the exact reason why numerical voting is needed.

In the currect budget system, you have only two binary choices, either fund or de-fund. These binary options cause severe conflicts, because they deal with problems as if they were black (de-fund) or white (fund). But things are often grey.

With numerical voting you have also the posibility to reduce the fund instead of de-fund. If you reduce the fund, then you may lose some value, but not all value is lost. With numerical voting MNs dont risk losing all value at once, because they can choose to reduce the fund instead of de-funding it.

 

[TroyDASH]

This is the exact reason why numerical voting is needed.

In the currect budget system, you have only two binary choices, either fund or de-fund. These binary options cause severe conflicts, because they deal with problems as if they were black (de-fund) or white (fund). But things are often grey.

With numerical voting you have also the posibility to reduce the fund instead of de-fund. If you reduce the fund, then you may lose some value, but not all value is lost. With numerical voting MNs dont risk losing all value at once, because they can choose to reduce the fund instead of de-funding it.

That sounds all great, but in the real world, contractors don't accept uncertain payment amounts. There are real costs associated with doing projects. If I propose a project and I know it's going to cost X amount, then I'm not going to do any of it if I don't get paid at least X. Either the project happens or it doesn't. It doesn't do anyone any good if I get paid 60% of X, I will have just been paid for no reason. This is really not relevant to the OP though

 

[demo]

That sounds all great, but in the real world, contractors don't accept uncertain payment amounts. There are real costs associated with doing projects. If I propose a project and I know it's going to cost X amount, then I'm not going to do any of it if I don't get paid at least X. Either the project happens or it doesn't. It doesn't do anyone any good if I get paid 60% of X, I will have just been paid for no reason. This is really not relevant to the OP though

The amount will not be uncertain, because MNs dont change their mind all together at the same time.
The amount will be rather stable, and it will change only in case something very important happens.

Finnaly it is must more safe for a worker to expect his amount to be reduced, rather than being in danger for the amount to be tottaly de-funded.

 

[TheDashGuy]

Are you guys competing for post count or what?

 

[TroyDASH]

The amount will not be uncertain, because MNs dont change their mind all together at the same time.
The amount will be rather stable, and it will change only in case something very important happens.

Finnaly it is must more safe for a worker to expect his amount to be reduced, rather than being in danger for the amount to be tottaly de-funded.

A contractor won't do work if their costs exceed revenues. There is no point in only reducing some of the payment if it means the project is dead either way.
I would very much like there to be improvements in modifying existing proposal amounts, but it would need to be different from you are suggesting. There would need to be a way for payments to be negotiated, not just sent down from whatever the MNs vote. This is not even considering the feasibility of implementing such a thing. Regardless, thank you for the discussion. I am sure this particular case will work out just fine

 

[demo]

A contractor won't do work if their costs exceed revenues. There is no point in only reducing some of the payment if it means the project is dead either way.
I would very much like there to be improvements in modifying existing proposal amounts, but it would need to be different from you are suggesting. There would need to be a way for payments to be negotiated, not just sent down from whatever the MNs vote. This is not even considering the feasibility of implementing such a thing. Regardless, thank you for the discussion. I am sure this particular case will work out just fine

Yes of course there is need to be a way for payments to be negotiated.
The contractor proposes an amount above which he will start working. The MNs vote on this amount using numbers. If the proposed amount is reached, then the job starts. If not, then either the contractor reduces the asked amount, or he waits for the MNs to change their vote.
This is a negotiation.

 

[halso]

@demo How many dash per month would it take for you to never mention "voting with numbers" again?

If this gets proposed, it will be a landslide YES.

 

[demo]

@demo How many dash per month would it take for you to never mention "voting with numbers" again?

If this gets proposed, it will be a landslide YES.

Masternode owners, in their majority, are a bunch of stupid people.
They deal with meaningless issues (like tungfa's youtube channel) and they dont care about enormously important issues (like the "pork barrel")

Someone has to remind them what the important issues are, and how those important issues can be solved.

 

[Voluntary]

> Masternode owners, in their majority, are a bunch of stupid people.

