Lets expand the treasury by end of this year ?

should we double our treasury funding by increasing the budget allocation to 13200 dash per month?

  • yes

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • no

    Votes: 14 82.4%

  • Total voters
    17

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
Everyone by now knows dash is thrvining ( even though market is not taking full notice of it ) primarily because of its Decentralised Autonomous Organisation style funding aka the treasury , every month some 6600 dash are released to be spent on various proposal and dash is arguably the only big crypto that has a sustainable way of doing this for the long term, where as in other coins, its extremely centralised i.e Vitalik holds a ton of ethereum and spends on supporting its eco-system however should he something happen to him or the coins , its a irrereable loss ( i am sure the CIA is thinking of all the ways to sabotage crypto-currency and is waiting for the right moment to strike ) , now dash is immune to this massive attack vector. Having said that 6600 dash is a good number , you know what would be better doubling it :)

Right now at $500 a pop, 6600 dash per month means 3.3 million , if we had 13200 dash to spend we could spend 6.6 million per month , that is absoultely massive amount of treasury isint ?

now as we spend more on marketing , the price will obviously rise, what happens when the price doubles to $1000 , we will have $10+ million budget , that is indeed fantastic , but right now we cant do it unfortunately

45% of all new coins go for miners , 45% go to MNOs and only 10% go to the treasury ( the super power of dash )

imagine spending only 35% on miners instead ? what would happen , let me answer all your questions

Miners give much needed stability and protection from DDOS attacks we cant compromise that ?
That is very much true, but there is not need to spend 26400 dash per month on that security , infact spending even 10% of new coins on mining is more than enough to protect dash from any practical DDOS attack vector, and as the price appreciates and we get more miners into the system it gets exponential more secure even with just 10% of new coins on mining.

These are not my words , Dash CEO Ryan himself discussed this a while back

embedding is not working properly but it starts at 52 mins 10 seconds


spending extra coins on treasury would create unnecessary inflation ?

thats simply not true , there are not extra coins being created , coins that are spent towards electricity bills and new mining gear and being diverted towards treasury so in effect on new coins will be created . in fact if we are not able to spent it all on treasury proposals , some new coins will never be created which will create mild deflation

cutting down the coins will create a shock to miners and they will lose faith in Dash .

This again is a genuine concern having said that even 4 years bitcoin supply drops by half but that didn't create miners to lose faith in mining bitcoin , the truth is it gives rise to more competitive mining alternatively when we express this intention clearly to miners and we bring all the MNOs on board to this, we can create better long term marketing strategies which will in turn increase the price much further ,so the miner will effectively lose nothing, its a win-win- win ( win for miners , win for MNOs , win for treasury )

This sounds a like a drastic idea that will hurt miners

i understand that mining is a competitive business, so should give plenty of notice to them and do it gradually , start with 5% and do it incrementally.

Its time to make this decision asap instead of delaying it ( even though execution can be done later ).

i am going to make proposal asking MNOs to vote for yes for proposal in this months cycle as a simple Yes

i am requesting fellow MNOs to supporting me in this cause by raising 5 dash so that i can post a proposal, i am putting the first 1 dash to support this.

https://insight.dash.org/insight/address/XqL4pEPDPZPBAGWmLJPxvukCwvWE6Qu4zS


please support it
 
Last edited:

Dashuser33

New Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Feb 4, 2018
5
1
3
38
I don't think this is needed now. even at current prices there is already a big monthly budget. I don't see how this would be more complex to do later.
 

solarguy

Active Member
Mar 15, 2017
865
413
133
60
At the moment, mining Dash has a pretty thin margin. I would vote no to make it thinner....right now. With the current weakness in the price, I would be extremely reticent to make fundamental changes to how our blockchain works. In the future, when the price is very robust (over a grand again) I wouldn't mind revisiting this question from a purely research perspective.
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
At the moment, mining Dash has a pretty thin margin. I would vote no to make it thinner....right now. With the current weakness in the price, I would be extremely reticent to make fundamental changes to how our blockchain works. In the future, when the price is very robust (over a grand again) I wouldn't mind revisiting this question from a purely research perspective.
yes , all i am going to ask is for MNO to express interest to do this some time in future not right away
 

solarguy

Active Member
Mar 15, 2017
865
413
133
60
It sounded like you didn't want to wait. So.....right now'ish.

