Welcome to the Dash Forum!

Please sign up to discuss the most innovative cryptocurrency!

Proposal: Dash.org purchase - December Payment Replacement

Discussion in 'Pre + Budget Proposal Discussions' started by Ryan Taylor, Mar 29, 2016.

  1. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    This is a cross-post of a proposal on Dashwhale at https://www.dashwhale.org/p/dash-org-dec-replace

    Proposal Description:

    As you may know, the month of December no budget payments were made. This affected all budgets.

    One item that was slated to start in December was the reimbursement for the Dash.org acquisition. So payment #1 of 4 was never paid to reimburse Evan and Daniel for the expense the domain.

    The missing payment was 2,100 Dash. We don't have room in the budget this month for the full 2,100, so I decided to split this payment of 2,100 Dash (plus 5 Dash for the proposal cost) into 3 payments from April to June.

    babygiraffe

    dash-cli mnbudget vote-many d73657800f25f30389dabff7adf1ef73679cb67607f22aa14eed2f64e6cba421 yes
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    • Like Like x 2
  3. TanteStefana

    TanteStefana Grizzled Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    1,854
    Trophy Points:
    1,283
    Thanks babygiraffe. Of course we want those who put up the funds to be reimbursed - and reimbursed for the Dash they sold, Dash for Dash. I'll vote yes :) (for those of you who don't know, babygiraffe is one of the core team)
     
  4. buster

    buster Guest

    January
    .0061 * 428.85 = $2.61 per dash
    2100 * $2.61 = $5481 Paid out for
    Reimbursement

    Feb
    .0146312 * 428.85 = $5.59 per dash
    2100 * $5.59 = $11,739 Paid out for Reimbursement

    March
    .0124 * 412 = $5.10 per dash
    2100 * $5.10 = $10,710 Paid out for Reimbursement

    Total Payout So Far for Reimbursement- $27,930

    Total costs for this purchase of Dash.org is $20,329.99

    Positive 7k dollars

    These are rough estimates but close enough for us to get the clear picture.

    As far as I see it the funds have far exceeded the amount the domain costs. There is no reason for this proposal and every masternode owner should vote no.

    *edit add this next payment in they get another 14k.

    Our 20k domain name just went to 41k. WOOOOOHOOOOOOOO what a great investment.

    *edit 2 if someone sold dash for fiat prove it.
     
    #4 buster, Mar 30, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2016
    • Like Like x 5
  5. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    This same issue was raised over at Dashwhale, so I will copy / paste my responses that I gave over there:

    First, we have been and continue to be transparent about the overall approach we take to reimbursements...

    "You'll notice in every single core team budget we make the explicit statement that exchange rate risk is borne by the team members incurring the expense. If an expense is paid in Dash it is clear that Dash needs to be paid back. However, even in cases when an expense is incurred in fiat, the network commits to pay back at then-current exchange rates. If the value of Dash subsequently goes down by the time the network's payment arrives, tough luck. There's no going "back to the trough" asking for more later. But likewise, if the value of Dash goes up by the time the network pays, the network shouldn't get to renegotiate and pay less. That's what is meant by the community member takes the exchange rate risk. You could think of it very much like the member is making a commitment to a "purchase" of Dash at the point in time that the proposal is submitted at then current rates. It would be unfair - and we would wind up with very few team members willing to shell out fiat to pay expenses - if every time Dash went down, we told them tough luck and every time it went up, we told them "we want to pay you less because it's worth more now". Make sense?"

    In terms of the options to deal with changing exchange rates, there are two basic approaches and there is rational for the approach we take...

    1) The network bears the exchange rate risk
    2) The team member bears the exchange rate risk


    If #1, there will ALWAYS be a difference from the time the expense is submitted and the time the network makes one or more payments. In order to "settle up" with the network properly, the team member would have to return any "excess" funds at the time of payment if they received too much Dash, or submit ANOTHER proposal to cover the shortfall at the time of payment in a potentially endless cycle if the exchange rates result in them receiving too little Dash to cover the expense. This is neither practical nor efficient.

    EDIT from Dashwhale version: I would also add that if the value of Dash were to drop severely after an expense was incurred, and the network was burdened with the exchange rate risk, the network may find itself owing its entire budget to pay off a large expense for many, many months. This would make budgeting a challenge to say the least.

    If #2, the risk of the exchange rate going down before the member is paid can only be fair to that member if they also reap the benefits when the exchange rate increases.

    These are contracts... when a British company signs a contract to pay in USD, it still has to pay in USD even though GBP/USD rates change. These proposals are much like contracts with the team member. The team member is committing to a USD expense today only if the network agrees to pay it back with the equivalent amount of Dash at that point in time. They are entering into a contract that is essentially PURCHASING Dash at the CURRENT exchange rate by incurring an expense on behalf of the network.