But voting with numbers would fix all that? Way to be consistent.

 

[demo]

> Masternode owners, in their majority, are a bunch of stupid people.

But voting with numbers would fix all that? Way to be consistent.

I am consistent.

Voting with numbers of course will fix that, because voting with numbers is a method that respects the opinion of the minorities. Minority opinion is respected when we vote with numbers, because in order to extract a result from the vote, the average is used.

So stupidity will be reduced, and the tyranny of the majority will also be reduced, if you decide to vote with numbers.

 

[noobtrader]

“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.”

― Charles Bukowski

 

[TheDashGuy]

“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.”

― Charles Bukowski

Captain Obvious! Where have you been?

 

[noobtrader]

Captain Obvious! Where have you been?

cmon ppl, this thread should be closed already, demo isnt even a MN holder.

 

[Voluntary]

@demo The only way a vote reduces tyranny of the majority is if the majority don't vote.

 

[demo]

Title: De-activate YouTube.com/DarkcoinTV
Owner: amanda_b_johnson
One-time payment: 1 DASH (8 USD)
Completed payments: no payments occurred yet
Payment start/end: 06-07-2016 / 20-08-2016 (added on 11-06-2016)
Please vote within: 21 days
Final voting deadline: in 1 month
Votes: 380 Yes / 166 No
Will be funded: No. This proposal needs additional 168 Yes votes to become funded.


Tungfa admitted that the DarkoinTV channel is not his property. So what are you waiting for? The result is clear, the channel must be de-activated.

I think it is stupid to wait another 21 days, or for another 168 "Yes" to arrive, because those hardcoded numbers (1 month and 548 yes required) are supposed to be there for proposals and budgets, and NOT for things like opinion asking (especially for unimportant opinion asking, like the deactivation of a youtube channel)

So the correct thing to be done is to have a never ending vote (why the vote should expire in 21 days? why not in 20 days, or in 30 days? Who decided that, and especially for what reason? Is there a theory behind, or they are just random numbers? Random numbers are bad, so better have a never ending vote to avoid randomness.)

And at this never ending vote, as long as the YES votes remain more than the NO votes, then the channel should remain de-activated.

Of course tungfa may still disagree, and in that case in order for MNs to force him, they have to take other measures (like voting with numbers and cut an amount from his salary)

 

[aleix]

I think it is stupid to wait another 21 days, or for another 168 "Yes" to arrive, because those hardcoded numbers (1 month and 548 yes required) are supposed to be there for proposals and budgets, and NOT for things like opinion asking (especially for unimportant opinion asking, like the deactivation of a youtube channel)

We have all sorts of profiles in our community, some of us cannot be connected 24/7. We need this month time to be able to connect and read the proposal, to discuss and to think about.

It is being voted, relax. It is not necessary to rush.

best,

 

[demo]

We have all sorts of profiles in our community, some of us cannot be connected 24/7. We need this month time to be able to connect and read the proposal, to discuss and to think about.

It is being voted, relax. It is not necessary to rush.

best,

If it is not necessary to rush then it is necessary to wait.
And if it is not necessary to wait then it is necessary to rush.

The question is this. Wait or Rush?
And who is about to decide that?

Wait or Rush is a very very important decision.
Because it applies to all decisions, and not only to unimportant decisions like the current one.

 

[halso]

@

If it is not necessary to rush, it is necessary to wait.
And if it is not necessary to wait, it is necessary to rush.

The question is this. Wait or Rush?
And who is about to decide that?

Wait or Rush is a very very important decision.
Because it applies to all decisions, and not only to unimportant decisions like the current one.

@demo have you bought your first DASH yet?

 

[demo]

@

@demo have you bought your first DASH yet?

No. Dash is not the currency I dream of. It has no future. So I wont buy it.

Unless the MNs change their opinion about voting with numbers.
In that case I will buy 5 dash in order to put my proposition to the budget.

And if the proposition pass, then I will invest in dash.

 

[halso]

I

No. Dash is not the currency I dream of. It has no future. So I wont buy it.