Plus, there is your statement, "Its time to do this now...."
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
It sounded like you didn't want to wait. So.....right now'ish.

Plus, there is your statement, "Its time to do this now...."
i would say we make the decision now and wait for the right moment to execute it , this is a big change but a necessary change and it needs to seep into the consciousness of Core and MNOs
 

TheSingleton

Active Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 27, 2017
277
141
103
If at all this should come from both the Miners and the MasterNodes. And while I'm not totally opposed to the idea, so far things seem to have worked out and we have not lost any big projects due to insufficient funding.
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
I feel doubling the budget would draw the wrong crowd to the community.
At which percentage of newly produced coins would the wrong crowd enter , how do we ascertain that ??
The point is whatever good treasury is doing . We can double it .. it's really that simple
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
If at all this should come from both the Miners and the MasterNodes. And while I'm not totally opposed to the idea, so far things seem to have worked out and we have not lost any big projects due to insufficient funding.
Well last month it was close but going forward we would run out then we can revisit it
 

TheSingleton

Active Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 27, 2017
277
141
103
I guess the question is not who supports this but under what circumstances would one support this. I would support this change if it was necessary to get one or some big proposals passed that would only fail because of insufficient funds.
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
I guess the question is not who supports this but under what circumstances would one support this. I would support this change if it was necessary to get one or some big proposals passed that would only fail because of insufficient funds.

I guess we have to wait watch till that happens but I am very sure this will happeen in near future , this month we just scratched the limit next month we could have few not getting funded coz of the limit and then most MNOs would hopefully change their opinion
 

Arthyron

Active Member
May 29, 2017
334
174
113
As a former miner (back in the Darkcoin days, my rig is too ancient to amount to much these days) and a current MNO, I am generally not in favor of this for the present. It could be that down the line this might be a good idea, especially as we move toward collateralized mining anyway, but for right now--even deciding on this right now, would probably not bode well. I do think it's something we should revisit in the future, though, maybe after we have a live and working Evolution.
 

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,734
1,283
same old Dashmaximalist ;)
nothing needs to change as nothing is broken !

is the budget full every month ?
are great projects not funded as there is not enough coins in Budget ?
are miners and MN's can afford to 'lose' another x % ?

exactly
.... moving on :rolleyes:
 

chinmi

New Member
Jul 20, 2017
20
12
3
41
If miner rewards are under scrutiny, so should MNO rewards. At least that will be the objection by miners and non-mno holders. This can not be decided on by a simple proposal over which only MNO's decide. Status quo is comfortable for a reason. Any change to the balance should be backed up by fundamental research and dialog with the community. I could be mistaken but I heard that research on the optimal reward structure was being done by Arizona State University..
 
  • Like
Reactions: TroyDASH

younglegend

Member
Jan 1, 2017
102
17
68
I think the amount of money we spent isn't the problem.

Biggest problem is in our marketing.



1. We always talk about bitcoin before talk digital cash.

Why do we use our funds and market bitcoin? why

can we just market digital cash effectively to

none crypto audience around the globe?



2. Right now we are preaching to the wrong audience, who has massive

debts in dollars. We should be marketing and give away in countries where

they have little or no debt, such as russia, uzbekistan, algeria, estonia, and so on.



Even if it takes much longer I really want dash to succeed in becoming

one of the strongest digital currency in the future and

solve lots of problems in the world.
 
Last edited:

Arthyron

Active Member
May 29, 2017
334
174
113
One other thing I wanted to add to this that I was thinking about last night, thanks to the work Core has done on the legal end of things, the greater Dash DAO now has a legal standing and Core can enter in to legal agreements on our behalf, and as I understand it, further work is underway to expand and flesh out the DAO's legal presence and capabilities. What this means is--if all goes as planned--the DAO will actually be able to truly *invest* in things, not merely fund them. This means we may end up with equity or shares or whatever in future investment and funding opportunities, which will create another massive stream of revenue for the DAO. So this is yet another reason that I find this change to be unnecessary for now and probably hereafter.
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
One other thing I wanted to add to this that I was thinking about last night, thanks to the work Core has done on the legal end of things, the greater Dash DAO now has a legal standing and Core can enter in to legal agreements on our behalf, and as I understand it, further work is underway to expand and flesh out the DAO's legal presence and capabilities. What this means is--if all goes as planned--the DAO will actually be able to truly *invest* in things, not merely fund them. This means we may end up with equity or shares or whatever in future investment and funding opportunities, which will create another massive stream of revenue for the DAO. So this is yet another reason that I find this change to be unnecessary for now and probably hereafter.
as much I like them, funding companies in US will be extremely challenging for the simple fact that MNOs don't have KYC / AML laws so how will send them the profits earned and sec simply loves to harass crypto community as much as possible. so we need to be cautious about funding companies in US

super crypto friendly nations are switzerland / estonia even they would have issues with KYC crap sooner or later , no govt is ok with losing out as much tax as they can get their dirty hands on
 

