Pre-Proposal: Detailed Research & Analysis of All Dash Proposals on a Monthly Basis

As an NMO, would you vote for this proposal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 68.4%
  • No

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • Potentially, with some changes

    Votes: 1 5.3%

  • Total voters
    19

craigums

Member
Jul 7, 2017
44
32
58
37
Hi All! Here's our pre-proposal. Looking forward to your feedback and to submitting it for next month's budget cycle. Thanks you all for your help in putting it together and for your support thus far!


Pre-Proposal: Detailed Research & Analysis Of All Dash Proposals on a Monthly Basis


Abstract
: We (Craig Mason and Paul Mason) propose to research and analyze Dash budget proposals on a monthly basis in a video format as well as in writing. In doing so, we believe that this proposal will provide a win-win outcome in terms of efficiency for Dash MasterNode Owners (MNOs) as each MNO requires similar information in order to make informed decisions when voting on budget proposals. We will analyze proposals based on their apparent long-term value proposition for Dash, and we believe that we are qualified to do so based on our past performance, dedication to reason and evidence, and ability to communicate these concepts in a useful manner. In doing so, we believe that we can save Dash MNOs tens of thousands of dollars in value for a fraction of the cost.


Goal: we will research, summarize, and analyze all Dash budget proposals each month in order to provide Master Node Owners with succinct and useful information in order to simplify and assist decision making in the voting process. (The general idea of this proposal is also summarized in video form here:
)


Deliverables: each month we will research each Dash budget proposal and create a video in which we summarize and discuss each proposal as well as provide our personal opinions as to how we would vote were we to have masternodes. We will also provide a written synopsis of our findings containing similar information.



Who are we: we are two brothers, Craig & Paul Mason, with a YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/craigmason) in which we discuss a variety of topics including crypto currencies, philosophy, and the world. Craig is an accountant with a master’s degree who has consulted with a variety of small businesses over the last 10 years and has previously started and sold an accounting firm. Paul is a chef by trade and has a degree in philosophy. Both of us are students of philosophy, logic, and reason for many years prior to beginning our channel. (Examples of previous work linked below in the “Examples” section.)



Background: Dash’s budget proposal function allows for decentralized decision making by MNOs, who have the incentive to make decisions for the long-term best interest of Dash’s value and continued adoption. However, with Dash’s continuing strong growth and its increasing budget, proposals continue to increase, not only in quantity, but in complexity and magnitude as well.

As a result, in order to make fully informed decisions, MNO’s would be forced to spend potentially hours each month researching and considering each proposal before making their votes.

In areas in which significant amounts (in terms of sheer magnitude) of new or changing information are relevant to an industry or group, i.e. perhaps the significance of new tax legislation to an accounting firm, other firms, which specialize in research and analysis, often provide value to such a group, in this example to accounting firms, by providing a reliable “distillation” of the new legislation down to its key points and implications.

Such an arrangement allows for far greater efficiency for the entire group than if each member were forced to do the research independently, as each individual member of the group is seeking essentially the same information. Thus the entire group of firms gains value from such an arrangement.


Value: when we apply the above principle regarding outsourced research to Dash, we can see that there is a similar potential for benefit:

Assuming only 1,000 MNOs out of 4,500+ master nodes cast votes in total, and if each voting MNO were to spend an average 1.5 hours researching and deciding on all proposals could be reduced by only a third (from 1.5 hours to 1 hour), this would save a total of 500 man hours. Assuming the average value of an MNO’s time is worth $40/hour this saves a gross reduction of $20,000/month in MNOs’ time. We believe this is a conservative estimate of the value we provide and will be asking for less than half of this amount.

Additionally, many MNOs simply may not have the time or desire to research each proposal each month. As a result, MNOs may cast votes which result in a suboptimal allocation of Dash’s budget. If, as a result of the research proposed herein, MNOs can make even slightly more informed decisions, which result in only a .001% improvement in Dash’s market value (currently more than $2 billion as of the writing of this proposal), the value of such a result would be approximately $20,000.


Cost: 18.333 Dash/month + 5 Dash for reimbursement for the proposal fee for a total of 20 Dash/month over 3 months. One MNO suggested that we charge 30 Dash/month, but we feel that the proposed amount is adequate compensation for the proposed scope of work.


