Many New Proposals are up - PLEASE VOTE !

Pal

New Member
Jun 23, 2016
17
8
3
Dash has a Decentralized Governance system based on collateralized masternodes. If you have a Dash address with 1000DASH, you can set up your own masternode, and have a say in the direction of Dash. It's something like shareholders in a company, only P2P.
So I can't vote without 1000 dash?
 

Minotaur

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 7, 2014
452
1,079
263
Yea I watched it. THanks tho!
OK in that case let me supplement my answer to your question. Dash's governance system relies in its masternode operators which are the people running the collateralized nodes on the Dash network. The reason why this governance system works is because you are relying on people that are invested and have a stake on the network success but also are providing infrastructure and services to the network, so it is not only about stake but also about participation.

By using this ingenious model Dash is able to remain pure Proof of Work for security where it matters but also drive the network decisions based on the risk and involvement of stakeholders. Is not only about owning some Dash, we will have many people that will invest in a little DASH or simply use it for its many advantages, instant confirmations etc, but not all users wish to or will get invested to the level of running infrastructure and participating in governance. Even more so in the future when we reach a more mainstream audience.

So it is not a system in which everyone is equal that would be more akin to socialism which we dont support, it is really a system that fosters open free market participation and people can take as much risk as they are able to. This is why anyone that meets the requirements can become a masternode without needing permission, but it is not an intrinsic right that comes just from holding DASH it is more involved than that. In the future many users wont be involved in running the infrastructure and governing the network, they will just be users and enjoy the decentralized financial services the network offers. We are still at the early stages of the project so many people joining now are joining as investors, infrastructure suppliers and governance representatives but this will change over time specially when more user friendly services are released and more people will join just as standard users.
 

yidakee

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 16, 2014
1,812
1,168
283
OK in that case let me supplement my answer to your question. Dash's governance system relies in its masternode operators which are the people running the collateralized nodes on the Dash network. The reason why this governance system works is because you are relying on people that are invested and have a stake on the network success but also are providing infrastructure and services to the network, so it is not only about stake but also about participation.

By using this ingenious model Dash is able to remain pure Proof of Work for security where it matters but also drive the network decisions based on the risk and involvement of stakeholders. Is not only about owning some Dash, we will have many people that will invest in a little DASH or simply use it for its many advantages, instant confirmations etc, but not all users wish to or will get invested to the level of running infrastructure and participating in governance. Even more so in the future when we reach a more mainstream audience.

So it is not a system in which everyone is equal that would be more akin to socialism which we dont support, it is really a system that fosters open free market participation and people can take as much risk as they are able to. This is why anyone that meets the requirements can become a masternode without needing permission, but it is not an intrinsic right that comes just from holding DASH it is more involved than that. In the future many users wont be involved in running the infrastructure and governing the network, they will just be users and enjoy the decentralized financial services the network offers. We are still at the early stages of the project so many people joining now are joining as investors, infrastructure suppliers and governance representatives but this will change over time specially when more user friendly services are released and more people will join just as standard users.
As always, very eloquently put.

As I've suggested before, Dash's governance model is not really a democracy. It's more of a meritocracy. The more you invest in it, the more participation rights you potentially have and the more you have to gain/loose. It not about how rich you are, it's about how strongly you participate. You can be a Dash gzillionaire with zero MN's. Your participation is zero, except for market discovery purposes.

Which in practical terms is an extremely interesting and novel working model that drives our concept of DAO. Certainly does not equate to a pure investment versus return situation. That I would call pure capitalism with market discovery. Dash is beyond that.

In a pure capitalist environment, you put your stake towards an investment in hopes of a more favourable return, offering pure governance to a third party. In high level capitalism, you invest in something or someone, with high hopes on their talent and expertise, and just ride that wave. In a meritocratic environment, your stake represents not only concrete market value, but also functional value. These two, while hand in hand, are in essence independent. So your return is fixed and independent of market valuation, but it's functional aspect decision making drives the market itself. Almost seems like a paradox but in essence is the opposite.

