I think Dash needs some changes

qwizzie

Grizzled Member
Aug 6, 2014
2,012
1,182
1,183
I consider coinmarketcap rank pretty pointless at this point to evaluate a specific crypto project.

Marketcap is nothing more then Price x Supply. Dash has relatively low circulating supply (10.8 Million Dash) in comparison with other crypto projects, which effects its marketcap calculation formula considerably. In that regard Dash will always have an uphill battle to fight. Also coinmarketcap nowadays includes just about anything : stablecoins, exchange tokens, ICO's, crypto coins, crypto tokens, premined coins, PoS coins, PoW coins, DeFi, NFT and it lists close to 10,000 crypto projects. That site is basically comparing apples with oranges.

What point is having a lower or higher marketcap rank anyways, when the price performance (% down from ATH) is pretty much the same or worse ? (See Bitcoin Cash and Dash)


Source : https://cryptorank.io/

I really don't understand why people are still so focussed on marketcap rank alone, when there are other more usefull metrics to evaluate a crypto project.
 
Last edited:

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,297
1,374
1,183
@kot I wouldn't get so hung up on when code should be released (or not). It just needs to be rock solid reliable and good communications with devs and stakeholders.

As previously said, governance modifications should not be lumped in with other updates, they deserve priority over all other updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AgnewPickens

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,297
1,374
1,183
I mostly agree, marketcap is a really poor indicator of success. I do think, however, it currently serves a key psychological role to your average Joe "investors" / gamblers. The problem, really, is there are few alternative ranks with widespread appeal. Where can we find ranks based on actual real world usage?
 

kot

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Mar 17, 2015
800
2,072
263
@qwizzie , @GrandMasterDash ,

Thanks for your input and opinion.
Despite the fact that I share your opinions, I think we, as a project and community, could not afford ignoring CMC. Mainly for two reasons:
  1. CMC is the first place, where majority of crypto investors, users and press go to verify the project and build their opinion about it. No matter how we hate it, CMC position is a big indicator for all people in crypto. If we ignore that simple fact, market will ignore us.
  2. We are heavily dependent on the price of coin. Only if position is higher, there will be money for development, dapps and new projects in the ecosystem. Higher position is a must imo
 

kot

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Mar 17, 2015
800
2,072
263
When would you have us do the release then? Recall it was 14 months since v0.17, the developers dragged their asses long enough!
The answer is always the same - when the time is right (and in the right place).
How successful you would be launching a new line of surfing boards in the beginning of winter (and advertise it in eg, Zermatt, Switzerland)?
 
Last edited:

Marine

Moderator
Dash Core Group
Apr 26, 2022
34
97
18
33
Thanks for pointing this out, Robert.

I would say that the reason why Dash is 75th is that is that we're acting slow.
The overhyped cryptos on CMC's top are not like that, as they're constantly offering something new, something unusual, be it a new concept or marketing thing.
Among them all Dash is looking sometimes like Steve Buscemi from an old meme.
1661962177953.png


I'm here only a couple of months and not so experienced as you but anyway, I don't think we lost our opportunities. We just need to define our way before the platform goes live.
I'm communicating a lot with podcasters, web3 devs and schools for platform promotion, and other blockchains for integration. Everyone is interested in it, I never met negative reaction on my proposal to cooperate.
We still hold the aces to make it right I think, and plenty of time to build our strategy of platform promotion, once it goes live. Because, it all eventually comes down to its release.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,297
1,374
1,183
@kot I know nothing about surfboards so I searched and found this:

"Remember to try to sell your surfboard in the right season. There will be more interested buyers in Malibu and fish boards during summer and more potential buyers for high-performance sticks during the winter season."
I like your analogy but the only way I see this applying to dash is if we intentionally delay a product release for a planned and coordinated campaign. Nothing wrong with this, but I suggest that certain updates - such as governance - should be released ASAP for reasons of network effect. Take, for example, "one dash proposals". I would argue that this delayed feature has negatively impacted us i.e. we failed to attract more treasury contractors when we needed them most. The feature can still be marketed later - and we may consider the best timing - but I suppose what I'm saying is, there is a balance to be made because of lost opportunities.
 