Examples of previous work:

Previous Dash Proposal Videos:

September 2017:


August 2017:

July 2017:


Other Dash videos we’ve made:

Why Dash Keep Getting Better:

On The Dash Community: https://youtu.be/Icrc76zWqBw

Can Dash Compete With Bitcoin Cash?: https://youtu.be/956qdG42MgE

Max Keiser Should Join Up With Dash: https://youtu.be/f44hwWaBxGY

What’s The Deal With The Dash “Instamine”?: https://youtu.be/UncqwuxCmJQ

Max Keiser Dash Bus Tour Proposal Analysis: https://youtu.be/QZ07sXrvVcM



Criteria Upon Which Proposals Will Be Evaluated:

All proposals will be evaluated based on their expected long run value to the Dash network. We believe that the more reasonable methodology to do so is by using an estimated expected long-term return on investment (ROI) calculation which takes into account the potential benefit that may be realized in relation to the costs. More specifically, we believe the following factors contribute to increasing Dash’s value in the long run:

· Potential for increased adoption: any crypto currency only survives and thrives with a significant network effect – will the proposal potentially cause those unfamiliar with Dash to begin using it? I.e. does it bring awareness of Dash to actual potential users (i.e. properly targeted) who may be interested such a product? Does it do so in a way consistent with principles of sales and marketing which are likely to lead to actual adoption and use (i.e. repeated exposure)? (Examples include: targeted advertising, outreach to targeted communities, etc.)


· Potential for increased use/stickiness: there is an adage in business that we believe to be true which is as follows: it takes far less resources to keep a current customer than to get a new one – Does the proposal help in making current (and especially new) users able to use or find out about Dash more easily? (Examples include: Dash focused media resources such as Dash Force News, region or language specific resources for developing local communities, translations of existing resources, etc.)


· Potential for increased value to the Dash network itself: only products that are valuable succeed attain sustainable market share in the long run – does the proposal help Dash provide more value to its users? (i.e. does it make Dash more user friendly, more secure, more robust, or in some other way a better product for users in general?) (Examples include: the Dash bug bounty program, software development, etc.)



Potential Risks (and Proposed Mitigating Factors) with this Proposal:

· Potential for maligned incentives: were we to accept donations from proposal owners may create incentive to review those proposal owners more favorably than reviews based on perceived merit alone. If you’ve seen The Big Short, this potential problem is clearly evidenced when it comes to light that the rating agencies are paid by big banks, and thus become incentivized to rate their products favorably.

Proposed solution: we will not be accepting donations from any proposal owners. Previously we have received less than 0.5. Dash in unsolicited donations the majority of which was from one proposal owner. Prior to the close of voting on this proposal we will either return those funds to the donor or donate the funds to another cause unrelated to Dash.

While we may potentially open up our channel to accepting donations in general in the future, we will return or donate forward to others any donations received from known proposal owners. (Currently, the only donations we receive have been via the Dash Slack “tip bot” which were unsolicited.)

Additionally, we will disclose all other income related to our channel(s) from any other sources. As we have stated many times on our channel, we believe values are at the root of making good decisions. We believe that transparency is a key value to for a venture such as this, and as such, we will strive to make our venture as transparent as possible to everyone involved.


· Centralization of media sources and potential censorship: if you have seen our previous content related to other topics, you’ll have noticed that we don’t shy from discussion controversial topics. With increasing censorship from mainstream tech platforms of non-advertiser friendly content creators, this leaves open the door that our platform could be taken away at any moment.

Proposed solution: as other have suggested, we will be posting videos relating to this proposal on a new cryptocurrency only focused channel on YouTube (to be created) as well as on at least one other less censorship platform (TBD, likely DTube or BitChute). This will allow the videos related to this proposal to both benefit from exposure to the subscriber base or our current channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/craigmason) as well as allowing others to share the content without associating it with unrelated and potentially controversial topics. Additionally, by posting the content on less censorship prone platforms as well, the content will be less resistant to censorship in general.


· Other unknown factors: as with any new venture, we are sure that there are other risk factors which we have not taken into account here.

Proposed solution: openness to criticism is one of our core values. We believe in consistently improving and correcting our mistakes. As such, as we have done thus far, we will encourage any and all feedback as to how we can improve our work.


