I would like to suggest that it may be a good time to re-evaluate the membership fees the foundation is charging. I am not 100% on this but I think the membership fees have not been re-evaluated for over a year? Price has gone up a lot since then. Anyway, just a request from someone who wants to join . Pablo.
That's possible: if all masternodes are forced to fork some 5 or 10% of their earnings towards the Foundation (the Foundation Tax), so that they have voting rights, then I can see a possibility of your idea to be fair
I would agree to this if it were, say, 5 USD per masternode per month, or some other fixed amount. Pablo.
It would be my view the DASH Foundation should remain a separate function from the DASH Master Node network/voting body. My viewpoint, sans documentation, would be the Foundation is or should be a benevolent group interested in promotion of the DASH vision beyond financial gain. The Master Nodes are certainly interested in financial gain, which is not an unreasonable concept ! IMO, Foundation participation should not be solely dependent upon MN vote, nor should membership in the foundation be restricted by some high monetary price. IMO, ALL reference to USD & btc should be avoided in budgetary and appropriation discussion... the accountant can deal with fiat conversion when necessary. I do NOT know how one actually becomes a member of the DASH Foundation, yet it occurs to me it could be accomplished by a white-paper letter of intent submitted for vote to the existing Foundation members, perhaps along with a gratuity, (or locked amount in wallet), submitted along with that proposal for membership, much as any proposal is submitted to the MNs for vote. YMMV rc
I think raganius' point was that only members of the foundation should be allowed to vote for the board, as they've invested in the foundation. And I agree. If you want to vote for the board, you should be a member. I agree with fible that the dues should be reevaluated. They're really high. The Foundation provides many services such as standing in as a legal entity for the Dash Network. And as such, as owner of our websites and domains and the dash trademark, it has, and should continue to receive funding from the budget. It's also going to be the go-to for legal issues. Since these services the Foundation provides are paid for through the budgeting system, there is no real need to charge outrageously for membership. Membership should be voluntary, should have some cost so as to weed out the rif raf yet be accessible. Eventually, perhaps the Foundation could do things for it's members, which would encourage membership, like other organizations do.... But that idea isn't for now The way Evan has been talking about "Dash Branches", I get a little queezy about thinking that these "branches" would be run by just anyone who wants to propose setting one up. There would be no oversight that way, and who knows if the funded "branch" would actually have people servicing customers or if they'd just be taking the money and faking service, etc... But this is only one idea, and it's obviously not fleshed out yet. But if the Foundation did oversight, I'd feel that's a good project for it.
...and while I am upon my little soapbox... It occurs to me that whenever someone mentions or uses the word 'employee', a relationship with certain and specific liabilities under commercial law is created. As such, it is my opinion this particular word should be removed from the DASH vocabulary and replaced with 'contractor'. The difference between the two is significant, though the same work product shall materialize without DASH assuming legal obligations by the incorrect usage. Please do NOT accept my opinion if you are at all interested in this ! Simple research will enlighten you ! Best rc
Very true, but now you sound like my husband, LOL Certainly the core team has to be careful with their terminology. Though we can't control the general population.....