No matter what the market value, 1k Dash staked on a MN will always earn you a fixed dividend for the service you provide to the network. That is hard-coded. Extremely interesting as we all well know. The more network "power" you have, the higher the risk you actually endure, but not from a divindend point, but from decision-based market conditions. Your own direct opinion and vote governing the functional aspect of the network. Brilliant!

So while mathematically all votes are equal, those who believe the most in Dash have a bigger say in it's direction. They're also the one's providing the biggest service to the network, and also enduring the biggest market risk on it's direction. In essence they inherently have more merit.
Hence, meritocracy.

.
 
Last edited:

Pal

New Member
Jun 23, 2016
17
8
3
As always, very eloquently put.


No matter what the market value, 1k Dash staked on a MN will always earn you a fixed dividend for the service you provide to the network. That is hard-coded. Extremely interesting as we all well know. The more network "power" you have, the higher the risk you actually endure, but not from a divindend point, but from decision-based market conditions. Your own direct opinion and vote governing the functional aspect of the network. Brilliant!

.
Most of that made sense, but i'm curious about this hard coded amount of dash for a "masternode". Wouldn't the people who got in cheap basically run the show? Since the amount is static and the apprise has risen dramatically since the launch, wouldn't a few people control most of the nodes and voting powers?

Correct me if I'm wrong, that just seems to by understanding from what i've been hearing/reading on the forums as a lurker for a few weeks. Finally joined up because Amanda made it seem very interesting, but its very hard to understand.
 

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
Make me!

No, really. Make me. Fix the budget system. Make voting part of the proof of service. Its the most important thing that MNs are supposed to be doing, and they aren't required to do it... We have retards participating when they shouldn't, and smart people ignoring it because they'd rather money hose from the deck of their boat while failing to do the main, most important thing that MNs are supposed to be doing...
so it is not only about stake but also about participation.
O RLY? Then why isn't participation mandatory? Create an "abstain" vote option to force them to at least show up... Also enables the ability to retract a vote without having to oppose. With this addition, proof of participation can exist without forcing a yes/no.

Abstain currently == Null.

Create the abstain option so that there can be a differentiation between those not even bothering to pay attention, and those who are showing up, but don't feel fit to influence the outcomes.

Go look at the thread about the retail integration proposal. Retards abound with retard demands. Make them think about it a little....

Currently:
Yes == Yes
No == No
Not even paying attention == Abstain

Better way:
Yes == Yes
No == No
Abstain == Abstain
Not even paying attention == Null

Rack up enough Nulls in X number of blocks and Proof of Service punts you. No more payments for losers who don't do their job.

Better; don't punt them. Let them keep servicing IX and Mixing, but don't pay them!

If you refuse to show up for work, do you still think you're going to get a paycheck? DASH is currently allowing that.
 
Last edited:

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
Wouldn't the people who got in cheap basically run the show?
Maybe. I paid ~$0.007 for each of my DASH. Even if I'm a complete retard, if my nodes become worth $100,000 each, I'm going to take shit seriously. Right now I don't bother voting. I'm going to let the children mess up and learn the hard way, maybe...
 

Pal

New Member
Jun 23, 2016
17
8
3
Maybe. I paid ~$0.007 for each of my DASH. Even if I'm a complete retard, if my nodes become worth $100,000 each, I'm going to take shit seriously. Right now I don't bother voting. I'm going to let the children mess up and learn the hard way, maybe...
Wow man you got super lucky! Congrats!

And what do you mean there is no abstain in voting? Thats craziness! Let's not go against thousands of years of evolution guys!

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/dec/05/realestate/re-associations5 -"Abstaining isn't same as voting 'no'"

http://www.artoftheory.com/the-ethics-of-voting/
Excerpt:
In The Ethics of Voting, I argue that citizens have no standing moral obligation to vote. Voting is just one of many ways one can pay a debt to society, serve other citizens, promote the common good, exercise civic virtue, and avoid free-riding off the efforts of others. Participating in politics is nothing special, morally speaking.

