Will there be another cycle soon? I am advising new Latam organizations that are not quite ready for the treasury but are beyond the DFN meetup prizes, and want to set their expectations appropriately.
We will do everything we can do get another cycle up as soon as possible. But if we will have the funds to, I do not yet know.Will there be another cycle soon? I am advising new Latam organizations that are not quite ready for the treasury but are beyond the DFN meetup prizes, and want to set their expectations appropriately.
We could put out a call for seed projects. Package them up nicely for a treasury request together with your request for funds, show all of the options MNOs will have to choose from.We are looking into it, but since the treasury is so tight, we are unsure how it would go.
Yes, it would be wise to do that, integration is important and i like what Dash force News Meetup it's doing about it. Here in Cancun Mexico we need to start the education and adoption, i was planning to put an proposal for Boost for education and adoption in Cancun and Playa del Carmen because in deed we need it.Just some thoughts:
I dont want to be stingy but Is there a way to limit "Meet Up" (aka Marketing) Proposals to a certain amount?
Prioritize a category like "integration" for more Dash?
Would love to hear what others think about this!
"Intergration" is great, but the "Meet up" category cannot be considered as only marketing.I dont want to be stingy but Is there a way to limit "Meet Up" (aka Marketing) Proposals to a certain amount? Prioritize a category like "integration" for more Dash?
So a new cycle began, which offers 60 dash. Unfortunately the proposal fee remains extremely high. For a total budget of 60 dash, 1 dash proposal fee is huge!!!
The veritas team said:But I, I am not even asking to give voting power to all actors. I am just asking the opinion of all the actors to be recorded. So that , after some period of time, every objective observer could take the voting statistics , could watch what the bad and what the good decisions were, and thus discover scientifically what is the optimum electorate for the community. You should not be based to the blind faith of the core team, which decided what the electorate should be without an obvious or a scientific reason. Do the core team, do the masternodes have the braveness to accept science rather than blind faulty faith? Do they?it would be better to give some level of voting power to all participants in the system according to their stake in that system.
I highly disagree, if someone cannot afford, or find someone to sponsor, a one dash fee then it is clear the project is not a good one anyway. This fee is a necessary anti-spam feature in order to protect the platform.Unfortunately the proposal fee remains extremely high.
Governance proposals will not be added, as DashBoost is not a mechanism which is able to achieve decentralized consensus in a trustless manner. All operations such as governance proposals must be submitted through the treasury as that is the mechanism in Dash which allows the DAO to make decisions.
Why are you doing this?Deleted some ad hominems and speculation as fact. Please be aware that this is not permitted on the Dash Forum.
I see nothing wrong with this post. Your questions are not being censored. You violated Dash Nation rules when you insulted @Pasta’s character (ad hominem) and made assumptions about his intentions (speculation as fact). Debate facts, not the character of the person you’re talking with. Stay within the rules posted, and you’ll have no issue with me.Why are you doing this?
Why you misinterpreting your own ruiles?
Where was the "speculation as fact" and the "ad hominen" in my post?
I repeat my questions to @Pasta
1) Will you allow adaptive proposal fees?
2) Will you allow low or zero fee governance proposals that deal with dashboost itself?
The one dash fee is what was agreed to by the MN network, in addition, I see no instance where a fee lower than $250 is beneficial for legitimate projects which are large enough to deserve funding. Any project which cannot crowdfund a one dash fee is clearly not good enough anyway to be of any substance.
As DashBoost is a treasury funded entity, any attempt to mandate a change must be approved by the MN network, in line with how our network has always worked.2) Will you allow low or zero fee governance proposals that deal with dashboost itself?
So all the Dashboost internal governance decisions should depend on the MN network and should ask permission by the MN network? Do you claim this as a general rule? Do you claim that for any project that has been funded by the Masternodes, whenever an internal governance decision should be taken in this project, this also requires an approval by the MN network? And all these internal governance decisions by all these funded projects should pay the 5 dash proposal fee in the dash budget system, whenever they want to internally decide something? What are you talking about?As DashBoost is a treasury funded entity, any attempt to mandate a change must be approved by the MN network, in line with how our network has always worked.
So you dont want to take into account the dashboost voters, when you are about to decide about dashboost. This is you answer, as far as I understand it. No internal governance decisions are allowed in dashboost.Well now, either you read my comment too hastily or you are attempting to put words in my mouth. I did not state that "all the Dashboost internal governance decisions should depend on the MN network." Instead I stated "any attempt to mandate a change must be approved by the MN network." In other words, our team acts autonomously and makes internal decisions that it deems appropriate, and in the case the community does not agree with one of our decisions or wants us to make a change we don't see as needed or beneficial(as you are doing here) then the MN network must approve it.
We at DashBoost will do what we believe to be in the best interest of the network in all ways. If you want to try and override our decision and/or opinion that a variable/reduced fee (or any other change) would not be beneficial, the obligation is on you to get a proposal passed which outlines the change.
Asking a closed team (a cabal) for changes rarely works.Yes, if you want to change something, suggest it to the team. We can debate its merit and come to a decision, if you disagree with the decision then you can put it to a MN vote.
If you want to 'fire' us then put in the proposal. If you want to tell us to allow governance proposals in DashBoost, put in a proposal to the MNs.Fire the core team. Fire the cabal. Let the community decide.
I dont care to fire you. You should care to fire yourself, if you want dashboost to boost.If you want to 'fire' us then put in the proposal. If you want to tell us to allow governance proposals in DashBoost, put in a proposal to the MNs.
The people have the power to mandate a change if they see fit.