[Pre-Proposal] DashBoost - Funding Small Projects By Sub-DAO

Would you support this proposal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 20 83.3%
  • No (Please explain why)

    Votes: 2 8.3%
  • Possible, Need More Info (Please ask your questions)

    Votes: 2 8.3%

  • Total voters
    24

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58


EDIT: Please forward all communication to the update due to the massive differences between this pre-proposal and the proposal which was submitted and passed in the January Cycle. Thanks.

DashBoost


A January 2018 Proposal

View the Google Doc for better formatting and extra information about implementation.


OVERVIEW
Dash Boost will fund low budget proposals outside of the traditional scope of the treasury. This will lower the necessary proposal fee from the petitioner and allow for almost anyone to get involved with the treasury system. All actions will be fully transparent and auditable.

GOALS
  1. Have a website in which all petitions may be viewed, voted on, commented on etc.

  2. Provide funding to petition owners who show competence and have an idea which will increase the value of the Dash network.

  3. Provide fiat locking & escrow services protecting the DAO, Sub-DAO and petitioner.

  4. Provide multi-stage funding for petitions where the next stage is only paid out on completion of a predefined goal.

  5. Provide high quality feedback in the form of a public opinion paper stating why the petition was granted or denied.
SPECIFICATIONS
A petitioner will submit a petition, or request for funding with a maximum value of ~20 dash valued in fiat, including deliverables, proof of involvement in the community and a ~$200 fee in order to minimize spam. The petition will then be live on the site after the submitted petition is verified. At that point community members may vote on the petition with the number of votes being derived from their holdings of dash.
Reviewers
Reviewers will not be implemented initially. Whether or not reviewers will every be implemented will be up to the community and if normal voting works with larger amounts of petitions. In the case that the reviewer system is implemented, both the voters and the reviewers must agree a petition should pass.
A set of three reviewers will work "together" and act similar to judges. They will read the information the petitioner has presented, join calls with the petitioner and review the proofs submitted by the petitioner. At that point the reviewers will evaluate all information including community feedback, votes, potential gain, risk etc and come to a decision. The reviewers will then release their decision in an opinion paper detailing the reasons why the proposal was or was not given a positive mark. In the case the proposal was not accepted, the reviewers have the option to return all or part of the submission fee. Click here to see an outline of how the reviewer system will probably work.


All petitions will be denominated in US Dollars. The requested USD amount will be paid out in Dash using the 7 or 30 Day Simple Moving Average on the Saturday ending the first full week after the superblock.


Submitters will have the default option of multi-staging the petition. Multi-staging a petition will mean that the petitioner agrees that the dash will be released over time as the petitioner accomplishes predefined objectives. Multi-staged proposals will have a much higher chance of being accepted due to the lower chance of fraud. No petitions will be paid in full until predefined deliverables are met.

Long Term Expansion
DashBoost will be committed to expanding our infrastructure and protocols to better supply relevant feedback to petition owners and minimize the number fraudulent petitions that get through. DashBoost is also committed to allowing other teams and groups the ability to use the DashBoost branding, hosting, templates, formatting, protocols, reporting etc to create their own specialized systems to allow funding in different niche markets. These groups can either be funded through DashBoost or may find funding through their own means.

TEAM
We will select around 5 to 10 people from the community as reviewers if it is decided to implement them. These people will be selected based on their knowledge of Dash, project management, ability to work in a team etc. Reviewers will be paid for their efforts at market rate.

COMMUNITY VOTING
Any person can register on DashBoost and verify ownership of a certain address. The balance of that address will correlate to a certain number of votes that the owner will receive and be able to use. The algorithm that decides how many votes a user will receive based on address will be linear (IE. 1 Dash = 1 Vote). Community Voting will primarily be used as a poll. However, if the poll is negative, it will NEVER be directly funded. In the early days of DashBoost the voting system be a simple majority vote.
BUDGET
[Late Stage, if needed]
Each petition will be reviewed by 3 reviewers, with an estimated average of 2 hours per review. At an hourly rate of $40, each petition will cost $240 to review.
Reviewers also check on proposals every stage. This will take an average of 1 hour, totaling $100 per month. If a proposal is multi-stage and has 4 stages we will request $400 for stage review. If it has 2 stages, $200 etc

We have currently started working with a Web Developer who is going to be paid directly in Dash. Over these next few days he and myself will be working together to create a comprehensive plan of attack and specification for the creation of this website. We will post the specification here once it has been completed.