Unless the MNs change their opinion about voting with numbers.
In that case I will buy 5 dash in order to put my proposition to the budget.

And if the proposition pass, then I will invest in dash.

I believe the guys at Feathercoin are big into voting with numbers and universal dividends. Have you thought of hanging out there for a while?

 

[demo]

I

I believe the guys at Feathercoin are big into voting with numbers and universal dividends. Have you thought of hanging out there for a while?

I dont know them. Thank you for the info. I ll check them out.

 

[BolehVPN]

I really appreciate @amanda_b_johnson 's work. I also really appreciate @tungfa 's work and I think this could have been sorted out privately. Was there a reason why this wasn't done? I think as previously mentioned @tungfa gave access to the YT channel and I really don't think he's hoarding it.

Calling a masternode vote on it, I'm generally okay with it as a decision making mechanism, but I think the main thing is the way the whole thing was worded:

"A Call for tungfa to Heed the Masternodes' Vote"
Implying that he isn't open to discussion at all and that the vote is final (it isn't and in fact I changed my mind after seeing Tungfa's point of view).

Network employee tungfa created YouTube.com/DashOrg because the original (DarkcoinTV) had copyright violations against it, and he believed it was in jeopardy. This strategy, though noble in its intent, is unfortunately foolish from any kind of marketing perspective, because it:​

The first step in having a meaningful discussion is to not to use such emotive language and not to demonize the person you're trying to convince. @amanda_b_johnson has good points as does @tungfa but it does seem that this has gone into painting @tungfa in a very negative light which is wholly unnecessary unless he was already totally uncooperative (which doesn't seem to be the case?). The whole Slack talk was also downright disrespectful and unnecessary. The Dash Chat slack has so much going for it and is an awesome asset to the community, if you have a grievance that is more against the man than the policy, then that should be taken privately and not in a public slack channel which reflects badly on the community as a whole.

Also, we have a troll, the best way to deal with them is to ignore them.

 

[rustycase]

It was un-warranted to ..paint tungfa in a negative light..
Quite blatant when it was disclosed the vote has yet to be decided.
tungfa is an invaluable asset to the DASH community and I expect his performance shall indeed be in line with the MN vote.

Amanda B. Johnson would be a valuable spokesperson for DASH !
She is attractive, makes a strong, positive presentation, and informative, yet has never been bashful about declaring her lack of familiarity regarding certain subjects... She actively seeks more information and is a fast learner !

Her personality is most definitely 'high energy' ! ...and reactive !! IMO, this is most likely why the unsuitable wording was used when expressing herself.
This, is why a 'project manager' should oversee all presentation under the DASH banner... to review content.
It's awkward to say, "I mis-spoke.", once a recording has been presented to the public.

As an example, over the years, we have watched any number of hours of 'bloopers' which are quite entertaining !

Best
rc

 

[TheDashGuy]

Can you guys literally just stop posting in this thread? Kthx.

 

[Dunedoo]

The past is history and should not be removed, just like the block chain. Leave it there imo. We start deleting stuff and the trolls will come out "look there deleting because blah blah blah"

 

[eduffield]

An Update About Youtube

We'd like to update the community about our youtube account issues. We've found it was caused by a communication issue between various parties within the core-team and outside the core team. To fix communication issues in the future such as this one, we will be adding a best practice to disagreements between community members.

Here are the correct steps to follow when seeking an agreement between parties:

1.) The parties in question should seek each other out directly and attempt to find common ground and resolve the issue.
2.) If no solution can be found to the issue, an arbitration request should be opened internally to allow the issue to be talked with those from the core-team.
3.) If 1 and 2 fail, the issue should be raised to the masternode network as a governance proposal. After the vote, parties should communicate directly, until the issue is resolved.