Last edited:

bigrcanada

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 9, 2014
319
369
233
Penticton, BC
www.dasilvavineyards.com
@qwizzie , @GrandMasterDash ,

Thanks for your input and opinion.
Despite the fact that I share your opinions, I think we, as a project and community, could not afford ignoring CMC. Mainly for two reasons:
  1. CMC is the first place, where majority of crypto investors, users and press go to verify the project and build their opinion about it. No matter how we hate it, CMC position is a big indicator for all people in crypto. If we ignore that simple fact, market will ignore us.
  2. We are heavily dependent on the price of coin. Only if position is higher, there will be money for development, dapps and new projects in the ecosystem. Higher position is a must imo
As mentioned before...we do run the risk of solely focusing on development and not proper marketing. As you are also one of the OG's in this project, in the years you were in DCG, what were the discussions on how to approach this. I'm sure there was frustration with the lack of traction...but there must of been some high level discussions as what could be done to curb the slip DASH suffered.

Moving forward...how do you think this could be best addressed?

Richard
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,876
1,866
1,283
Dear Dash Community Members,

I would like to offer my thoughts about the project direction and possible changes we, as a project and community, should consider. I am not writing this to demand changes but rather offer my point of view and have productive conversation about the project's future.

I think Dash needs some corrections on strategic and operational levels and I would like to present some of my propositions on this matter. I am not going to argue with those who think the direction of the project is correct - this is not my intention.
The intention of this post is to focus on improvements and a better future of the project. This only - no fights, unproductive arguments and finger-pointing.

Few years ago, when Evan was still around, the brilliant idea of Evolution was created. At that time Dash was already a payments-focused project and Evolution was going to be a great supplement for the project's strategy. It was going to be a Venmo-like wallet run on blockchain. Sadly, Evan left the project and other engineers continued his work. Simple solution (wallet with user names and list of friends) grew to the idea of a development platform and DashPay wallet. According to the development teams, it was supposed to take only a few months to develop the platform and wallet, so the management team made a decision to go into that direction, despite possible delays. From the business perspective it was much more attractive and the estimated difference in the delivery time (3-6 months, according to the devs) was insignificant, compared to the possible advantages. It was 2018 - you know the rest very well.

2018 was also a year when the market crashed and DCG had to make many difficult decisions about the budget and headcount. The development teams constantly assured us about the relatively quick delivery time of the platform, management made a decision to focus on technology delivery, and not on other equally important iniatiatives such as marketing, comms, bizdev. All of our efforts and funds were used to retain developers and deliver Evo. This approach has not changed to this day and I consider it to be a mistake. I confess that as a member of senior management I am also guilty that it was kept this way for such a long time.

Crypto industry evolved, markets evolved, communities evolved but Dash remained narrowly focused on Evolution delivery and focused solely on developers and delivering the best possible technology. We can see now that it was not a perfect choice - markets punished us hard for this choice.

In my opinion changes in the current strategy and direction are necessary, if the Dash network wants to survive and thrive. We have always heard from our devs that good tech is going to defend itself and eventually will be recognized by the markets. I think the reality does not support this claim anymore. We have probably the best tech in the industry and despite this, the project is slowly fading (from the market perspective). Much (technologically) weaker projects managed to explode in the space - projects that are still in development, or completely without development, constantly failing (eg. stopped blockchains) are much more recognized and have a much better position in the industry. I think we should stop ignoring markets? and put more focus on what is working for other projects. And follow. Let's not repeat the same mistakes, expecting different outcomes.

It seems like the common thing to successful projects in our space is not a great tech, perfect decentralisation, sophisticated solutions and focus on development but instead:
  1. Focus on promotion and marketing
  2. Consistent, effective and incremental technology development and delivery
  3. Welcoming and enthusiastic communities around the world

So what, in my opinion, could we change?

1. More promotion and marketing
We already have great tech - there is no doubt about it. And almost no one knows about it. I am pretty sure that there is no need to create more new products or more sophisticated tech-oriented solutions. What is needed instead is cheering on what we are having, comparing to the competitors, screaming how good we are, creating videos, memes, messages etc. We have a lot to talk about.

After the expected platform release, I think there will be no necessity to put more money and effort into developing more tech. I think that much better use of the network money would be to spend it on promotion. It doesn't mean that we should stop development - no. I think we should limit money spent on development for a year or two and redirect this money towards promotion and marketing. Existing development teams should not be expanded but focus more on documentation, marketing support and actively participate in the promotion efforts (e.g. by doing videos, samples, tutorials, joining development communities and promoting our tech). Their help will be largely needed to promote the platform in the development community.

