I think Dash needs some changes
- Thread starter kot
- Start date
Just a quick update with regards to Dash Trustless Masternode Shares :
According latest Platform & Core Dev Update (24st of Jan 2023), Dash Trustless Masternode Shares will not be included in Dash Core v20 and is currently just in conceptual phase (no real work done by DCG developers).
Dash Core v20 will mainly contain a hard fork to change the MN reward logic for HPMN's from 4x MN rewards from Dash Main Blockchain (L1)
to 75% of the MN rewards from the Platform Chain (L2 / Credits) and 25% from Dash Main Blockchain (L1).
Hopefully Dash Trustless Masternode Shares will make it to Dash Core v21, although there is some unclarity with that as well. Dash Core team basically put Trustless Masternode Shares in the backlog (list of things to do after Platform release), which contradicts with Sam last year specifically mentioning Trustless Masternode Shares would be either in Dash Core v20 (because supposedly there was work done on it already) or in the unlikely event of Trustless Masternode Shares not getting merged in Dash Core v20, it would be included in Dash Core v21. So here is hoping Trustless Masternode Shares does make it to Dash Core v21.
On a different topic :
What i would like to know is if anything has been done with the work that Patrick Quinn (former interim-CEO of DCG) did during his time as interim CEO of DCG.
I seem to recall he integrated or worked on integrating some kind of planning tool for DCG, that would allow DCG to make better development projections / better delivery schedule / get more control on the development side of things and i think Patrick also worked on improving or clarifying the Dash Roadmap ? Is DCG actively using that now ? To this date the Dash Radmap still seems outdated for 2023 (https://www.dash.org/roadmap/)
Update : i found Patrick's Scorecard on Reddit (www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/yg7dvj/the_90_day_ceo_scorecard_for_patrick_quinn_and/)
So he implemented this planning tool for DCG :
Also after three months (the Reddit thread was from three months ago) the Dash Roadmap is still not complete. Will we only get a new updated Dash Roadmap after Platform launch on Mainnet ? What is DCG objective here ?
According latest Platform & Core Dev Update (24st of Jan 2023), Dash Trustless Masternode Shares will not be included in Dash Core v20 and is currently just in conceptual phase (no real work done by DCG developers).
Dash Core v20 will mainly contain a hard fork to change the MN reward logic for HPMN's from 4x MN rewards from Dash Main Blockchain (L1)
to 75% of the MN rewards from the Platform Chain (L2 / Credits) and 25% from Dash Main Blockchain (L1).
Hopefully Dash Trustless Masternode Shares will make it to Dash Core v21, although there is some unclarity with that as well. Dash Core team basically put Trustless Masternode Shares in the backlog (list of things to do after Platform release), which contradicts with Sam last year specifically mentioning Trustless Masternode Shares would be either in Dash Core v20 (because supposedly there was work done on it already) or in the unlikely event of Trustless Masternode Shares not getting merged in Dash Core v20, it would be included in Dash Core v21. So here is hoping Trustless Masternode Shares does make it to Dash Core v21.
On a different topic :
What i would like to know is if anything has been done with the work that Patrick Quinn (former interim-CEO of DCG) did during his time as interim CEO of DCG.
I seem to recall he integrated or worked on integrating some kind of planning tool for DCG, that would allow DCG to make better development projections / better delivery schedule / get more control on the development side of things and i think Patrick also worked on improving or clarifying the Dash Roadmap ? Is DCG actively using that now ? To this date the Dash Radmap still seems outdated for 2023 (https://www.dash.org/roadmap/)
Update : i found Patrick's Scorecard on Reddit (www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/yg7dvj/the_90_day_ceo_scorecard_for_patrick_quinn_and/)
So he implemented this planning tool for DCG :
Which unfortunetely does not seem to help with the DCG delivery schedule at all.
Also after three months (the Reddit thread was from three months ago) the Dash Roadmap is still not complete. Will we only get a new updated Dash Roadmap after Platform launch on Mainnet ? What is DCG objective here ?
Last edited:
Watching DCG and Co kick the simplest of proposals, such as putting updates onto the same rails as proposals... next they will reject fractional voting which is even more stupidly simple to implement. And you know what? - the proposal for updates was sitting on the forums for 14 days without a SINGLE COMMENT FROM DCG. The fractional voting proposal is already 15 days without any comments from DCG. But hey, someone somewhere keeps saving their ass.
No one has the balls to de-fund DCG, keep falling for the same shit about Platform being imminent. Frankly, I couldn't give a damn if they launch it or not, it's a big pile of shit anyway. In the same way Thorchain constantly has halts, so too will dash. Nor do I trust that dash credits to dash will survive hacks on a Proof of Shit chain.