In the case of the youtube channel, we have come to an agreement that meets the needs of everyone:

- Move youtube subscribers from the old channel to the new channel over the next few months
- Place a banner at the top of the youtube channel showing this is not the official DASH youtube
- Place a video as the primary video that tells users this channel is shutting down
- Finally retire the channel Jan 1st, 2017

Here's a marked up image of the expected results:

http://i.imgur.com/tI1lei1.png

 

[tungfa]

Tx Evan
all sorted

 

[demo]

- Move youtube subscribers from the old channel to the new channel over the next few months
- Place a banner at the top of the youtube channel showing this is not the official DASH youtube
- Place a video as the primary video that tells users this channel is shutting down
- Finally retire the channel Jan 1st, 2017

Nice proposal, but ...wrong order. It is not elegant to move subscribers before warning them. So moving should be the 3rd step.

1st step- Place a banner at the top of the youtube channel showing this is not the official DASH youtube
2d step- Place a video as the primary video that tells users this channel is shutting down
3d step- Move youtube subscribers from the old channel to the new channel over the next few months
4th step- Finally retire the channel Jan 1st, 2017

As long as I am against the deactivation of the channel, I hope that the subscribers that are not aware, to be awake and vote, in order to save the channel from the doomsday of Jan 1st 2017.

Finnaly lets compare Evan's proposition to amanda's proposition:

If you vote YES, you express a desire to de-active https://YouTube.com/DarkcoinTV,enabling us to move forward with copyright strike-free replica https://YouTube.com/DashOrg and give ourselves the best shot at making a good impression on potential customers

If you vote NO, you express a desire to leave https://YouTube.com/DarkcoinTV visible and searchable, knowing that at any point in the future, potential Dash customers may land upon it and wonder what the hell they're looking at – maybe they should try Ethereum, instead? They have just one channel, and it's not confusing.

Amanda does not define the deactivation time, so it is assumed that the deactivation is immediate, after the end of the poll. In the absense of the OTHER option, the voters were trapped. So it is wise to add the OTHER option in the voting procedure. What was the OTHER vote? It was evan's vote. Evan had anOTHER proposition to make, that was neither into the amanda's YES nor into the amanda's NO.

And if we want to be tottaly correct, as long as the proposition of Evan and the proposition of Αmanda have identical subjects, they should be voted side by side, the result of the one should depend on the result of the other, and both polls should be merged. The rule is absolute. Polls that have similar subjects, they should be merged.

This means that everyone should be informed about the existence of similar, alternative, competing propositions-polls, and you should allow votes to migrate from one proposition-poll to the other. So you need yet another functionality, the undo vote. So that people will be able to undo their yes/no vote from amanda's proposition, and vote Evan's, in order for Evan's proposition to receive more yes than Αmanda's, and that way become the winner proposition.

 

[TroyDASH]

An Update About Youtube

We'd like to update the community about our youtube account issues. We've found it was caused by a communication issue between various parties within the core-team and outside the core team. To fix communication issues in the future such as this one, we will be adding a best practice to disagreements between community members.

Here are the correct steps to follow when seeking an agreement between parties:

1.) The parties in question should seek each other out directly and attempt to find common ground and resolve the issue.
2.) If no solution can be found to the issue, an arbitration request should be opened internally to allow the issue to be talked with those from the core-team.
3.) If 1 and 2 fail, the issue should be raised to the masternode network as a governance proposal. After the vote, parties should communicate directly, until the issue is resolved.

In the case of the youtube channel, we have come to an agreement that meets the needs of everyone:

- Move youtube subscribers from the old channel to the new channel over the next few months
- Place a banner at the top of the youtube channel showing this is not the official DASH youtube
- Place a video as the primary video that tells users this channel is shutting down
- Finally retire the channel Jan 1st, 2017

Here's a marked up image of the expected results:

http://i.imgur.com/tI1lei1.png

Thank you @eduffield! I am glad to see this matter has been resolved. Sometimes as a decentralized project, our people both inside and outside the core team have a tendency to just 'wing it' rather than follow/outline even the most basic procedure, but given the recent difficulties we have had with communication, this will help. How does an arbitration request get initiated -- is the core team member who is directly involved expected to initiate it internally, or is there a designated person that any arbitration requests from the outside be directed to?

Thanks

 

[rustycase]

I did notice that key word, 'internally' ...
rc