    In this particular instance, the expenses were originally paid by selling Dash, so Dash is owed back to the member, so it's really irrelevant for this proposal. But I want to make this clear so there isn't confusion in the future about who is accepting the downside risk in these proposals, and therefore the upside "risk" as well. It should not matter whether they sold Dash first to pay the expense or if they pay the expense out of their own pocket. What a team member does to raise the fiat (whether they borrow from a friend, sell a masternode, etc) is neither relevant nor any of the network's business, nor is it even verifiable that they sold Dash first.

    In fact, I would argue that by differentiating (fiat vs. Dash), we open ourselves up to potential abuse of the system. A community member could sell Dash to fund an expense, but not specify the source of funding until after the Dash payment was made to him. If the exchange rate had declined, the member could then lie and claim that they funded with fiat from their bank account and are therefore owed more money (and there would be no way to disprove this). Whereas if the exchange rate had increased, he could then produce proof of the Dash sale to fund the expense and keep the full amount.

    Let's keep this simple. Team members bear all exchange rate risk, not the network. It is simpler for many practical reasons (no refunds or additional payments needed to settle), enables planned budgets, prevents abuse, and is fair to the team members involved.
     
  6. buster

    buster Guest

    *edit 2 if someone sold dash for fiat prove it.

    Also there is about 6k extra funds already based on reimbursements already made. So maybe that can be given to the person who sold their dash for fiat? and the other two who already had fiat don't get the extra 2k?
     
  7. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    I would add that by the "value at time of payment" logic, it would be hugely advantageous for the network to simply delay paying back for expenses for a year and by then, it will owe the team members practically no Dash (assuming our value increases dramatically), but I think that illustrates just how unfair a system like that would be.

    Team members have been waiting long enough to get paid back in my opinion... we should return the Dash to them as quickly as we can.
     
  8. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    This is my opinion, but I don't think prying into anyone's personal finances is in keeping with Dash's values. Nor, per my other posts, do I feel that it is even relevant how the expenses were funded. But I'd love to see what the community thinks. We have been consistent when Dash went down in value too... no one has come looking for a "make up" payment for shortfalls, and we have been clear about who was taking on the exchange rate risk all along.
     
  9. buster

    buster Guest

    Im not even clear on what stance you are taking. it sounds like you don't think the network should take the risk the person should, but it sounds like you think we should pay Minotaur his dash back because he deicided to sell it so he could help fund the dash.org domain purchase. I might add this was all done before any pre proposal or even a proposal was made. So yeah theres that too.

    It's clear that the money for the website has been paid out, I proved that. if someone took a risk that is on them. Sorry dude. I see there is already 400+ yes votes which probably means eduffield voted yes for this without even acknowledging some of the community proposals first. Awesome.

    Why should Daniel prove it? because he is not just some community member. He is the Director of Business Development for Dash and he needs to be accountable for what he says he did.
     
  10. tungfa

    tungfa Administrator
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member Masternode Owner/Operator Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2014
    Messages:
    8,961
    Likes Received:
    6,735
    Trophy Points:
    1,283
    correct
    daniel stepped up and sold Dash for Cash as we needed the funds fast !
    same old story, we need some flexibility in these budgets, a vote back then would have taken tooling, as they guy who was selling was right there, to go public with that deal (domain for x amount) would only have triggered
    ether
    - trolls: to start bidding to bring the price up
    or
    a 3rd entity: to start bidding as they saw (proposal) that we were interested

    daniel stepped up to help out when it was needed, so it is only fair to pay him back the Dash he sold !
     
  11. buster

    buster Guest


    I sincerely disagree. Daniel took a risk, he does not deserve to get those dash back and neither does anybody else making proposals.

    Re: all the other stuff irrelevant to what I am saying, thank you though.
     
  12. tungfa

    tungfa Administrator
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member Masternode Owner/Operator Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2014
    Messages:
    8,961
    Likes Received:
    6,735
    Trophy Points:
    1,283
    you mentioned it brother ;)
    so my answer to that was:
    "to go public with that deal (domain for x amount) would only have triggered
    ether
    - trolls: to start bidding to bring the price up
    or
    a 3rd entity: to start bidding as they saw (proposal) that we were interested"

    he does not 'deserve'
    whow
    i think he does, as he helped us all out with this !
    (same as the prefunding and payback of the soda machine, same story different color)

    does dash.org makes sense ?
    well, there u go :D
     
  13. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Apologies if I'm still not being clear enough. I will attempt again.

    For a whole host of reasons, which are enumerated above, it is impractical for the network to assume exchange rate risks in its contracts. It is therefore the community member's risk that the currency may increase or decrease in value between the time the proposal is submitted and the time the network issues payment.