Website design and programming

$30,000

Administration costs

$15,000

Miscellaneous costs
$5,000

Total

$50.000 [edit] per month [/edit]

Any extra left over funds will be carried over to the next month. This project will possibly get funds from GreenCandle's left over money.

MVP
Everything outlined above is based upon community involvement being similar to what I expect it to be. Based on feedback and other factors such as community voting/ commenting involvement the final product may change.
The MVP(Minimum Viable Product) will be guaranteed finalized at the end of February, probably earlier. The MVP will contain, the ability to submit a petition with a fee, the ability to verify ownership of an address, the ability to comment on a petition, the ability to vote on a petition and other small features such as filtering and editing. As long as community involvement remains high, a petition will pass or fail based upon the voting exclusively. In the case that community involvement drops too low to keep fair voting, the reviewer system will be activated. In such a case, the system surrounding reviewers and how to keep them fair outlined in other sections and comments will be used. If the reviewer system is activated, the network will still have the opportunity to vote no and block the petition regardless of what the reviewers say. In the case that the MVP works and solves the problem, we will keep it nice and simple and using the voting mechanism.


MILESTONES(edited)
February 28th
Have a functioning platform, which although not pretty does the basics of what the platform requires. This includes someone being able to submit a petition, and reviewers judging on them. Community members can view and comment on petitions. Meet the MVP spec.

March 31st
Have a fully developed back-end with a solid user interface. Quality of life features such as editing and voting on comments etc. At this point in time, a report will be distributed outlining how the voting mechanics have been working and how we feel about what would be best to ensure good petitions receive funding while those who's purpose is to scam the network do not receive funding. This may contain suggesting keeping the current pure voting system, a voting system with reviewers acting similar to PEC and reviewing a petition by having no actual sway and a system where both the reviewers and the voters must agree that a petition should be passed.

End of Q1
Have a fully functional fully accountable platform which is capable of diverting hundreds of small proposals away from the MNOs every month. Have a fully functional website with little to no bugs and a review process that ensures all petitions are treated fairly and minimizes risk.

CLOSING

Thank you greatly for reading this pre-proposal. Both myself and @Nutomic on discord have been involved in the creation of proposal, he has served as a great back-board to knock ideas off of and help smooth out this proposal. He is working closely on this project with myself. He or myself will attempt to respond to any comments or questions posted. If there is anyone who would like to talk about this 1 on 1 with myself or would like to work with this proposal, either in the form of being a reviewer or designing and creating the website that will be used, please contact me on discord ( @Pasta ).

I would like to thank everyone again and encourage you to respond with any comments, feedback or questions you may have.
 
Last edited:

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
We have currently started working with a Web Developer who is going to be and has been paid directly in Dash. Over these next few days he and myself will be working together to create a comprehensive plan of attack and specification for the creation of this website. We will post the specification here once it has been completed. We are hopeful that we will have a Minimum Viable Product by the time we push this to the full treasury.

Both he and myself are very excited to work together and make this site work. I cannot wait.
 

djcrypto

Member
May 27, 2014
180
94
88
Hi @Pasta

Looks like a good idea!
I also know that GC is doing something similar with GreenCandle Grant Center.

Will you be forming a corporation with accounting and legal advice to set this up?
What will your fees be like? Or will it have a monthly budget? What are the expected operating expenses?

I know there is accounting and legal issues for GC, especially when they convert to fiat.
Why would you convert all Dash to fiat?
I think we should be trying to encourage a Dash-based economy. don't you?
Let the contractors convert to fiat themselves if they have to.