Recent changes in DCG communications and growing efforts on the community side created a solid foundation for better promotion. This created a constant flow of Dash-related information, increased visibility of the project and it should be definitely continued.
I think what is missing is a professional marketing campaign, driven by experienced agencies and/or people, who have experience in the field.
Dash needs good promotion and recognition - and there are people out there, who could help us to achieve it. In my opinion we don’t need perfection, we don’t need more experiments with DAO, we don’t need radical transparency, we don’t need more tech etc. We have made many of those experiments and we are pioneers in many things. However, we don’t have to be pioneers in everything and constantly experiment.
Let’s simply use the tools that work. Traditional marketing works.

So what would be my proposition here?
  1. Continue community and DCG efforts in constant flow of messages, communication and promotion. This is a great foundation and starts working well.
  2. When the platform is launched, move developers to promote it in the development community, create videos, visual materials, code samples, tutorials, great docs, articles, participate in conferences and hackathons and engage in discussions with other devs. Just don’t stay hidden in the caves or create more and more features - we don’t need more.
  3. As a supplement for the foundation, from time to time (not constantly) launch campaigns with professional agencies. Good example is Coca-Cola and their summer campaigns. When the time is right - which in our case is a bull market - we should push hard. Agencies from the industry know how to do it - they successfully promoted many projects. Let’s use their experience, hire them and work together. There is no magic in that - one or two experienced PMs could coordinate these efforts. What is needed is money. We could collect the funds earlier - slowly, to not drain the budget, and prepare for the right time.
    What is important is to not do these campaigns during the bear market - it would be a total waste of money.
2. Less focus on tech and developers
Just to be clear - by writing “developers” in this post, I mean all functions within DCG that are responsible for the code: developers, tech leads and CTO.

It is not easy to say but it needs to be said. Simple and straightforward - for a couple of years this project has been kept hostage by developers. And this needs to be changed.

As mentioned above, in 2018 the Dash network and DCG became focused on developers and gave them a lot of power and independence. And since then we were hearing that we need 3-6 months to deliver. We have GREAT developers but we also have problems with developers and the delivery process. It requires changes - the good thing is that those changes are easy to do.

The biggest of our problems is that developers are cheered, almost worshipped, despite not delivering as promised and not kept accountable for that. We have always shielded our devs. As a result, they do whatever they want, without focus on the delivery but with focus on development instead. If you let developers drive the project, they will do what they do the best - they will develop the code (the more sophisticated and geeky, the better) as development is fun for them - but this is not necessarily what the project needs. We need timely delivery, releases and products - not more and more super-complicated code.
This should be acknowledged and changed. We need results and delivery, not development for the sake of developing code.

There were tons of books written about why you should not give developers power to lead the project and product development. I am not going to repeat that - DYOR. Great summary of this is this the tweet from Andreas - it reflects our situation very well:
Just watch the latest 2-3 sprint reviews and you’ll know what I am talking about.

Our efforts should NOT be focused on developing code. Focus should be on delivering products and explaining why these products have value. Value to investors, users and also external developers. Great code is great but this code should serve the purpose of giving value to our users (not just giving fun to developers). And also encourage potential investors to buy Dash. This is really important - don’t ignore the power of the markets.

So I propose to apply the following changes in the delivery process:
  • Delivery excellence should be the key. Keep developers accountable for what they do and what they promise. Make sure they understand the goal of what we are doing (and this goal is not to develop as much code as possible to be clear)
  • Replace those, who don’t deliver like they promised or are unreliable. Accidental failures can be tolerated, constant failures and broken promises not.
  • Let other people do what they should do and let them control developers. We have other people, who could improve the delivery process a lot - let them work and not interfere. Scrum Masters should oversee the development process. Product Owners should control product roadmaps and delivery of products. SMs and POs should oversee and control developers, not the other way around.
  • Create a clear vision of what is going to be delivered and explain what is done already. In a simple language, understandable for the average person. Geeky, tech language is counterproductive in the long run - people don’t understand that.
  • Better plan of the releases. Avoid big releases (platform is a great example of that mistake) and plan small, incremental releases instead.
  • No releases during the bear market (or at least minimal number of releases). Bear market annihilates the positive impact of the releases - we have experienced this already. Market situation has a big impact on the project and Bitcoin dictates the market situation. Follow the market.
  • Last but not least - put the right people in charge and give them power to apply necessary changes. Even if those changes are difficult. If we don’t want to have more years of development but effective delivery instead, changes are absolutely necessary. Start from CEO - in my opinion it should be a market-, business- and user-oriented individual with a good understanding of financial business. We should only consider a person whose primary objective is the quick delivery of a platform.
  • On the other hand, if you think everything is great, any changes are unnecessary.