OTHER FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION AND DISCLOSURES

· Please note that the content to be created from this proposal will be based on information that has not been verified by us. (i.e. proposal owners and others put forth information and make promises which we cannot verify.) The content we create will be entirely reliant on unverified information provided by others or will be our own personal opinions. None of the information provided is intended to be financial advice or an assurance of the accuracy of information put forth by the potential proposal owners or any other sources. The value we will provide will come from the time spent in distillation, summation, and analysis of that information rather than any kind of assurance or advice as to how to use it. All information put forth will either be our personal opinions or unverified information only.


Conclusion: we look forward to your feedback and for the opportunity to work with the Dash community and hope that we can create a mutually beneficial relationship that makes the lives of MNO’s easier and helps contribute to Dash’s bright future. We can be reached in this pre-preposal thread, via email at [email protected], or via twitter @oldcraig (Craig) and @lilpolty (Paul).


Thank you all for your consideration.

-Craig Mason & Paul Mason

edited to add September video link!
 
Last edited:

thedesertlynx

Active Member
Sep 6, 2016
162
150
103
34
Looks like a good addition to the ecosystem. I have some suggestions that may or may not have already been thought of, but they're elements of what I feel would be a great proposal evaluation system:

1) Qualifications. Does the proposal owner have skills and work experience necessary to execute what they propose? It's perfectly reasonable to ask for a resume/LinkedIn/whathaveyou and to mention if the proposal owner provided one or not.

2) Who are they, what's their history with Dash? What's their interest, why are they trying to interface with the network? This weeds out cash grab types who just hear Dash is giving out money and try to get it.

3) How will they handle the funds? Once the payment leaves the superblock, how will they store it, convert it to fiat to pay expenses, and account for price fluctuations? If the price goes way up and they get way more money than they thought, what will they do with the extra funds? Is there any escrow involved?

Now, three suggestions for how to do the videos themselves:

1) Speed them up vs. the casual pace of the previous videos. This is only because we have just so, so many proposals to go through, and if they take too long people will just tune out, no matter how good.

2) Add links to jump to specific proposals. That way people can jump around and get only the info they want.

3) Have a top 3/5/whatever from you guys' personal perspective. I would love to do the same thing for Dash Force News, but it helps to have another independent group doing the same thing as well so both are properly viewed as personal favorites, not undue efforts to influence the network.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dima

craigums

Member
Jul 7, 2017
44
32
58
37
@thedesertlynx - These are great suggestions. I agree that qualifications, history, and specific handling of funds are all important factors. We will add these as considerations for the final proposal.

Re the video suggestions:

1. I agree that the videos need to be tight and engaging. We've hired a professional editor for our Sept video (up today or tomorrow) - she is great and we'll be working with her to continuously improve the production/pacing/quality of the videos.

2. Good call - timestamps/links incoming for the next video.

3. Love this idea. Will add it in Oct's video. I feel as though some of the really cool ones get lost with the ones that we like but aren't quite as jazzed about. This will help those stand out.

Thanks again for the suggestions and help in getting this done. Looking forward to see how it goes!
 

MizzyMax

Member
Feb 14, 2017
168
31
88
26
Even though I really like your videos as I have mentioned To you guys before. I don't think Dash should fund any party to sway votes a certain way. It's morally wrong from a decentralized standpoint. Once you start to have the power to sway votes a certain way you can decide the future of Dash in a way.

Like Iv said before on the PEC proposal, this idea leads to gateways of bribing/ if you're friends you automatically are approved of. There are ways people will try and use you and get on your good side because they know you make these videos. If Masternodes vote for you then they obviously use what you are producing so there would be no question your review could have strong impact on a proposal.

The PEC system was also a very flawed system to grade proposals on, yours is much more fluid, if you happen to go through with this anyway I suggest keeping to the same subjects you talk about. Looking at the over all value of a concept is what is important rather then little details of how someone will manage funds/ previous work experience/ previous involvement in Dash. It starts to become a system of micro management when you get into those fields and you can almost always find a flaw that leads to questionable highly opinionated ideas. I think the videos are great as they are right now personally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nebojsa

craigums

Member
Jul 7, 2017
44
32
58
37
@MizzyMax - I pretty much completely agree with your sentiments. I agree that undue influence needs to be closely monitored and that the "big picture" should be the focus of evaluation. We'll have a revised actual proposal up soon...thanks again everyone for the feedback! =D
 

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
It sounds good in theory, but this lends itself to bribery/favoritism/nepotism too easily.