My two bits.
 

Beru

Member
Oct 5, 2017
43
24
48
49
Thats a much needed structure. Theres a lot of talking about that. Are you open to collaborate with others who wants to do pretty much the same thing? I dont think we want rival organisations at this point. If you can make the fee high enough to make the petitionner pay for the evaluation it will make a more perrenial system IMO. Without being volunteer driven, I think you have to cut the evaluation price. With support and participation from known old timers, you have better chance I think.
 

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
Hi @Pasta

Looks like a good idea!
I also know that GC is doing something similar with GreenCandle Grant Center.

Will you be forming a corporation with accounting and legal advice to set this up?
What will your fees be like? Or will it have a monthly budget? What are the expected operating expenses?

I know there is accounting and legal issues for GC, especially when they convert to fiat.
Why would you convert all Dash to fiat?
I think we should be trying to encourage a Dash-based economy. don't you?
Let the contractors convert to fiat themselves if they have to.

My two bits.
Hey @djcrypto thanks for your response.
I have talked to Jeff at Green Candle. We are aware of the similarities of our projects and we have been in talks about what might happen. As of this point in time, to my knowledge Green Candle is not ready to deploy a solution soon. There are some differences between GC and DB and I am going to be in continued talks with them in order to maximize the potential of the dash ecosystem and both of our plans.
As of this point in time no corporation will be formed. When appropriate we will contact tax professionals on how to properly handle it.
No fees will be applied to the petition owner(except the anti spam fee which will be given back as long as it is not a spam/garbage petition). There will either be a monthly budget or one proposal every few months to fund the project. The expected costs are outlined in the budget section. $240 per proposal review. $100 per month of follow up. $10000 per month in administrative costs and an initial $10000 budget for the website development.
No Dash will be converted to fiat, minimizing legalities. Instead the amount of dash given to the petition owner be will be based on the moving average of the price when it is awarded. The petition is locked to USD values but is paid in dash.
Thanks for your questions. If you have any more I will try to answer them as soon as possible! Have a good day.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rion

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
Thats a much needed structure. Theres a lot of talking about that. Are you open to collaborate with others who wants to do pretty much the same thing? I dont think we want rival organisations at this point. If you can make the fee high enough to make the petitionner pay for the evaluation it will make a more perrenial system IMO. Without being volunteer driven, I think you have to cut the evaluation price. With support and participation from known old timers, you have better chance I think.
Hey @Beru, thanks for responding. I am always open to working along side of other people within the community. My goal is for this problem that I see to be resolved. Any way that happens I will be happy.
I'm not sure if this is what you ment, when you mentioned volunteering, however the reviewers of a petition will be compensated for their time at fair market rates.
Since the fee will be given back to accepted petitions, I do not see how it is possible to construct a system where the reviewing process is paid by the petitioner. If you used such a system, that would only correlate to an increase in the cost of the petition which would result in the same amount of total dash being requested. From my perspective, if you separate the petitions and the reviewing costs it is easier to see where all of the funds are being used and allows for easier community auditability, a feature that is a must for me.
Thanks for your response. Please respond with any questions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ayo_brezzy

Blake

Member
Mar 16, 2017
120
53
78
37
I think this could be very good. To have major league and minor league proposals going on side by side would be ideal to me. Like the name, the concept....good work. I have had two proposals pass and three fail. I know the system well and think something like this would be a great thing for people who get positive reviews in the pre-proposal phase to hop into next. This is what I was trying to do with Dash Texas (my current proposal that passed) was find people that were trustworthy and truly liked Dash that lived in Texas. I know many that would find use in this idea-good thinking!
 
  • Like
Reactions: rion and Pasta

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
I think this could be very good. To have major league and minor league proposals going on side by side would be ideal to me. Like the name, the concept....good work. I have had two proposals pass and three fail. I know the system well and think something like this would be a great thing for people who get positive reviews in the pre-proposal phase to hop into next. This is what I was trying to do with Dash Texas (my current proposal that passed) was find people that were trustworthy and truly liked Dash that lived in Texas. I know many that would find use in this idea-good thinking!
Thanks @Blake, your support means a lot. I am very excited for this and cannot wait to help out smaller project owners!
 

