Proposal: Adaptive Proposal Fees

Vedran Yoweri said:
That's because you don't understand distributed systems while dreaming of democracy.

This proposal suggests to change the core system and parameters under the disguise of being a discussion about what calculations should be used to determine the 'best' averages.

- it's a proposal to change core system and parameters.
The budget voting system should not be used for this, that's what github is for.

- it's a proposal which introduces an obligation for the MNO to vote every month on something essential to the security of the network.
Network security should be under control of the protocol, this is the essence of what creates trust in distributed systems.
Click to expand...

Then please explain Evan's proposal to change the block size to 2MB.
 
Pietro Speroni said:
This brings home the understanding that you cannot have everything, if you allocate money to fix the street then there is less money for the hospitals... and so on.
Click to expand...

Thats why budgeting voting with numbers requires range slider bars.

range-slider-demo.png
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
it's a proposal which introduces an obligation for the MNO to vote every month on something essential to the security of the network.
Network security should be under control of the protocol, this is the essence of what creates trust in distributed systems.
Click to expand...

Security is not at risk. First of all it's voluntary. And second, in the event of too few votes (less than 2%), the fee would revert to the previous month. Which security threat was you thinking?
 
GrandMasterDash said:
Then please explain Evan's proposal to change the block size to 2MB.
Click to expand...
- MNO are dumb, they can only vote yes if core proposes it.
I'm invested in dash because i used to trust Evan and now trust core, if i didn't i would sell my coins and move on. I don't know you and certainly don't trust you. If you think that's dumb than you argue that everybody invested in dash is dumb, a thought that can only flourish in a trolls mind.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
Which security threat was you thinking?
Click to expand...
The proposal fee is essential to protect the network. $500 to get access to $500,000 is peanuts, i'll vote to raise the fee, if this passes every month.

Until recently we were very good at deflecting troll attacks, Evan made sure to filter out the nonsense and use arguments that made sence to improve dash.

With the budget system came more opportunities for trolls to score, even getting some coins while running the scheme is now a possibility. When money is involved people tend to be more emotional, this is a weakness whitch can be exploited. We saw this play out with the old slack.

Some trolls with 2 or 3 accounts each worked for a couple of months to integrate in the community, map out the strong, influential, emotionaly weak and the members who are just not that smart. They convinced members they should run the 'official' dash slack and take care of new people comming to dash, all the while gradually convincing members that core is bad and should be replaced. This didn't work but the attack was a great succes. They pocketed budget funds and convinced some valuable members to leave dash and go full troll on it. They also played every new person who came to dash for months, while trying to blackmail core.

If you ever wonder why the current slack mods are so fanatical in keeping it newbie friendly, now you know. The wounds are deep for the people who got played.

This is normal for any voting about anything valuable and happens all the time in politics and in dash. That's why you see so many dicussions and proposals to lower the fee. Lower fees makes gaming the system much easier. It will increase the number of proposals, keeps everybody busy discussing worthless proposals and increases the chance one of your trolling proposals passes, because it's cheap to run 5 or 10 schemes at a time.

Proposals should be about projects that add value to dash or it's ecosystem, anything else gets a default 'no' vote from me.
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
- MNO are dumb, they can only vote yes if core proposes it.
I'm invested in dash because i used to trust Evan and now trust core, if i didn't i would sell my coins and move on. I don't know you and certainly don't trust you. If you think that's dumb than you argue that everybody invested in dash is dumb, a thought that can only flourish in a trolls mind.
Click to expand...

When we say that MNOs are dump, greedy and selfish, we always mean the big MNO operators, the whales, and not the majority of the MNO individuals.
Thats why we need a proof of individuality, thats why we need to let all actors to vote. In order to prove the stupidity of the whales.
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
- MNO are dumb, they can only vote yes if core proposes it.
I'm invested in dash because i used to trust Evan and now trust core, if i didn't i would sell my coins and move on.
Click to expand...

Thank you, I think you have explained yourself perfectly. Now I understand. We indeed have a very different vision. You trust the main programmer, I (and apparently some others) look for a decentralised non hierarchical system. I believe the two visions are mutually incompatible. Your system has proven many time to work well (although at times it also failed miserably), while our is work in progress. It might succeed, but we don't have a complete working prototype. And although I believe this particularly proposal to be perfectly safe, remaining under a benevolent dictator (or benevolent group) is probably even safer.
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
The proposal fee is essential to protect the network. $500 to get access to $500,000 is peanuts, i'll vote to raise the fee, if this passes every month.

Until recently we were very good at deflecting troll attacks, Evan made sure to filter out the nonsense and use arguments that made sence to improve dash.

With the budget system came more opportunities for trolls to score, even getting some coins while running the scheme is now a possibility. When money is involved people tend to be more emotional, this is a weakness whitch can be exploited. We saw this play out with the old slack.