I also agree that the Voting feature of MNs is broken because the MNOs are broken.

While I understand your intention is to band-aid this, I have to say no due to the influence capability. Even if you are 100% honest, the potential exists, and that is all it takes to undermine what is largely a trustless system.
 
Last edited:

CaptAhab

Member
Mar 25, 2015
102
57
78
Dash Address
XwUeFiUQz1qLurzcpzKBDUTPvj1Tzx3FYs
Perhaps you will get to review your own proposal?
 

thedesertlynx

Active Member
Sep 6, 2016
162
150
103
34
Cool! I'll repeat what I said on Dash Central: I'm in favor as this is something that too few people are doing: actually evaluating and summarizing proposals to save masternodes time. MNOs can always do their own research, in particular if something in the review catches their interest. I should add two things:

1) Someone absolutely has to get the ball rolling here! Everyone is terrified of making enemies or doing this project wrong, and therefore much-needed evaluation doesn't happen. This is worth it solely on the basis of starting it out.

2) In order to provide some decentralization in the evaluation game, myself and my colleagues will discuss doing our own "top picks" pre-proposal review. That way right off the bat you get two different perspectives on proposals, which makes it far safer/less scary to even more reviewers to join in if they so choose.
 

craigums

Member
Jul 7, 2017
44
32
58
37
Cool! I'll repeat what I said on Dash Central: I'm in favor as this is something that too few people are doing: actually evaluating and summarizing proposals to save masternodes time. MNOs can always do their own research, in particular if something in the review catches their interest. I should add two things:

1) Someone absolutely has to get the ball rolling here! Everyone is terrified of making enemies or doing this project wrong, and therefore much-needed evaluation doesn't happen. This is worth it solely on the basis of starting it out.

2) In order to provide some decentralization in the evaluation game, myself and my colleagues will discuss doing our own "top picks" pre-proposal review. That way right off the bat you get two different perspectives on proposals, which makes it far safer/less scary to even more reviewers to join in if they so choose.
Thanks TDL! I'll repeat my response from Dash Central as well: Good calls on both counts. The idea that this opens up the dialogue for others to do the same is a big point towards pushing me to actually go through with it. I look forward to seeing what you guys at DFN come up with as well.

As "making enemies" with unpopular viewpoints, I have plenty of experience doing so, so no concerns there...However, it seems like the Dash community is far more open to reasonable conversation and constructive criticism as it's value driven (both philosophically and monetarily) and thus, I hope and suspect that we won't make too many enemies.

Thanks again for all of your insights and encouragement to go forward with this. They were instrumental in getting it done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thedesertlynx

EazyDay

Member
Feb 2, 2017
40
13
48
49
Gilbert
about.me
Dash Address
XtN1c3dxyHCTu4CtPi7z3U7pSTbLShupce
  • Kudos, you did find a real problem that can, if not already, get out of hand. I did not read even half of the proposals, to much minutia.
  • I like the idea of TV show for proposals. Dash meets CSPAN.
  • This is actually a much larger idea, so are you willing to let professional TV producers take over as this grows?
  • Would Dash own the show/IP and your team paid a salary?
  • I would not support an Op-Ed Dash branded TV show. " our opinions and philosophy "@240 in the first video. For me, I need you to decide if you want to be Journalists with facts or Op-ed writers/producers? However, there is a space for both ideas in the market, but is another conversation.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
2,963
1,140
1,183
For me, if you could get some interviews with proposers, and keep us posted on active proposals, and go a bit deeper with general investigation, then I would vote for this.

Tbh, while ABJs work was good, imo she would sometimes shy away from confrontation / challenging questions. In this respect, I sense that perhaps you would better fill this gap.

I really don't mind if you duplicate some of the functions of DFN because the multiple perspective is very attractive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: younglegend

younglegend

Member
Jan 1, 2017
102
17
68
Yeah, I agree that we need more communications on what

is going on with our proposals. If they have to be anonymous for some reason, let them be,

but the progress should be reported. Also I like when proposals doesn't get paid all at once.