Prioritization of fiat gateways

Status
Not open for further replies.

oaxaca

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 8, 2014
573
832
263
There is a way to redirect the awareness funds conviently and also preserve the integrity of the masternode governance.

Create a proposal that says something to the effect that fiat payment gateways are an acceptable use of awareness funds and let the masternodes vote on it.
Even easier is to create a new budget proposal listing all these items and downvote "awareness". That would be integrity.
 

JGCMiner

Active Member
Jun 8, 2014
364
217
113
Even easier is to create a new budget proposal listing all these items and downvote "awareness". That would be integrity.
I think this whole thing was about MN owner convenience anyway -- as explained in the first post.

It would be a pain for everybody to down vote awareness and then up vote the new proposal only to rinse and repeat when 12.1 is released. And what happens if awareness is not down voted in time? If voting participation is any indication MN owners don't really pay attention. That would have been even a bigger mess.

I just think that some of these things are not black and white -- and in this particular case the ends justify the means. Plus if Evan was really trying to circumvent voting process there was no reason for him to saying anything before actual binding contracts had been signed...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ryan Taylor

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 3, 2014
550
1,649
263
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Maybe we should put it to a vote whether we should proceed with the downvote? Give it 24 hours to see the level of participation. It would be a great proxy to see how many MN downvotes we would be able to get quickly. If the number of downvotes we would get quickly is enough to ensure Pub. Awareness can be voted out in time, we could proceed. There might still be time to do it safely.

In the future, functionality will exist to allow a budget owner to cancel a budget item without having to request the network to take action. This will allow us to eliminate this risk. In the meantime, it is a risk we have to manage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

Ryan Taylor

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 3, 2014
550
1,649
263
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
OR we could just issue a 5 Dash "decision" proposal that says "should we redirect the funds?". That would also be a risk-free approach to getting network consensus without the need for a risky downvote.

EDIT: It is clear to me that most community members are supportive of the redirect... this would just allow us to make it official.
 

AnarchicCluster

Active Member
Dec 22, 2014
399
408
133
Dash Address
XgJkzjmW1onXH8EsaaZakN1GswjjnAYhUE
Just to clear this point up:

It should actually have been pretty simple for the core team. Evan publicly stated in the past that the core team as a whole owns slightly under 10% of all coins in existence. If you consider the Yay votes have to be 10% over the Nay votes (only of voting nodes, not all nodes) for a proposal to pass, it should not have been that hard to down-vote the PR initiative. Or you could just start a new proposal indicating re-purposement of funds without having to down-vote anything; either option is pretty straight forward,

Anyway, like I said, I think its a great re-purposement, but we have to be careful not to become complacent.

:)

Pablo.
Hi Pablo
I hear your concerns and I think an interesting solution to this would be a proposal created by you or any other community member with one simple question: Do you agree with redirecting funds from public awareness budget to the development of Fiat-to-Dash gateways? I'm sure it will pass and everybody will rejoice, however if it didn't pass, the core team would have to take that into account. In other case it would leave a huge stain on the project's credibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

JGCMiner

Active Member
Jun 8, 2014
364
217
113
OR we could just issue a 5 Dash "decision" proposal that says "should we redirect the funds?". That would also be a risk-free approach to getting network consensus without the need for a risky downvote.

EDIT: It is clear to me that most community members are supportive of the redirect... this would just allow us to make it official.
Good idea. eduffield ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

AnarchicCluster

Active Member
Dec 22, 2014
399
408
133
Dash Address
XgJkzjmW1onXH8EsaaZakN1GswjjnAYhUE
AnarchicCluster, I beat you to it! ;)

Now we just need a vote to see if this voting thing is a good idea! :tongue::tongue:
Haha yes you did! Actually I had this post written a while back just got distracted with other things (stupid job) and posted it much later than I intended.

Anyway, you know what they say, about great minds ;) hehehe
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo and tungfa

hiddendark

Member
Mar 19, 2014
65
39
58
The title and content on DashWhale should be updated with the info from the start of this thread.

There should also be a note about the change having been made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

koampapapa

New Member
Mar 5, 2016
38
28
18
This is more than trading bots. It will be a wallet, broker, limit order exchange, and more. Trade bots are just one of the first things that will come out of the parternship.