Blake

Member
Mar 16, 2017
120
53
78
37
I will most definitely direct people your way if this passes-best of luck and have a good 2018! Will keep checking on this one!
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
2,992
1,152
1,183
I definitely like this. However, I think I would prefer to see a targeted region or proposal type. For example, Latin America Artists, or South East Asia Social Media, etc etc. Because, ultimately, this is something that could be replicated and have maximum returns because of specific targeting.

Keep in mind, small projects may not be global in nature, and English is not everyone's first or preferred language i.e. better suited to native speakers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rion

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
I definitely like this. However, I think I would prefer to see a targeted region or proposal type. For example, Latin America Artists, or South East Asia Social Media, etc etc. Because, ultimately, this is something that could be replicated and have maximum returns because of specific targeting.

Keep in mind, small projects may not be global in nature, and English is not everyone's first or preferred language i.e. better suited to native speakers.
Hi @GrandMasterDash, as we expand if needed I would begin implementing having sub groups under DashBoost, these sub groups would be able to use our branding and would be able to use a sub-domain of our website with our template and methodology used as well as one of our ssl certificates, etc. However they would have a high level of specific knowledge about the region they are creating their group for.
I find this to be the best option for the network because this would retain the easy and simply auditability I have been striving for and have been implementing into our site. If there become 100 different completely separated funding groups how do you audit them? Chances are you won't be able to for some of them. I am all for competition and if another group wants to come up separate of DashBoost and get network funding, more power to 'em. However I believe the best option to ensure auditability is have at most around 3-5 primary sub-DAOs who get direct funding.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
2,992
1,152
1,183
Hi @GrandMasterDash, as we expand if needed I would begin implementing having sub groups under DashBoost, these sub groups would be able to use our branding and would be able to use a sub-domain of our website with our template and methodology used as well as one of our ssl certificates, etc. However they would have a high level of specific knowledge about the region they are creating their group for.
I find this to be the best option for the network because this would retain the easy and simply auditability I have been striving for and have been implementing into our site. If there become 100 different completely separated funding groups how do you audit them? Chances are you won't be able to for some of them. I am all for competition and if another group wants to come up separate of DashBoost and get network funding, more power to 'em. However I believe the best option to ensure auditability is have at most around 3-5 primary sub-DAOs who get direct funding.
I'm sorry but I totally disagree with this. We wouldn't be able to audit all these sub-daos, true, but that's exactly what decentralization entails.

Would I want big payments to go to your (eventual) big organization and trust you with global sub-daos? - absolutely not. Should I trust that you will have enough expertise and deep understanding of each region / niche market? - obviously not. Korean sub-daos should be managed by Koreans. Likewise, a Bollywood sub-dao would be best served with those most knowledgeable in that field. And so on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ayo_brezzy

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
I'm sorry but I totally disagree with this. We wouldn't be able to audit all these sub-daos, true, but that's exactly what decentralization entails.

Would I want big payments to go to your (eventual) big organization and trust you with global sub-daos? - absolutely not. Should I trust that you will have enough expertise and deep understanding of each region / niche market? - obviously not. Korean sub-daos should be managed by Koreans. Likewise, a Bollywood sub-dao would be best served with those most knowledgeable in that field. And so on.
Personally I think one of the most important parts of our treasury system is making sure you can audit where the money is going and if you approve of that. With a large number of sub dao's all having their own website and formats I believe that to be impossible. For such a reason, I think this system with the future expansion of highly specialized groups under DashBoost, allowing for the same format of information and all the information able to be found in one place, is the best compromise between consistency of information, auditablity and specialization, making sure the people giving out the money intimately know the field they are operating in. This would allow for the Korean DashBoost to be lead by Koreans and same with anywhere else or any other niche market, while also maintaining a similarity of format and information allowing for you to find where all the funds are going to very easily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ayo_brezzy