However, I argue that if citizens do decide to vote, they have very strict moral obligations regarding how they vote. I argue that citizens must vote for what they justifiedly believe will promote the common good, or otherwise they must abstain.

That is, voters should vote on the basis of sound evidence. They must put in heavy work to make sure their reasons for voting as they do are morally and epistemically justified. In general, they must vote for the common good rather than for narrow self-interest. Citizens who are unwilling or unable to put in the hard work of becoming good voters should not vote at all. They should stay home on election day rather than pollute the polls with their bad votes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstention

There is a reason this is built into most modern day voting platforms of any importance. All businesses should operate this way. Especially an online businesses that are building a crypto currency with governing aspects... Otherwise it just going back in time when noone understood the important of abstain votes!

"In support for this non-political strategy, some non-voters claim that voting does not make any positive difference. "If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal," is an oft-cited sentiment attributed to anarchist Emma Goldman.[17]

In addition to strategic non-voters, there are also ethical non-voters, those who reject voting outright, not merely as an ineffective tactic for change, but moreover because they view the act as either a grant of consent to be governed by the state, a means of imposing illegitimate control over one's countrymen, or both. Thus, this view holds that through voting, one necessarily finds themselves violating the non-aggression principle. Herbert Spencer noted that whether a person votes for the winning candidate, votes for a losing candidate, or abstains from voting, he will be deemed to have consented to the rule of the winning candidate.[18]"
This applies to Dash voting in a very obvious way, no? I mean I know I barely understand the tech yet but abstain voting seems like obvious stuff to even myself!

Crazy. Owell, I'm sure someone will fix it soon enough! The Dash currency is still young right? Liek 2 yrs or sumthin?

:rolleyes:o_O
 
Last edited:

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
And what do you mean there is no abstain in voting? Thats craziness! Let's not go against thousands of years of evolution guys!
The way abstaining works now, there's no way to parse it in Proof of Service. The most important feature of masternodes is open loop and unmonitorable. And thus, unenforceable.

Adding the "abstain" option to the voting system isn't because abstaining needs to exist. It needs to be there to make the process closed-loop and enforceable. You're still not voting either way, but you're proving that you showed up. Then, those who don't show up can be penalized. It's not possible without the abstain option.

It's not like you're hiding. All masternodes are known....

If this were a government, I'd agree with you. But this is about Proof of Service to the DASH network, not ultimate truth and philosophy. If a Masternpode isn't even showing up to do it's most important job, it needs to be penalized. That can't be done unless we can define null as a non-participant. Currently, abstainers and nulls are both the same thing. The only way to change that, is for abstainers to actually vote that way. We can't make the nulls show up by definition.

Currently, polishing node40's knob is more important than than the most fundamental aspect that those very nodes are supposed to be fulfilling... Biggest and most obvious conflict of interest, ever....

When elected officials abstain from a floor vote, they generally are marked as abstain. Absent is whent hey don't even show up.... This is how we know they're at least showing up to do their fucking job...

there is a difference, and unless we track it in some way, there's no way to include it in the proof of service.

So, I re-iterate. If I'm supposed to be voting with all these MNs I have; make me! I'm like an obnoxious senator that knows my stupid leftist constituency will keep re-electing me no matter how much I neglect my duties. Whatcha gonna do about it? I live the life of a king on your tax money, and I refuse to do the job I;m being paid to do! So what? What ya gonna do?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pal

Macrochip

Active Member
Feb 1, 2015
223
185
103
Make me!

No, really. Make me. Fix the budget system. Make voting part of the proof of service. Its the most important thing that MNs are supposed to be doing, and they aren't required to do it... We have retards participating when they shouldn't, and smart people ignoring it because they'd rather money hose from the deck of their boat while failing to do the main, most important thing that MNs are supposed to be doing...

O RLY? Then why isn't participation mandatory? Create an "abstain" vote option to force them to at least show up... Also enables the ability to retract a vote without having to oppose. With this addition, proof of participation can exist without forcing a yes/no.