As for my experience, I co-founded and was the primary developer for Coinapult. We've been building bitcoin wallet, exchange, and trading software since 2011. In this 4th generation, we decided to open source everything and do it right, once and for all. If you wish to start a competing brokerage, as it sounds, please watch and make use of the code that comes out.
Okay, do you know what an API is? Because there is no way it should take 3 weeks to create a bot that polls 3 exchanges and their order books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

oaxaca

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 8, 2014
573
832
263
Okay, do you know what an API is? Because there is no way it should take 3 weeks to create a bot that polls 3 exchanges and their order books.
This is the kind of discussion we should be having about a budget proposal. Pros / Cons / Cost / Timing. The "automatic" payment for "public awareness" circumvents this kind of discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: buster and Dunedoo

isysd

Member
Dec 23, 2015
43
178
73

fible1

Well-known Member
Dash Core Group
Masternode Owner/Operator
May 11, 2014
710
722
163
I want to say that, having run one of the first consumer level Bitcoin trading bot companies (Butter-Bot); I can vouch for the fact that the process can take from several weeks to a few months, depending on how lean and reliable you want these to be. It's not a matter of hacking some code together if you want to build a quality, custom product. You have to start from the ground up for each specific application purpose.

Just my two cents.

Pablo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

koampapapa

New Member
Mar 5, 2016
38
28
18
I want to say that, having run one of the first consumer level Bitcoin trading bot companies (Butter-Bot); I can vouch for the fact that the process can take from several weeks to a few months, depending on how lean and reliable you want these to be. It's not a matter of hacking some code together if you want to build a quality, custom product. You have to start from the ground up for each specific application purpose.

Just my two cents.

Pablo.
I mostly am playing Devil's advocate here. It is a great use of funds... Dash community really shouldnt blame me for being a dick... Clearly this project was largely influenced by views expressed in previously rejected proposals (cough cough). Would have loved to play a part in building some of this, and would have done it for far less Dash too.


Also, again playing Devil's advocate, things have gotten a lot easier since Butter Bot's times. There are more libraries for each API and most exchanges offer websockets.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ryan Taylor

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 3, 2014
550
1,649
263
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Based on feedback from the community, and in consultation with the rest of the core team, I have added a "decision proposal" to the network to make the reallocation of the Public Awareness budget official. I think this is a good solution that addresses some of the concerns expressed here of the reallocation, and at the same time reduces the risk of unintended consequences of a (failed?) downvote of Public Awareness and upvote of a totally new proposal. The current version of the budget system certainly has some shortcomings, and unfortunately one of them is that the proposal owner cannot cancel a proposal. With a popular proposal like PR, which had 40+% net support at the time, it was unclear if we could actually get it voted out in time. While this solution is not perfect, it should go a long way toward addressing the concerns until the next, more robust, version of the governance system in 12.1 is released.

EDIT: I will also make sure that the OP on the PA project description on Dashtalk, and the description on Dashwhale are updated to ensure anyone reading the original project descriptions is aware of the change. I do not have access to those posts myself, but I will see that they are changed as soon as I can.
 

Solarminer

Well-known Member
Apr 4, 2015
762
922
163
Although there are some good intentions here, this is irresponsible. Like oaxaca said, this type of change needs to be voted in with a reasonable amount of discussion. This is what has happened whether intentional or not:

  • This change was made with a very short timeline, basically forcing a binary decision to use the funds or loose them.
  • This proposal is now so big and includes several activities. There is no way to vote on which activity has value - encouraging a yes if you want one of them.
  • There is little detail on how the funds will be spent - look at all the other proposal with a detail list of deliverables.
  • This decentralized exchange isn't decentralized. It is a centralized exchange with customer funds privately controlled. Something like Coinffeine or OpenBazzar are decentralized.
  • Now a proposal is created to again ask - loose the funds or ok the funds. It is the same binary decision.(I appreciate the effort BabyG)

Split this up into the opensource plugins, the cryptocapital.io, and coinopult. Then vote them in on their own merit. But before we even put all these funds into development we should be paying the bills. Why is dash.org and dashtalk.org not paid first with these funds? Pay the bills and then put less into the fiat gateways.

Right now it looks like Dash World, which is one of the most thought out and innovative proposals, is not going to be funded. Ironically, this is at a time when we have no public awareness activities getting funded. Dash World would encourage community involvement with targeted marketing ideas to really push Dash awareness.
 

Ryan Taylor

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 3, 2014
550
1,649
263
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Solarminer, I understand your points about short timeline, and wanting more granular control over how resources are allotted. And while I understand those concerns, I have very different views of how this process can and should work.

There is an inherent trade-off in running any organization between the extremes of 1) granular control over every decision made, right down to whether or not to buy pencils (not that you are proposing that), and 2) "black box" handing over control to someone else without any visibility or control over spending / decisions (basically a dictatorship). While 99.99% of all people would probably agree that those two extremes are undesirable, there is bound to be disagreement over where the "sweet spot" is in between.