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
2,992
1,152
1,183
Personally I think one of the most important parts of our treasury system is making sure you can audit where the money is going and if you approve of that. With a large number of sub dao's all having their own website and formats I believe that to be impossible. For such a reason, I think this system with the future expansion of highly specialized groups under DashBoost, allowing for the same format of information and all the information able to be found in one place, is the best compromise between consistency of information, auditablity and specialization, making sure the people giving out the money intimately know the field they are operating in. This would allow for the Korean DashBoost to be lead by Koreans and same with anywhere else or any other niche market, while also maintaining a similarity of format and information allowing for you to find where all the funds are going to very easily.
"in one place" is exactly centralization. Do I approve of alternatives to Dash Central? - absolutely, I wholeheartedly encourage it.

Let's say you are audited and found to be dishonest.. that would put all your sub-daos into chaos, globally. Right now, for example, we have a Russian news dao separately funded and run very well by Russians. If she messes up, we can defund her with zero impact on other countries / niches.

I don't understand why you - as a New Member - are trying to convince us that you are best positioned to achieve this globally.
 

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
"in one place" is exactly centralization. Do I approve of alternatives to Dash Central? - absolutely, I wholeheartedly encourage it.

Let's say you are audited and found to be dishonest.. that would put all your sub-daos into chaos, globally. Right now, for example, we have a Russian news dao separately funded and run very well by Russians. If she messes up, we can defund her with zero impact on other countries / niches.

I don't understand why you - as a New Member - are trying to convince us that you are best positioned to achieve this globally.
At the moment, we have only a few news daos. It is very easy to go through each of their medias and find out if they are doing what they are supposed to do. However, there is no ability for that to scale. We have seen an increase in the number of proposals already, it is very difficult at this stage to make sure everyone is doing what they promised. Now image if you have hundreds of small proposals a month. Thousands per year. You cannot make that easily community auditable without some level of centralization. If DashBoost is found to be doing dishonest acts, which it won't, then the groups working with us getting funding through us could go either go directly to either the treasury or greencandle and ask for funding and show their results of what they have done and easily get funding.
Like I have said before, I have no problem with other ideas fulfilling this gap in the community and I am all for competition and adjusting my proposal. If we get to the point when this level of expansion is necessary, these groups can be under the DashBoost umbrella (ie web domain and hosting, ssl support, formatting, etc) and still request their own funding directly from the treasury. In such case, malevolent acts inside of DashBoost wouldn't affect their funding in any way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ayo_brezzy

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
I have updated the initial post adding the section "Long Term Expansion" outlining the basics of how we wish to work with other specialized funding groups.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
2,992
1,152
1,183
I am from the United States with Spanish as a Second Language.
With respect, why don't you limit operations to North America and Canada? Surely this is a big enough market to fulfill? I mean, this is a test case, you don't need global ambitions at this stage. Someone else can come along, see what you're doing and implement a European version, while another attacking South East Asia, and so on. Each territory is more than big enough. If you want to work with others then fine, but why push a singularly accountable global agenda from day one?
 

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
With respect, why don't you limit operations to North America and Canada? Surely this is a big enough market to fulfill? I mean, this is a test case, you don't need global ambitions at this stage. Someone else can come along, see what you're doing and implement a European version, while another attacking South East Asia, and so on. Each territory is more than big enough. If you want to work with others then fine, but why push a singularly accountable global agenda from day one?
That is a really good suggestion. I will be sure to talk with my team about that. At this point, with there being zero solutions close to being ready to go to market similar to how we are, I don't want to rule out regions until there is a group there which could supply them with funding. For example, as soon as there is a group in Japan doing stuff like this, we could shut down our operations in Japan but I don't want to stop people in the community to get funding if you know what I mean. I definitely believe we will have a focus on NA with a secondary on the UK. You know what I am saying? I don't want to cut them off without them having an option.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
2,992
1,152
1,183
@Pasta when it came to China, for example, we needed specialist help; cultural differences etc. And, honestly, people in local markets have no problem finding their local dash resources
That is a really good suggestion. I will be sure to talk with my team about that. At this point, with there being zero solutions close to being ready to go to market similar to how we are, I don't want to rule out regions until there is a group there which could supply them with funding. For example, as soon as there is a group in Japan doing stuff like this, we could shut down our operations in Japan but I don't want to stop people in the community to get funding if you know what I mean. I definitely believe we will have a focus on NA with a secondary on the UK. You know what I am saying? I don't want to cut them off without them having an option.
And keep in mind, for each local market, you want to provide local escrow services.

