Im wondering about the Budget proposals funding mechanism, Is there any safeguard to fraud ?
I saw some development proposals and thought to my self that if I wanted It would be really easy to game this system. Throw up some proposal, clame that I can deliver and Dash away after the final funding.
Is there any kind of escrow for these kind of outside development funding ?
Some proof of actual development, or bounty payment when it has tested and ok-ed by some of the devs.
or maybe smart contracts ?
How about a old fashioned bounty fund for these kinds of proposals?
Just throwing this out there
To answer the OP, of course you can "game" the system, but this "gaming" will have a limited impact.
Decentralized, open systems are robust in preventing systemic, massive, long-term corruption and fraud. However, they aren't as strong at preventing small, short-term fraud. Centralized, closed systems are the opposite: they can prevent small, short-term fraud pretty well, but they are susceptible to an "inner circle" of people being able to control the system completely to their own advantage.
Decentralized, open systems are often reputation-based. In such a system, one can pretty quickly gain a legitimate reputation and thus commit a fraud; however, the fraud will destroy the person's reputation and thus their ability to commit fraud in the system again. Also, the size of the fraud will be dependent on how much of a reputation one builds up (which takes time and energy).
So, for example, if Andreas Antonopoulos made a proposal to the Budget System for 300 Dash in order to promote Dash at some conference, there is a very good chance he would be approved, as he has a reputation already. But if he were to take that 300 Dash and then not do what he said, it would be very unlikely that he could ever get approved again. So small, short-term fraud, but no massive fraud. But in a centralized system, if Andreas were close friends with the CEO or other leaders, then he could defraud the company for years, skimming money from them every month with the consent of the leaders and without the knowledge of the users.
On the other hand, if a brand-new community member were to ask for 2000 Dash/month for 2 years for some project with very little specs, then it is highly unlikely that he would be able to get approved. Even if he were personal friends with Evan, and Evan vouched for him, then perhaps it might be initially approved, but if nothing came of it, eventually the project would lose approval. (This is the main reason I think Budget System v2 [multi-month contracts] should always include the ability to cancel a contract).
We also have to remember that the current Dash ecosystem is moving towards more complete decentralization, but it's not there yet (it's just too young). We all know that a large number of Masternodes are controlled by a small number of people, but they still have to work in the open - there are no truly "back-room" deals, as all proposals are on the blockchain. Plus, as early adopters they are the most incentivized to NOT game the system, since Dash as a fully-functioning cryptocurrency is in their best interests.