Some trolls with 2 or 3 accounts each worked for a couple of months to integrate in the community, map out the strong, influential, emotionaly weak and the members who are just not that smart. They convinced members they should run the 'official' dash slack and take care of new people comming to dash, all the while gradually convincing members that core is bad and should be replaced. This didn't work but the attack was a great succes. They pocketed budget funds and convinced some valuable members to leave dash and go full troll on it. They also played every new person who came to dash for months, while trying to blackmail core.

If you ever wonder why the current slack mods are so fanatical in keeping it newbie friendly, now you know. The wounds are deep for the people who got played.

This is normal for any voting about anything valuable and happens all the time in politics and in dash. That's why you see so many dicussions and proposals to lower the fee. Lower fees makes gaming the system much easier. It will increase the number of proposals, keeps everybody busy discussing worthless proposals and increases the chance one of your trolling proposals passes, because it's cheap to run 5 or 10 schemes at a time.

Proposals should be about projects that add value to dash or it's ecosystem, anything else gets a default 'no' vote from me.
Click to expand...

So, your idea of a security threat is not trusting the majority to find middle ground. Seems you have no trust in other people's vote, except your own. If you can see the merits of 5DPFs (or higher) then why can't anyone else?
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
This is normal for any voting about anything valuable and happens all the time in politics and in dash. That's why you see so many dicussions and proposals to lower the fee. Lower fees makes gaming the system much easier. It will increase the number of proposals, keeps everybody busy discussing worthless proposals and increases the chance one of your trolling proposals passes, because it's cheap to run 5 or 10 schemes at a time.
Click to expand...

This is a deficiency of the current budget system, which discards all proposals after one month.
Some proposals should be able to enter the system and be voted on a rolling basis, thus avoid to be reposted every month.

And after all, there is the filter capability that can be implemented , for those who do not like to see a huge amount of proposals. Let evan and the core team be your filter master, and let them filter (on your behalf) whatever proposals they judge as stupid. This is legitimate.

What it is not legitimate is to claim that most of the proposals sould be denied to appear, simply because you dont like to do the job of reading them and voting them. Not everyone is like you, and not everyone trust the core team like you do.

You want to transform dash into a nest of core team believers, but some of us are always infidels. In God we trust, in dash core team we do not.
 
Last edited:
It's sad to see that proposal fees have become dash's block size debate. All these justifications to keep an unelected 5DPF are effectively saying that dash has no governance system to deal with it. Go ahead @Vedran Yoweri and put your money where your mouth is; submit a proposal to keep 5DPFs. Let's see what happens to dash when it fails.
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
The proposal fee is essential to protect the network. $500 to get access to $500,000 is peanuts, i'll vote to raise the fee, if this passes every month.

Until recently we were very good at deflecting troll attacks, Evan made sure to filter out the nonsense and use arguments that made sence to improve dash.

With the budget system came more opportunities for trolls to score, even getting some coins while running the scheme is now a possibility. When money is involved people tend to be more emotional, this is a weakness whitch can be exploited. We saw this play out with the old slack.

Some trolls with 2 or 3 accounts each worked for a couple of months to integrate in the community, map out the strong, influential, emotionaly weak and the members who are just not that smart. They convinced members they should run the 'official' dash slack and take care of new people comming to dash, all the while gradually convincing members that core is bad and should be replaced. This didn't work but the attack was a great succes. They pocketed budget funds and convinced some valuable members to leave dash and go full troll on it. They also played every new person who came to dash for months, while trying to blackmail core.

If you ever wonder why the current slack mods are so fanatical in keeping it newbie friendly, now you know. The wounds are deep for the people who got played.

This is normal for any voting about anything valuable and happens all the time in politics and in dash. That's why you see so many dicussions and proposals to lower the fee. Lower fees makes gaming the system much easier. It will increase the number of proposals, keeps everybody busy discussing worthless proposals and increases the chance one of your trolling proposals passes, because it's cheap to run 5 or 10 schemes at a time.

Proposals should be about projects that add value to dash or it's ecosystem, anything else gets a default 'no' vote from me.
Click to expand...

This proposal is not about lowering the fee, it's about making the fee adaptive and reflecting the consensus of the Masternodes.
 
Vedran Yoweri said:
- MNO are dumb, they can only vote yes if core proposes it.
I'm invested in dash because i used to trust Evan and now trust core, if i didn't i would sell my coins and move on. I don't know you and certainly don't trust you. If you think that's dumb than you argue that everybody invested in dash is dumb, a thought that can only flourish in a trolls mind.
Click to expand...

I trust core as well, but even the core team doesn't have any particular reason why 5 dash is optimal. As far as I know they are open to changing it or making it adaptive. Haven't heard anything negative from the core team about this proposal yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top