Build a template for others to work with. It's fine for me to vote 7 sub-daos than 100 proposals times 7.
 

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
@Pasta when it came to China, for example, we needed specialist help; cultural differences etc. And, honestly, people in local markets have no problem finding their local dash resources


And keep in mind, for each local market, you want to provide local escrow services.

Build a template for others to work with. It's fine for me to vote 7 sub-daos than 100 proposals times 7.
What would you think of that being a general guideline but not a hard fast rule?
 

charlieb

New Member
Dec 15, 2017
12
7
3
41
I really like this proposal. I'd like to know more about the judges. Will there be the same three sitting in judgement on each proposal or will there be a selection from a pool. I think a pool would be nice but perhaps only necessary if you go beyond the proposed volume of applications. Other than resubmission to the DAO what kind of oversight will be in place to ensure the network as a whole agrees with the judges' decisions? Will the judging discussions be published or just the decision document?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pasta

Pasta

Member
Core Developer
Apr 29, 2017
87
81
58
I really like this proposal. I'd like to know more about the judges. Will there be the same three sitting in judgement on each proposal or will there be a selection from a pool. I think a pool would be nice but perhaps only necessary if you go beyond the proposed volume of applications. Other than resubmission to the DAO what kind of oversight will be in place to ensure the network as a whole agrees with the judges' decisions? Will the judging discussions be published or just the decision document?
Hey @charlieb, it depends how many qualified reviewers we get whether it will be a pool or the same all the time. At the moment I have enough reviewers to be able to do this successfully however I do not yet have enough for the long term. I definitely want a large pool of qualified reviewers. All reviewers have to come to agreement on if the petition should receive funding or not, if they disagree they have to come together and talk to a solution. And all 3 rubrics and the final decision document will be publicly available as well as all info the petitioner provided. There will be voting, so you can vote on a petition acting like a poll and making sure we are acting in a way the community supports. In addition there will be comments sections open through the whole process as well as discord if you want to give feedback as to why you think a certain petition should be granted or denied. In addition, since most of these will be multistaged, even if it passes the first time you can post a bunch in the comments and talk to us about why it's bad etc and at the review for it we might cut it's funding based on community feedback.
 

charlieb

New Member
Dec 15, 2017
12
7
3
41
Hey @charlieb, it depends how many qualified reviewers we get whether it will be a pool or the same all the time. At the moment I have enough reviewers to be able to do this successfully however I do not yet have enough for the long term. I definitely want a large pool of qualified reviewers. All reviewers have to come to agreement on if the petition should receive funding or not, if they disagree they have to come together and talk to a solution. And all 3 rubrics and the final decision document will be publicly available as well as all info the petitioner provided. There will be voting, so you can vote on a petition acting like a poll and making sure we are acting in a way the community supports. In addition there will be comments sections open through the whole process as well as discord if you want to give feedback as to why you think a certain petition should be granted or denied. In addition, since most of these will be multistaged, even if it passes the first time you can post a bunch in the comments and talk to us about why it's bad etc and at the review for it we might cut it's funding based on community feedback.
Don't get me wrong I really like this proposal but it seems centralized and undemocratic. Since we're working with a courtroom metaphor have you considered having a jury of dash holding volunteers with one of your judges acting as the qualified and vetted foreman? That way you could have a large pool, majority voting and a natural recruiting ground for judges/foremen. Something to think about perhaps.