This is why I've been selling dash and also why I will keep submitting proposals. Throwing money at proposals for the simplest of modifications to prove how fucking lame they are.
Let's have a competition, who can suggest the simplest of proposals that actually brings value to the network. I know it's only one dash to submit but nevertheless I will fund the best ideas. I either sell dash or get rid of it in proposals fees. Honestly, go to zero and I just couldn't care less. It is my hope that others may follow this initiative by submitting good honest proposals, that we may see how lame DCG is.
No one has the balls to de-fund DCG, keep falling for the same shit about Platform being imminent. Frankly, I couldn't give a damn if they launch it or not, it's a big pile of shit anyway. In the same way Thorchain constantly has halts, so too will dash. Nor do I trust that dash credits to dash will survive hacks on a Proof of Shit chain.
This is why I've been selling dash and also why I will keep submitting proposals. Throwing money at proposals for the simplest of modifications to prove how fucking lame they are.
Let's have a competition, who can suggest the simplest of proposals that actually brings value to the network. I know it's only one dash to submit but nevertheless I will fund the best ideas. I either sell dash or get rid of it in proposals fees. Honestly, go to zero and I just couldn't care less. It is my hope that others may follow this initiative by submitting good honest proposals, that we may see how lame DCG is.
Whether it's mission creep or unexpected problems. Whether it's updates to existing features or the addition and complication of new features, Platform has many more YEARS of work ahead of them. Just how many years will they keep this scam going, perpetually "too busy" to do anything else.
Marine should have the opportunity to build a marketing team but her wings are severely clipped from a lack of budget.
Just no wonder why Chris Hough couldn't stick around, probably had his wings clipped too... or perhaps better to say a straight jacket.
And then we have the beloved Trust Protectors that never intervened to stop HPMNs. Already DCG has converted their "poll proposal" into code in anticipation of the final takeover.
Or shall we point out that the Trust Protectors run to Joel of all people to host an AMA! No wonder dash is so fucked, why can't they host an AMA themselves?
The kind of changes that need to happen will likely never happen until we can completely rid the network of all the old guard. Including TPs that insist on giving DCG BJs.
There is a last hope that I honestly concede will never happen. That is masternodes not upgrading to v19, but they will of course.
Such a pity the SEC will never go after Sam for being the defacto dictator with his forced upgrades and Sporks.
Just no wonder why Chris Hough couldn't stick around, probably had his wings clipped too... or perhaps better to say a straight jacket.
And then we have the beloved Trust Protectors that never intervened to stop HPMNs. Already DCG has converted their "poll proposal" into code in anticipation of the final takeover.
Or shall we point out that the Trust Protectors run to Joel of all people to host an AMA! No wonder dash is so fucked, why can't they host an AMA themselves?
The kind of changes that need to happen will likely never happen until we can completely rid the network of all the old guard. Including TPs that insist on giving DCG BJs.
There is a last hope that I honestly concede will never happen. That is masternodes not upgrading to v19, but they will of course.
Such a pity the SEC will never go after Sam for being the defacto dictator with his forced upgrades and Sporks.
@GrandMasterDash
Apart from Sam, can you see that it is you, who wants to be a dictator and have the project and network going your way?
Apart from Sam, can you see that it is you, who wants to be a dictator and have the project and network going your way?
I assume you are kidding.
Everybody knows who the dictator(s) is (are) .....
Classifications (mnowatch.org)
YES, because over the years so much of what I said was ignored and now I feel vindicated. Where would dash of been if someone had actually listened and made the necessary changes. Equally, Taylor's vision was so at odds with my own and we can say he did in fact play the role of dictator. Where is he now? Where is that dictator that was so god-damn righteous about getting in bed with the enemy? NONE of what was preached ever amounted to anything.
Can we agree that Dash is meant to be Digital Cash? That being the case, shouldn't dash-cash literally be on every exchange and DEX? Should it not be the base currency on which all other activities ride? Despite dash being on many exchanges it is FAR from being universally accepted. You know what is universally accepted? - bitcoin, ethereum and litecoin. Apparently low fees was not the killer app. And don't even get me started on "instant send", dash can't even retain that functionality on Kucoin let alone tempt all other exchanges to accept it. And this is the most important part... if you can't even get Instant Send accepted at most exchanges then WTF chance is there to get Platform usernames accepted? Ah yes, Platform is going to produce killer apps! lolol
It is sad to say, dash literally failed it's mission.
If I am "wrong" then who else is trying to change things up? You see, it's one thing to say I am wrong but it's another to actually submit the proposals that will make a difference.
It does not seem likely a new CEO of DCG will be found or fulfilled anytime soon, having watched the latest Dash Platform and Core Development Update.