    Your proposal is to subsequently pay LESS Dash if the value of Dash increases in value by the time the network pays. But you are saying "tough luck" if the value of Dash decreases by the time the network pays. This is a "heads I win, tails you lose" approach. If we were to treat the team members that are fronting these expenses that way, who in their right mind would ever pay a fiat expense on the network's behalf?

    EDIT: If I misunderstand you stance on what should happen with the value of Dash decreases, please correct me. I'm trying my best to address your concern.

    EDIT2: "Risk" works both ways, but you cannot take away the upside potential of a risk and leave the team member only with the downside potential of the exchange risk... perhaps this is the terminology that is causing the misunderstanding.
     
  14. buster

    buster Guest

    I know the issue with bidding war. Same excuse was used by fernando in the slack channel regarding the purchase of the dashtalk.org domain name. 3rd time is a charm and Ill be waiting for when you guys use it.

    You misunderstood me. People who pay fiat cash for proposals deserve to get their funding back. If someone sells dash to fund a proposal this is a huge RISK. Daniel sold his Dash, its as simple as that. If I sold my dash on that date I wouldn't be asking the budget for my dash back 6 months later when its gone up ten fold. Does daniel deserve to be paid back his fiat cash? Yes he does, and as Ive explained with the numbers I posted, the current dash.org proposal has already paid out 27k. They are paid back that is final.

    Does dash.org make sense? For 20k yes. FOr 42k NO NO NO NO NO.

    The point is people shuldn't be selling dash to fund proposals because it creates this EXACT issue. If you fund a proposal make sure you have the fiat cash to fund it or don't fund it at all. Simple as that. Or, if you want to sell your Dash do it, but know that dash price can increase and you might lose out if someone forgets to magically press the button that pays out the budgets.
     
  15. tungfa

    tungfa Administrator
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member Masternode Owner/Operator Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2014
    Messages:
    8,961
    Likes Received:
    6,735
    Trophy Points:
    1,283
    Speed is the enemy here !
    i totally hear you, but as we were pushing for speed with certain ideas, these issues come up !
    i totally hear you, and i hope this will be solved in the future (less speed, more voting ;))
     
    #15 tungfa, Mar 30, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 30, 2016
  16. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    buster , if you have an alternative approach that you feel is fair, please detail it. It sounds like you would prefer a system that values all fiat reimbursements at the time that the payment is finally made to the recipient, NOT like it is currently (at the time the proposal is submitted). How would such a system work in practice? I would be interested in how you would deal with the following issues.

    1) What happens when Dash increases in value in the time after the proposal is submitted, approved, and paid? Do you expect the member to reimburse the difference (e.g., "overpayment")? Where would this Dash be sent, who would control it, and what could it be spent on? How would you propose enforcing returning the overpayment if the community member (whether core team or not) didn't comply? What if the payment is going to a third party like a company?

    2) What happens when Dash decreases in value in the time after the proposal is submitted, approved, and paid? Since the team member has been "shorted" and has not yet been "paid back", is the member entitled to submit a "make up" payment for the shortfall? What happens if the "make up" payment ends up being too high or too low by the time it pays? How could you ensure the cycle would ever end?

    3) What would happen if the value of Dash were to drop rapidly by 75% (or 50% or 25%) and had overcommitted itself in fiat reimbursements it could no longer meet with the Dash being created? Which team members or companies would have to wait for more months? How could we effectively plan the next month's expenses if we don't yet know the value of the Dash budget in the fiat commitments the core team or community efforts were committing to do? What if the price decline is severe enough that the budget is perpetually overcommitted?

    I'm very open to good ideas. I am all ears to complaints too. But we should only eliminate the system in place if we can create something that will work better.
     
    #16 Ryan Taylor, Mar 30, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 30, 2016
  17. buster

    buster Guest

    Look you just asked me 20+ questions i don't have the mental capacity to answer your questions after digging trenches all day. I was under the assumption this it how it worked. I was told that this "investment" was 20k. It's already 27k and if this gets approved it will go to 41k. Numbers do not lie, words lie, and twist and have perogatives.

    Did the budget pay out around 27k worth of dash so far?

    Was this a fiat transaction?

    If the price of dash decreased would Daniel rather take the fiat?

    Is a portion of this 2100 dash going to the other parties involved or to just daniel? If other parties, are they also claiming they sold dash to pay for this?

    You see my problem?

    We all want more dash.

    We all do a lot for dash.

    See me making any bogus proposals?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. TheDashGuy

    TheDashGuy Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    1,232
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Trophy Points:
    183
    There needs to be a clear stated standard one way or another with dealings like this.