Abstain currently == Null.

Create the abstain option so that there can be a differentiation between those not even bothering to pay attention, and those who are showing up, but don't feel fit to influence the outcomes.

Go look at the thread about the retail integration proposal. Retards abound with retard demands. Make them think about it a little....

Currently:
Yes == Yes
No == No
Not even paying attention == Abstain

Better way:
Yes == Yes
No == No
Abstain == Abstain
Not even paying attention == Null

Rack up enough Nulls in X number of blocks and Proof of Service punts you. No more payments for losers who don't do their job.

Better; don't punt them. Let them keep servicing IX and Mixing, but don't pay them!

If you refuse to show up for work, do you still think you're going to get a paycheck? DASH is currently allowing that.
This deserves way more attention. Masternode operators have one job and they get paid plenty so the least we can ask of them is make a damn virtual cross. We already know DGbB is not a democracy. Among many other reasons in a democracy voters don't get paid to vote (they rather try to vote someone they have to pay the least), so sanctioning MNs by non-payment is more than fair. This shouldn't even become a "proposal" it's common sense and should become part of DGbB naturally in the next protocol update.
 

IronVape

Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 26, 2016
117
75
78
Forcing people to vote does not cause the results that you are expecting to achieve. If voting was mandatory and carried some penalty for failure to vote, I would script up an auto-no or auto abstain so that I didn't loose anything.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
There is a great high level explanation about governance in this video.


Advertising the hardcoded numbers 45-45-10... And everyone applauded. How sad...
No one explains why 45-45-10 is right, and any other combination is wrong. But still everyone applauded.

Random hardcoded numbers, whithout a theory behind, are inherently wrong. And they should be voted.
 
Last edited:

halso

Active Member
Apr 27, 2016
439
235
113
Sydney, Australia
w
Advertising the hardcoded numbers 45-45-10
And everyone applauded.
But no one can explain why 45-45-10 is right, and any other combination is wrong.
How sad... Random Hardcoded numbers, whithout a theory behind, are wrong, and they should be voted.
Otherwise this will be the cause of dash's death.
why are you still here?
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
w

why are you still here?
Because you should vote whith numbers. This is your destiny. You cannot avoid that. If you are trying to avoid it, this will be your end.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
I don't agree. Let's vote.
Have you vote for all the previous initial decisions made into dash project? Like the 45-45-10 for example? If yes, then you are right when asking to vote also for this one.

But if all previous decisions are not voted, then why do you ask especially for this particular decision to be voted? Isnt it strange, isnt it hypocrisy, that you forgot all the previous decisions, and you insist on this one?

The polls (and the decisions extracted from that polls) are not lonely stars, they depend eachother. Lets vote, not only for this decision you personally dont agree with, but also lets vote for all the previous initial and interdependent decisions. Lets built the voting tree, the tree of knowledge. Voting is the duty of masternode owners. If they dont vote, then they do not deserve to gain benefits from dash. Voting is a job. A serious job, and it should be paid a lot.
 
Last edited:

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Forcing people to vote does not cause the results that you are expecting to achieve. If voting was mandatory and carried some penalty for failure to vote, I would script up an auto-no or auto abstain so that I didn't loose anything.
This can be solved. This is already solved. This is the captcha technology. You know that, whenever you subscribe to whatever site.
So stop saying about auto-no and auto-abstain scritps. Captcha is already here, for smart guys like you.
 
Last edited:

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
M

Maybe you should give crypto a rest for a while.

Have u heard of tinder?
Voting is the duty of all masternode owners.

If they dont vote, then they do not deserve to gain any benefit from dash. Profit should go only to MNs that vote frequently, and the rest of them should gain nothing.

Voting is a job, a very serious job for dash, and it should be paid a lot. Voting is a personal job, a serious mental job, you should not be allowed to vote using scripts, and this should be checked using captcha technology. And of course voting history should be preserved, so that we can see who votes smart and who votes stupidly.