Searching for a CEO candidate has been put on hold from DCG side it seems, with Sam mentioning that DCG is currently not in the financial position to attract or fulfill that position, unless a lot of developers will be let go and / or considerable budget funding is granted to fullfill both the search for and the fulfillement of the vacant CEO of DCG position.
Link : www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HhY8f0vbh0 (timestamp 1:09:20)
Which makes me wonder if DCG's hierarchical system could perhaps benefit from operating more flatly, something like this :
* No teamleader is above the other
* Each teamleader will bear responsebility for the performance of its own team
* Each teamleader will need to create their own team's budget proposal and answer questions from MNO owners
* Each teamleader is allowed to optionally request for budget funding of any unallocated leftover budget
* Each teamleader can set their own team's objectives and milestones, while maintaining good communication with other teamleaders
* Some teamleaders will need to be appointed from within current teams
This means the end of CEO, CTO, CMO (and any other management position i may have overlooked) in DCG and the introduction of teamleaders instead.
This could bring some competiveness inside DCG (it is more easy to obtain any leftover funding, if your team performs and delivers well) and perhaps it also helps with project development delays, as this brings above mentioned teams far closer to the MNO owners and provide MNO owners with more control.
Searching for a CEO candidate has been put on hold from DCG side it seems, with Sam mentioning that DCG is currently not in the financial position to attract or fulfill that position, unless a lot of developers will be let go and / or considerable budget funding is granted to fullfill both the search for and the fulfillement of the vacant CEO of DCG position.
Link : www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HhY8f0vbh0 (timestamp 1:09:20)
Which makes me wonder if DCG's hierarchical system could perhaps benefit from operating more flatly, something like this :
* No teamleader is above the other
* Each teamleader will bear responsebility for the performance of its own team
* Each teamleader will need to create their own team's budget proposal and answer questions from MNO owners
* Each teamleader is allowed to optionally request for budget funding of any unallocated leftover budget
* Each teamleader can set their own team's objectives and milestones, while maintaining good communication with other teamleaders
* Some teamleaders will need to be appointed from within current teams
This means the end of CEO, CTO, CMO (and any other management position i may have overlooked) in DCG and the introduction of teamleaders instead.
This could bring some competiveness inside DCG (it is more easy to obtain any leftover funding, if your team performs and delivers well) and perhaps it also helps with project development delays, as this brings above mentioned teams far closer to the MNO owners and provide MNO owners with more control.
Last edited:
Nope, they need a head honcho to set the company wide expectations, to oversee the entire group, as a common point of contact to the DAO, to make decisions and implement changes while supporting staff and reducing coercion and threatening behaviour.
By the way, you missed mobile and I would roll comms and biz dev into one.
By the way, you missed mobile and I would roll comms and biz dev into one.
Damn, i indeed overlooked the mobile team. Also i misspelled Ernesto's name.
Problem is that the head poncho is not being searched for. Nor can the head poncho be afforded right now, according Sam. Which means zero progress on that.
If DCG is no longer searching for a new CEO, then i don't see the Dash Trust Protectors being able to do much in that area either.
Which means no operational change within DCG and most likely continuation of DCG project development delays.
Problem is that the head poncho is not being searched for. Nor can the head poncho be afforded right now, according Sam. Which means zero progress on that.
If DCG is no longer searching for a new CEO, then i don't see the Dash Trust Protectors being able to do much in that area either.
Which means no operational change within DCG and most likely continuation of DCG project development delays.
Last edited:
@qwizzie
Your proposition has no impact on project development delays or team efficiency imho.
Changing the structure doesn't change the work culture and doesn't eliminate any existing issues. It would only relocate the same problems into different structure.
Your proposition has no impact on project development delays or team efficiency imho.
Changing the structure doesn't change the work culture and doesn't eliminate any existing issues. It would only relocate the same problems into different structure.
Well, the current management style structure has also not worked well for Dash these years (just look at how many DCG managers left DCG) and is perhaps too costly for DCG as well (specially during bear markets / crypto winters). At least this more flat hierarchical system gives MNO owners more control on the budget side of things and possibly force the DCG teams to perform better, in order to keep receiving funding. It could also improve communication and provide clarity on what each team is working on exactly. We have a good picture with regards to the Platform and Core teams through the Dash Platform and Core Development Updates, and a far less clear picture so far on the other teams (Business Development, Marketing, Mobile, Infrastructure).
Last edited:
My idea : put up a 0 dash requesting proposal up, with the request to MNO owners to update to latest version 18.2.1 ASAP
and point to current differences in masternode distribution per reported version and protocol as can be viewed here : https://www.dashninja.pl/deterministic-masternodes.html
There is no good reason why 18.1% of MNO's are still on v18.0.1
Ideally this is something that DCG should do after a new Dash Core update for a few months. Specially now that the proposal fee has been brought down to just 1 dash.