If you expect voting on every project and want time for the masternode owners to debate, we pay a price in the form of reduced nimbleness (due to the time needed to educate the MN owners and coordinate a vote), the loss of the ability to coordinate activities as part of an overall strategy (e.g., what if only two pieces of a three-piece strategy are voted in?), and potentially poorer decisions (because every masternode owner likely lacks the time to study every decision in detail to make the best one vs. people working on that same issue 10 hours a day).

Swing too far the other way, though, and you risk bad managers destroying value, with little control over what they are doing.

I would look to companies and non-profits as models that are time-tested and seem to work pretty well. Shareholders and big donors to these entities don't make decisions on budgets and projects. They DO decide who sits on the boards of these entities, and if performance is lacking, they vote them out. For major decisions, they do get directly involved in the decision, like whether or not to change their bylaws, whether or not to merge with another entity, whether or not to split, or perform a major buy-back of shares.

However, Dash is a new entity. We don't need months to coordinate a vote at our annual meetings. We only have about 3,600 "shares" and even fewer shareholders. So while I think we can definitely be far more inclusive of decisions than say a public company (simply because the technology allows it), I feel that the "sweet spot" is a bit closer to delegating authority to good managers than us, as MN owners, trying to get involved in too many decisions.

I believe you may be atypical. You are far more involved in the project than most MN owners and I suspect many wouldn't even want the constant burden of having to get educated and vote on every project. Most investors will probably want to delegate responsibility to a "management team", perhaps make decisions about how much overall budget to give them (maybe even for a specific type like "marketing"), but beyond that I doubt we will end up in a place where you seem to want them. I could be wrong... the voting will decide... but based on other examples in the world, this is where I suspect things will end up.

Maybe there are opportunities to have the influence you seek without all the MN owner burdens and inefficiencies that would likely result from a project-level voting system. Perhaps we need more-involved representatives from the community, like you, that can represent the interests of MN owners in some way (e.g., endorsing plans, recommending that we vote out the current PR firm because they are doing a crappy job, etc.). I think there is a "sweet spot" somewhere. Through voting, we should be able to find it. If MN owners end up with higher votes for "general items", that means they want to delegate. If those are voted down in favor of individual projects and the general expense / management team type budgets are left out, then that means they want more control. I suspect that will change as the project grows, too. I think over time, fewer and fewer individual projects will get approved and more and more "management teams" will get voted in (for managing say, "Marketing 2017"). It will be interesting... we will see. I suspect, though, that we will always have more control over Dash than shareholders have over their investments.
 

rustycase

Active Member
Apr 19, 2016
495
118
113
The highlight of this announcement seems to be CryptoCapital.co. I like the fact they are Panama based. This means they won't bend over to OECD and pass on account information. This means all the accounts will be kept private indeed and not shared with 3rd parties.

However, not so much for US citizens because FATCA http://www.anorco.com/en/news/1-noticia-1
lol ...so much it hurts.
Those of us borg toiling away in the us being sucked dry by the vampire elite are so fortunate we may select between mickyD or takobel as we rush from our choice of salt mines to the underwater domicile where the family units reside on trips between indoctrination center and shopping malls.
P2P has Got to be an improvement !
I am newbie... and do not yet understand the details of eduffield and the core devs yet I am very pleased to see they recognize it is the 'direct fiat access ramps' which are among the greatest impediment to proper implementation of P2P.

I am nearly consumed with bitterness towards those who have saddled each and every one of us with this system.
This day I was forced to pick up the phone and ask why their digits did not travel at the speed of everyone else's...
I did Not get an acceptable answer... a hold, for possibly 21 to 30 days for a simple, direct transfer of digits.

People are gonna notice.

P2P is the only acceptable means of inter-action.

So now I gotta learn about cryptocapital.co and others similar ? So be it.

My heartfelt thanks to each and every one of the core devs.
... and all those in the community that make this work.
rc
 

rustycase

Active Member
Apr 19, 2016
495
118
113
Actually, it's not. If you have your wallet open and synced and ready to vote entering 2 commands is just about as easy as entering 1 command.

The issue is not "ease of voting" or "best intentions" or "did ted cruz hire hookers"? It's about redirection. If masternode owners upvote a proposal for "public awareness", shouldn't it be spent doing that?

President Obama issues the following statement: "I know y'all voted for me, but as of today I am stepping down and appointing Edward Snowden as your new president." Nobody would have a problem with the end result, but shouldn't our budgeting system respect the actual votes?

the voting system in us is designed to present advice to the electoral college.
...and whoever may have bought Them !
is Not a direct democracy here in us.
rc

edit... otherwise, how could She who's name shall be stricken from the history books' even be considered, by anyone who ever looked at youtube or a web article ?
Why has that person not been indicted for crime when people like you and I endure significant penalty, life-changing, perhaps, for as little as a traffic violation ??? rc
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevejohnsonlive
Status
Not open for further replies.