It's amazing to see how our budget system has developed since Evan originally proposed the idea. Initially only the Core Team submitted proposals, all of which passed without much controversy or fanfare. Recently, however, we have seen individual community members make proposals and have them approved, which is an important step in the evolution of our project. It's good to see innovation coming from the community rather than simply being developed in a "top-down" fashion from the Core Team.
Problems
However, the budget system has a few weaknesses that has caused/is causing/will cause problems. Namely:
1) Unused budget funds are "burned," resulting in money that could have been used to fund Dash development being wasted. Although theoretically "working as intended," this is inefficient and results in unintended consequences.
TanteStefana has eloquently argued in the BCT thread that the system is basically in debt right now, using future budgets to pay for existing projects. Not only that, but popular and highly useful proposals are getting numerous no votes out of the fear that approving them will result in unused budget Dash which will simply be burned.
2) Many service providers require legally-binding contracts to be signed, obligating the signer to pay future costs. A lawyer may be needed, for instance, and will not work unless he receives both a retainer and a legally-binding promise to pay for any additional charges which exceed the retainer. At present, the budget system is unable to handle such contracts. Any proposal can be voted down at any time, or a competing proposal can be voted up higher, resulting in future installments of the already approved proposal not getting paid.
Right now, either a human or other legal entity (e.g. the foundation) must be legally responsible for any such contracts. DACs such as Dash are not yet recognized by the law. When Evan, Daniel, or the foundation sign a contract based on a proposal which has passed, and the network for any reason withdraws funding (or simply pays more popular proposals before the contracted one), our developers or foundation are responsible for any unpaid bills. Eventually, these people/entities will stop taking this risk if they have to be worried about the reliability of reimbursement. Then if Dash needs a lawyer (or any other professional service), how will we hire one?
Possible Fixes
Any solutions to these issues are hampered in two ways: a) the possibility of unintended consequences, and b) the fact that some community members don't see these as being problematic, but rather "working as intended."
With as much respect as possible to both those difficulties, I would propose that the developers and community consider possible improvements. Possibilities include:
1) Unused budget Dash not being created, but being "remembered" by the network. In a month where 500 Dash would have otherwise been burnt, this Dash is in fact not created. But if the next month the budget goes over by 250 Dash, that amount is paid because the network "remembers" that 500 Dash was not created the previous month.
2) Some type of system needs to be developed to handle short-term contracts. Perhaps a system could be developed where for certain proposals (those involving legal contracts and requiring installment payments) you had one period to vote, say 30 days, and after that no more votes would be accepted, and no votes could be changed.
My suggestions are quite possibly flawed and could themselves result in unintended consequences. But I'm hoping they will be a starting point for some discussion.
Problems
However, the budget system has a few weaknesses that has caused/is causing/will cause problems. Namely:
1) Unused budget funds are "burned," resulting in money that could have been used to fund Dash development being wasted. Although theoretically "working as intended," this is inefficient and results in unintended consequences.
TanteStefana has eloquently argued in the BCT thread that the system is basically in debt right now, using future budgets to pay for existing projects. Not only that, but popular and highly useful proposals are getting numerous no votes out of the fear that approving them will result in unused budget Dash which will simply be burned.
2) Many service providers require legally-binding contracts to be signed, obligating the signer to pay future costs. A lawyer may be needed, for instance, and will not work unless he receives both a retainer and a legally-binding promise to pay for any additional charges which exceed the retainer. At present, the budget system is unable to handle such contracts. Any proposal can be voted down at any time, or a competing proposal can be voted up higher, resulting in future installments of the already approved proposal not getting paid.
Right now, either a human or other legal entity (e.g. the foundation) must be legally responsible for any such contracts. DACs such as Dash are not yet recognized by the law. When Evan, Daniel, or the foundation sign a contract based on a proposal which has passed, and the network for any reason withdraws funding (or simply pays more popular proposals before the contracted one), our developers or foundation are responsible for any unpaid bills. Eventually, these people/entities will stop taking this risk if they have to be worried about the reliability of reimbursement. Then if Dash needs a lawyer (or any other professional service), how will we hire one?
Possible Fixes
Any solutions to these issues are hampered in two ways: a) the possibility of unintended consequences, and b) the fact that some community members don't see these as being problematic, but rather "working as intended."
With as much respect as possible to both those difficulties, I would propose that the developers and community consider possible improvements. Possibilities include:
1) Unused budget Dash not being created, but being "remembered" by the network. In a month where 500 Dash would have otherwise been burnt, this Dash is in fact not created. But if the next month the budget goes over by 250 Dash, that amount is paid because the network "remembers" that 500 Dash was not created the previous month.
2) Some type of system needs to be developed to handle short-term contracts. Perhaps a system could be developed where for certain proposals (those involving legal contracts and requiring installment payments) you had one period to vote, say 30 days, and after that no more votes would be accepted, and no votes could be changed.
My suggestions are quite possibly flawed and could themselves result in unintended consequences. But I'm hoping they will be a starting point for some discussion.