There is also an option to contract an external party, completely detached from the project, to make an audit and assessment of the technology development situation in DCG. They would create a report and suggest necessary changes - this is not uncommon and there are many consulting companies doing such assessments of agile companies. It is also not expensive. I would strongly recommend considering this to gain an external perspective on the internal challenges instead of relying solely on DCG internal developers opinions as those may be biased.
3. Community evolution
I think we also need change and evolution in our community. I remember well what a great community we were. Community is a vital part of the project and the backbone of it. We don’t need politics, manipulation, “transparency”, “investigations” etc. Dash needs enthusiastic and positive people who are all working together to make the Dash network successful..
I am not going to write a big elaborate entry here. Let’s just eliminate negativity and those who create it - it doesn’t serve the project in any positive way. Let’s focus on building a positive message, supporting those who do things, being welcoming to new people, inspiring positive change, supporting each other, and spreading the word about the project. I think you know very well what I mean here.

If you managed to read this to this moment - thank you very much. Please let me know what your opinion is about the changes needed for Dash.
I am happy to have a productive discussion and help make necessary changes, as I have much more free time now, and care deeply about this project.

Robert
I'm willing to shift focus, as long as we never ever compromise decentralization. Without this, Dash is nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,876
1,866
1,283
@kot, thank you for your support, it means a lot to me! I’m really happy and proud to be part of the team behind Dash.

I believe we can do more for Dash, talk more and get more people involved.

Let me explain my point about agencies. OFC there are good and bad ones. But crypto is a quite specific industry, and classic marketing stuff may simply not work here. A particular expensive agency may have tons of successful case studies with big brands, but all them may mean nothing if they have no experience in crypto with its specific audience and behavior.

The previous fintech I worked at (not crypto) hired the best agency in our region for content and SEO stuff. These guys built their strategy only by using SEMrush's (marketing software for paid campaigns and organic promotion, yet another service I worked at before lol) algorithm analytics. The problem was that SEMrush and similar services just analyze keyword databases to suggest competitors to beat, but this information is not enough for building an actionable content strategy. Because one cannot be a competitor of Wikipedia, or Investopedia, if we’re talking about fintech. The guys from the agency didn’t care much about that and built content strategy based on that data which was completely wrong and led us nowhere.

And this is just one of such cases.

I believe there are many crypto-focused agencies, but it’s hard to tell how many scams there might be. I’m only saying that we gotta be super picky when it comes to working with an agency.

Regarding the internal team, you're absolutely right. I think I have a solution that might work for DCG. I wanted to tell about it a bit later (once there’s some proven track record at least), but since we’re talking about marketing changes right now I can’t help but tell you about DashWorks.

This is a DashIncubator fork we want to propose with the guys from DMH. Basically, DashWorks is a small team consisting of me, Doeke Koedijk, and Sam Kirby as mods. We aim to create and deliver valuable output for Dash. Anyone can join DashWorks and contribute to Dash for reasonable costs. DashWorks workflow is still under construction, but I think it can be a great solution for our further marketing efforts. DashWorks may put all organizations together and produce collective outputs.

IMO, we gotta focus on our strategy first, set up goals, spread roles, and see what tools we can use right now given short budget, market bloodbath, etc. Maybe it sounds too obvious, but that's just the way it is.

What do you think?
Where can I learn more. I know nothing about marketing, so need simple explanation :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,876
1,866
1,283
Roadmap on Dash Core Group Quarterly Call Q4-2021 (Includes Masternodes Shares on the 'Future' part)
See : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-core-group-q4-2021-quarterly-call-3-february-2022.52664/ (see slides)



Current roadmap ( https://www.dash.org/roadmap/ ) : No Masternode Shares, but instead we get Inter-Blockchain Communication (not totally sure if that is needed or not), Fungible tokens support (not needed in my opinion) , NFTS support (definitely not needed in my opinion).



I would like to know why our official Dash Roadmap is not showing Masternode Shares and instead is showing a lot of unnecessary or not needed feautures ?
Unless the Dash Roadmap website shows outdated information ? ( i am kinda praying that is the case, but then the question becomes : why have outdated information there in the first place ? Why not simply replace the roadmap with that of the quarterly calls ? Or at least adjust the 2023 part ?)