    And can we stop selling our Dash to cover proposals then want it back in obscure ways please? You guys set yourselves up for a shit show by doing this yet again. It now looks like our budget is less of a budget and more of a mining tool for the core team when they need something, which is fine, but come on. Transparency. If I would have known forums were going for 7k, domains for 42k, I would have gotten involved in Dash long ago..... I've never sold a forum for more than $850 USD. Domains are 4-$12 USD if done properly and so on.

    So whats the problem here guys? Why do we keep running into stupid issues like this? Is there a lack of policies in place for such occasions? Wheres the Dash Core Handbook? Do we need to make one or maybe a Dash manifesto? A Dash rule book? How are we going to stop these RETARDED threads and get on with making useful shit and moving Dash forward by not wasting budget funds and the enthusiasm everyone has all at the same time.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. TroyDASH

    TroyDASH Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,251
    Likes Received:
    794
    Trophy Points:
    183
    If the expense was in fiat, then my assumption is that the DASH was sold. If it wasn't really sold, then it is still the equivalent of having sold the DASH and then the proposal owner having bought the DASH back out of pocket. It is probably in the interest of the network to distribute this missed payment.

    My only question is, why the hell was this not arranged IMMEDIATELY following the error, in the January budget? It's not like we just realized this week that a payment was missed back in December. No one even attempted to address it until now...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  20. bertlebbert

    bertlebbert Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    289
    Trophy Points:
    133
    This very issue was disguised discussed back in early February
    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13797280#msg13797280

    It doesn't matter where or how Daniel got the money... the original proposal was to reimburse Dash - 4 payments of 2100 Dash...

    The budget system itself is unable to assume market risk - it pays agreed amount of Dash regardless of future market price.
    That market risk - both upside risk and downside risk - is borne by the proposal owner, and they will do better or worse depending on future market price. That is, they are entitled to any upside reward, just as they is subject to any downside loss.

    Edit: typo
     
    #20 bertlebbert, Mar 30, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 30, 2016
  21. JGCMiner

    JGCMiner Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    358
    Likes Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly, not to mention that MN owners already agreed to reimburse the funds in DASH and that this payment would have been complete months ago save for a unforeseen glitch.

    Not paying the previously agreed upon amount of DASH now that the price has gone up is reneging plain and simple. And that sets a dangerous precedent.
     
    #21 JGCMiner, Mar 30, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 30, 2016
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  22. hiddendark

    hiddendark Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    58
    The fact that under the current budget system masternode operators can change their votes at any time means that noting is 'agreed' or 'committed' until the payment is actually made. Anyone who has a proposal under the current system runs the risk of masternode operators deciding to later change what they 'agreed' to. It should eb more seen as masternode operators supporting the proposal but not being committed to it.

    Not advocating for either side in this debate, just bringing that point up for discussion.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  23. JGCMiner

    JGCMiner Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    358
    Likes Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would agree with you in 99% of cases, but not this one where the budget would have been paid in December save a glitch. If everything had gone as planned, Daniel and the rest would have already had the coins. That why this is a special case and not paying the same amount in DASH would be reneging.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Trolling Trolling x 1
  24. TroyDASH

    TroyDASH Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,251
    Likes Received:
    794
    Trophy Points:
    183
    So what about *all the other* budgets that were skipped in December? We going to plan to fix that now or wait another several months and then decide?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  25. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Other than ongoing budgets "core-team" and "Public awareness", there were no other multi-month budgets which were affected. Everything else was a one-payment budget item which would have been resubmitted. The core team just didn't get paid that month, and P.A. missed a payment. No need to make those payments up.
     
  26. David

    David Well-known Member
    Dash Support Group

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    618
    Likes Received:
    628
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Evan paid Core Team out of his own personal funds that month.
     
  27. David

    David Well-known Member
    Dash Support Group

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    618
    Likes Received:
    628
    Trophy Points:
    163
    I would respectfully submit that no budget proposal to date makes any financial sense if we use this logic. In fact, we should immediately shut down the budget system and simply have the network "save" all those Dash until one day when they are worth significantly more. If our price increases tenfold, then in hindsight we will say that we spent ten times too much on every budget proposal.

    Yes, at today's exchange rates, the domain cost $42,000. At next year's exchange rates, we may see that it actually cost $420,000. In ten years, that may be a deka-million dollar domain!

    If you think I'm being silly, consider that Warren Buffett agrees with me. In his 2008 letter to shareholders, he states that his worst investment decision was the purchase of Dexter Shoe Company. The company, which he bought for $460 million, went bankrupt. But that's not the worst part. Buffett paid for Dexter with Berkshire stock rather than cash. That stock would have been worth $5 billion in 2008.

    To this day, Buffett insists he lost $5 billion on that deal, not a "mere" $460 million.

    P.S. The key, obviously, is that each budget proposal contributes a small bit to the future value of the project. Who is to say just how much of Dash's $7 price came from the new domain name?
     
    • Like Like x 4