Arthyron

Active Member
May 29, 2017
334
174
113
as much I like them, funding companies in US will be extremely challenging for the simple fact that MNOs don't have KYC / AML laws so how will send them the profits earned and sec simply loves to harass crypto community as much as possible. so we need to be cautious about funding companies in US

super crypto friendly nations are switzerland / estonia even they would have issues with KYC crap sooner or later , no govt is ok with losing out as much tax as they can get their dirty hands on
I'm not necessarily talking about MNOs receiving profits, but the DAO as a whole. If the DAO as a whole could receive profits, then they can just use it to buy more Dash and increase the treasury budget. That's why Dash is a Delware Corporation and a New Zealand Trust and whatever the other thing was that they're working on. We're trying to find the right legal framework to allow such possibilities.
 

Unstoppable

Member
Jan 25, 2018
145
64
78
I'm absolutely against changing the ratio. No from me. Patience, dashmaximalist. When Dash is back over 1000usd we will again have more money than we can spend. As it is, a significant portion of the payouts already disappear into the ether. I would need to see widespread use of escrow and solid project management, presented to us in a transparent way, in near-real-time, before I would even consider the possibility of changing the ratios.

Even in that case, the simple rise in the price of dash will make this a non-issue. I think it's more likely that in 5 years time, we'll be discussing REDUCING the treasury by 50%. Imagine if Dash really was at 10k usd. What on earth could we possibly do with so much money, other than see it be wasted?

When Dash is really in widespread use, globally, and there is no longer a need for marketing proposals, conferences, educational materials, etc, etc, what on earth will we be funding, beyond retaining our talent in Core?

Think long term.
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
I'm absolutely against changing the ratio. No from me. Patience, dashmaximalist. When Dash is back over 1000usd we will again have more money than we can spend. As it is, a significant portion of the payouts already disappear into the ether. I would need to see widespread use of escrow and solid project management, presented to us in a transparent way, in near-real-time, before I would even consider the possibility of changing the ratios.

Even in that case, the simple rise in the price of dash will make this a non-issue. I think it's more likely that in 5 years time, we'll be discussing REDUCING the treasury by 50%. Imagine if Dash really was at 10k usd. What on earth could we possibly do with so much money, other than see it be wasted?

When Dash is really in widespread use, globally, and there is no longer a need for marketing proposals, conferences, educational materials, etc, etc, what on earth will we be funding, beyond retaining our talent in Core?

Think long term.
ok in all due respect . this statement has so many flaws. Dash is a budding nascent crypto startup thats 3% of bitcoins market cap and 0.0000001% of USD's market cap, so we have a very very very long battle ahead of us that would easily take decades or more. We need a lot of firepower to convince the whole planet to use dash and that is going to take a lot of money, marketing and so on, not to mention, Ryan wants to launch a global support center for dash.

Second point, you want to have less money for dash treasury because it's not being spent efficiently now, how about give it more money and make it efficient, what stops you from doing that anyway ? Think of this for a moment, if you are a marketing head for a company and you have 1% market share of crypto, do you think you would be happy to have a limited amount of budget , ofcourse not you want to more , how much more ? as much as possible , thats how successful companies think.

Why do big Fortune 500 companies billions and billions on marketing when those with 70% market share ? are they crazy ?
Are their marketing heads happy with the budgets they have, not they are not and that's a good thing, that's what makes successful?

Finally, should we spend our money more efficiently? absolutely.
should we have more money to spend? absolutely, as much as we can please
 

Dashmaximalist

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
1,008
247
133
37
maptags.in
For all those who think we have enough marketing budget already, just like to remind you the marketing budget dropped from 6600 dash to 6150 dash and apparently this keeps dropping every year :(