Maybe CTO of Dash Core Group could find the time to explain this ? I would appreciate it.
Having two different Dash roadmaps, showing different goal posts for 2023 is just confusing to Dash users.
I so agree with you, this is unfortunately a problem. I believe developers become myopic and look for efficiencies in integrating new features (Wow, if we use this, it'll only take that to integrate this cool new feature) but in the end, does anyone need this new feature? Or more importantly, now? NFTs might be useful some day, but even on ethereum they have no real use yet, why make them a priority? I'm completely with you on that!
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,876
1,866
1,283
Quite a lot of time passed by and I didn't see any news or announcements from the new CEO.
What is happening?
We don't really have CEO, what we have is Patrick, who stepped in to hold things together after you, Ryan etc al abandoned Dash, rather than work things out, thank goodness Patrick Quinn was willing to step in and hold things together. But with such a mass abandon ship, and a few unpaid months later, if you expected miracles from him, I'd say that's the biggest hypocrisy yet! Maybe you didn't mean for it to come across that way, but I'm still hurting a bit about the abandonment of DCG, and incredibly thankful toward Patric Quinn stepping in as he did.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AgnewPickens

qwizzie

Grizzled Member
Aug 6, 2014
2,012
1,182
1,183
The way i see it a lot of pressure has been placed for years now on certain Dash Core Group members (and on their previous CEO) through Dash Discord and other Dash media channels, blaming them for pretty much anything .. ranging from the downfall of Dash in marketcap rank and price to the lack of media presence from the previous CEO to a general lack of DCG transparency towards the Dash community.

That led to certain masternode whales (1 or 2 major whales) to stop supporting DCG compensation budget proposals, in an effort to force the previous CEO to resign.

After they managed that, they flipped their votes once more in support of the DCG compensation budget proposals and most likely thought things would go back to business as usual.

I am not at all surprised to see so many DCG resignations after the whole forcing the previous CEO to resign, and there is little doubt in my mind that things have only detoriated after that whole debacle.

Dash marketcap ranking / price : Pretty much the same if not worse and something that should never have been directed towards DCG in the first place. People just seem to have a very narrow view on things and most likely got blindsided by this crypto winter causing massive sell pressure on all altcoins and they needed a scapegoat for themselves. So they blamed it on either the former CEO or on DCG in general.

Current (Interim) DCG CEO media presence : Same as that of the previous DCG CEO (if not worse), pretty much zero media presence. Which does not bother me all that much, as marketing, promotion and media presence just don't have much effect in a bear winter, let alone during a crypto winter.

Lack of DCG transperancy towards the Dash community : Only got worse. We lost the DCG quarterly calls and we lost the Dash Quarterly Financial results and the Dash roadmap is still pretty much out of date and unclear.

Then there is the talk of DCG new interim CEO of moving more of the miner blockrewards to the Dash budget in the future (he seems to really like that idea, eventhough DCG already promised to the miners that we would not mess with the blockrewards anymore), talk of full market rated compensation of the DCG CEO role, when that same DCG CEO role was not compensated for many years by DCG previous CEO due to the bear market (which we are still in !!) and talks about some magical management tool being the solution of getting a grip on the devs release schedule.

* Will Dash survive this bear winter / crypto winter : yes, no doubt in my mind
* Is DCG seriously damaged by its own Dash community members : yes, no doubt in my mind and not by those that felt pressured to resign their position, but by those that did all the pressuring.
* Do i want Dash Core Group to have a full CEO postion with market-rated compensation during a bear market / crypto winter, when there are still DCG members not being (fully) compensated ? No.
 
Last edited:

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,297
1,374
1,183
I once heard, when a relationship breaks up, the calculation for getting over it is one month for every year of the relationship. Imo it's not a good human trait but if it also applies to DAOs then I think we maybe entering a new phase in Dash's life. Exit the old guard and welcome the new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AgnewPickens

vazaki3

Active Member
Jul 1, 2019
615
278
133
34
apogee.dynu.net
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
I so agree with you, this is unfortunately a problem. I believe developers become myopic and look for efficiencies in integrating new features (Wow, if we use this, it'll only take that to integrate this cool new feature) but in the end, does anyone need this new feature? Or more importantly, now?
This is exactly the reason why we URGENTLY need to start asking governance questions to the damned crew!