MNs that avoid to vote, they should give up crypto and dash, they have better go to tinder (or to DAO-ethereum :p)
 
Last edited:

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Dash Core Team
Moderator
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
Voting is the duty of masternode owners. If they dont vote, then they do not deserve to gain benefits from dash.
45% should go only to MNs that vote, and the rest should gain nothing.

Voting is a job. A serious job, and it should be paid a lot.

If MNs dont want to vote, then they should give up crypto and go to tinder.
No, voting is a right, not a job. MNs job is providing network services like PrivateSend and InstantSend and also for being online 24/7 which gives our network very fast sync time for new clients that come online. That's what they are paid for.

You can also think of voting this way: if shareholder doesn't vote, he gets his dividends anyway but he is probably missing the opportunity to change some decisions and therefore he is probably missing the opportunity to gain more (or to save his investments in case things get really bad) if he would participate and vote for the "right" things and/or vote against the "wrong" things instead of abstaining.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raze and tungfa

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
No, voting is a right, not a job. MNs job is providing network services like PrivateSend and InstantSend and also for being online 24/7 which gives our network very fast sync time for new clients that come online. That's what they are paid for.
.
Being online 24/7 means NOTHING! Bandwidth provided to the network is the real important thing. Offering bandwidth is the real service. Being online 24/7 when at the same time your bandwidth is almost zero, this is not a service at all, and those kind of MNs should gain nothing.

Do you measure somehow the bandwidth a MN offers to the network? If you could, this could be a good reason to pay a MN.

Or you could measure how many clients connect to the network and pay MNs on that number. But on the other hand, how do you know that the dash clients are real persons or fake accounts? This is why a web of trust is needed. Or this is why a CAPTCHA is needed, to distinguish between fake dash clients and real persons dash clients.
 
Last edited:

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Dash Core Team
Moderator
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
being online 24/7 means NOTHING! Bandwidth provided to the network is important.

Offering bandwidth is the real service. On the other habd being online 24/7 when at the same time your bandwidth is almost zero, this is not a service at all.

Do you measure somehow the bandwidth a MNs offer to the network? Or you could measure how many clients connect to the network and pay MNs on that number.

But on the other hand, how do you know the clients are real or fake? This is why a web of trust is needed. And this is why a CAPTCHA is needed, to distinguish between fake and real dash clients.
IMO there is no need to fix things that are already working. From my experience when a new node goes online most of (almost immediately) connected nodes are masternodes and network bandwidth is never the limiting factor - it's rather CPU or disk of a new node that suffer from incoming data.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
IMO there is no need to fix things that are already working. From my experience when a new node goes online most of (almost immediately) connected nodes are masternodes and network bandwidth is never the limiting factor - it's rather CPU or disk of a new node that suffer from incoming data.
CPU or disk is cheap, bandwidth is expensive.

You should paid MNs per bandwidth. Or per dash clients connected, provided that those clients are real persons (using captcha whenever a dash wallet connects)
 
Last edited:

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Dash Core Team
Moderator
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
CPU or disk is cheap, bandwidth is expensive.

You should paid MNs per bandwidth. Or per dash clients connected, provided that those clients are real persons (using captcha whenever a dash wallet opens)
Again, there is no need to complicate and regulate things which are fine already. Network is not paying for MNs expenses, that's not network's business tbh. Network is paying them for services they provide. If MNs like payments and they can pay their expenses - there are more of them, just like if miners like theirs and can pay their expenses - there are more miners.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Again, there is no need to complicate and regulate things which are fine already. Network is not paying for MNs expenses, that's not network's business tbh. Network is paying them for services they provide. If MNs like payments and they can pay their expenses - there are more of them, just like if miners like theirs and can pay their expenses - there are more miners.
It is not fine. You will create a bubble of MNs , and this will be the cause of dash collapse.

Be smart, dont be like Ethereum and DAO.

You should pay MNs for real services, for rare and valuable services, like the bandwidth is.

My Masternode is not equal to yours, if my Masternode serves 1000 dash wallets and yours serves only 5.