Or wait for the release of v19 on Mainnet end of this month and then do above for v19 ....
Last edited:
You can view a nice break down of user agents on this page.
It is an interesting idea to use the proposal system to send messages to MNOs to update, could be handy in case of an emergency, but there is a reason why few MNs updated to v18.2.1 and that is the botched v18.2 release, when it locked up, MNOs that upgraded were effectively scolded and then they were much more coy about updating to v18.2.1. Currently I am not running v18.2.1 either.
It is an interesting idea to use the proposal system to send messages to MNOs to update, could be handy in case of an emergency, but there is a reason why few MNs updated to v18.2.1 and that is the botched v18.2 release, when it locked up, MNOs that upgraded were effectively scolded and then they were much more coy about updating to v18.2.1. Currently I am not running v18.2.1 either.
MNOs should apply the latest updates up to, but not including ,v19.
At v19 MNOs, all possible channels should alert MNOs that v19 is a hard fork and that upgrades should only be performed if they agree with the HPMN network infrastructure. In light of upcoming US regulation on cloud services, MNOs should be fully informed of the implication. Good luck to the 100 HPMNs complying with KYC.
At v19 MNOs, all possible channels should alert MNOs that v19 is a hard fork and that upgrades should only be performed if they agree with the HPMN network infrastructure. In light of upcoming US regulation on cloud services, MNOs should be fully informed of the implication. Good luck to the 100 HPMNs complying with KYC.
In my opinion, MNOs should not influence structures and management style, because it would be highly ineffective. Destructive in a long run.
Not to mention lack of responsibility in daily management and execution.
MNOs should only vote with their money - if team is effective, we pay them. Otherwise different team is needed because the existing team doesn’t deliver.
Changing structures doesn’t change people. And in case the problem is caused by people, you end up with the same problem within different structure.
Organization, staffing, structures, work culture etc. should be the sole responsibility of the team.
Funding should be responsibility of MNOs.
Both parties should carefully measure their choices vs achieved results, and based on the results, make further decisions.
Last edited:
Source : https://www.extremetech.com/internet/meta-pulls-nft-support-plans-10000-additional-layoffs
Dash Roadmap :
NFT's market imploded, companies pulling NFT support.
DCG : plans to add NFT support with Dash Platform v2.0
Either there is a real disconnect between DCG (which is mainly a group of developers these days) and the outside world, or DCG knows something we (and Meta and Instagram) don't know...
Last edited:
There's more to NFTs than just ugly monkey pictures, eg a ticket to a concert or movie, so NFTs are probably here to stay, just the initial bubble is over. If we assumed that tech and the online world was over after the tech wreck of 2001 then we'd have missed out of amazon and all the innovation that came after that, so don't worry too much about the crazy market of this shit and the utility of it. A better example is if we abandoned Bitcoin after its second bubble, Dash would never have forked, right?
Or NFT's were just an overhyped crypto event, that are now going the same direction as ICO's.
All overhyped things come to an end eventually.
Source : marketscale.com/industries/business-services/what-went-wrong-with-the-nft-market-collapse/
I don't see that changing anytime soon, and i think Meta (and their research department) came to the same conclusion.
Which is why Meta is most likely now pulling out of NFT's.
I rather see DCG focus solely on Smart Contracts for Q4-2023, nothing else. Something tells me they will have more then enough work (and delays) on that.
Last edited:
You compare news released a day ago to the roadmap released when?
The Dash Roadmap was updated recently after a long period of neglect. Before that update the Dash Roadmap also had NFT's support as Platform goal.
So in other words : the newly updated Dash roadmap just took the NFT's support part that was previously on it and placed it for Q4-2023.
Showing in my eyes a firm commitment to NFT's support later this year. Is that wise ? I am not sure.
Deserves at least some discussion.
Last edited:
First of all, dash NFTs, like all Platform results, are limited to the consensus of 100 PoS nodes. If people can stomach that, they then need to have faith that both the dash project and Dash Platform are going to be relevant in, say, 5 years time. I think it's quite difficult to outrun Ordinals, despite the clunky implementation. Not to mention the upcoming censorship rules that will capture Platform.
Dash needs to innovate and get ahead of the next trend. NFTs alone is not going to cut it.
Dash needs to innovate and get ahead of the next trend. NFTs alone is not going to cut it.
Yes, some discussion might be needed in order to address question. However I can see your expectation of the roadmap immediately following news or changes in other companies. This is not rational.
The reason of Meta working on NFT might be completely different than reason why Dash would adopt NFTs.
And it is still only roadmap - it is not written in stone.