 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: onetime

kot

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Mar 17, 2015
800
2,072
263
We don't really have CEO, what we have is Patrick, who stepped in to hold things together after you, Ryan etc al abandoned Dash, rather than work things out, thank goodness Patrick Quinn was willing to step in and hold things together. But with such a mass abandon ship, and a few unpaid months later, if you expected miracles from him, I'd say that's the biggest hypocrisy yet! Maybe you didn't mean for it to come across that way, but I'm still hurting a bit about the abandonment of DCG, and incredibly thankful toward Patric Quinn stepping in as he did.
Well... I would not say we abandoned the ship - I was on the ship during much worse times and tried hard to work things out. Things went sideways due to a few very unacceptable incidents triggered by some particular individuals and it did not seem to me that Trust Protectors were interested in working things out - they were interested in their own agenda. Ryan was forced to leave and I have resigned for a very particular reason - you can see the story here: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-trust-protectors-please-react.52886/
Patrick was a part of this process - we were very open with him during our conversations.
 
Last edited:

kot

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Mar 17, 2015
800
2,072
263
As mentioned before...we do run the risk of solely focusing on development and not proper marketing. As you are also one of the OG's in this project, in the years you were in DCG, what were the discussions on how to approach this. I'm sure there was frustration with the lack of traction...but there must of been some high level discussions as what could be done to curb the slip DASH suffered.

Moving forward...how do you think this could be best addressed?

Richard
There was a discussion about this basically on monthly basis, during the board meetings. And it was always the same story shared with the board - we are doing better and need 3-6 months.
When we have realized that was a mistake, things went too far, price felt down, we went into survival mode ensuring continuous development and (unfortunately) developers held us hostage for many months/years more. Yes - we have failed as a board by not stopping this.
And I think the current situation is worse - in my opinion there is no fraction in DCG that is business oriented, with strong understanding of the market. DCG is fully tech-oriented at the moment.
What is even more troubling - with Glenn departing there might be operational difficulties that no one cares about at the moment, but they will hit hard soon.
 
Last edited:

bigrcanada

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 9, 2014
319
369
233
Penticton, BC
www.dasilvavineyards.com
There was a discussion about this basically on monthly basis, during the board meetings. And it was always the same story shared with the board - we are doing better and need 3-6 months.
When we have realized that was a mistake, things went too far, price felt down, we went into survival mode ensuring continuous development and (unfortunately) developers held us hostage for many months/years more. Yes - we have failed as a board by not stopping this.
And I think the current situation is worse - in my opinion there is no fraction in DCG that is business oriented, with strong understanding of the market. DCG is fully tech-oriented at the moment.
What is even more troubling - with Glenn departing there might be operational difficulties that no one cares about at the moment, but they will hit hard soon.
This was something I had been pointing out for a long time, though I am pretty sure we are all aware of the short comings DASH is facing. There needs to be a point where we focus on maintaining Platform and Evo once released, while moving a substantial amount of the budget to business and market development. This whole situation is a bit of a mess at the moment. To be fair...its important to point out that we do need our "main" product and use case to be developed before reaching out...initially. But DCG will need to refocus on moving beyond development focus to business and other use cases.

This is why I've advocated for separate DOA's. One DOA strictly focused on Development on contract to treasury controlled by DCG and the products that the ecosystem/treasury pays them for, another DOA strictly focused on administration and business development. I do not think DCG should be developing code...that should be handled by a different DOA, period.

So, is it your opinion that the project is doomed at this point due to this lack of vision? Do you believe in separate DOA's as a solution or what is your thoughts on how this could be addressed?
 

KateNickolson

New Member
May 17, 2022
5
2
1
32
I agree that more promotion and marketing is needed. You can promote in several ways: through advertising networks, through Influencers, and through communities. In order to interact with your audience, you need to run an active marketing campaign, during which you dedicate the cryptocommunity to the life of the project, disclose goals and results through publications on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Instagram, Medium and Linkedin, participate in conferences and make partnerships with other companies. The first and most important thing in marketing is choosing a target audience. Only by identifying interests, needs, and demographics can you implement a brand audit and marketing strategy that will find your ideal customers.
 
Last edited:

kot

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Mar 17, 2015
800
2,072
263
So, is it your opinion that the project is doomed at this point due to this lack of vision? Do you believe in separate DOA's as a solution or what is your thoughts on how this could be addressed?
No, I don't think the project is doomed. I think there is a clear vision but poorly executed.
As I wrote previously - DCG should do whatever necessary to finish the platform MVP development, release it and make sure it works on the mainnet. After that part of the funds should be redirected towards promotion and marketing - it doesn't matter to me if it would be a separate DAO or DCG or another group doing promotion efforts. Just do it.
 

Andrew Strauss

New Member
Apr 26, 2020
1
0
1
29
I build an opinion based on my personal experience that the user interface seriously can be improved, but the overall experience is good.