Proposal for Testnet Contributors Fund

[moli]

I like that idea. Maybe it would be wise for people who want to propose a budget to make an unofficial-proposal before the official-proposal. People can hash out some issues which the proposer can take into consideration, then we get something concrete and make an official proposal. I'm sure there was discussion that took place about this proposal before it was posted but maybe an entire thread and a few days could have helped. Discussion about the proposals is key and it would also help save time voting on proposals that are similar with slight differences. (e.g. if this proposal is re-proposed and we have to vote on it again).

We can use the current proposal as an example. Lets assume Moli made a post 2-3 days ago letting us know she was going to make this proposal. Lets assume we spent 3 days discussing all the things we have discussed since she made the proposal. Moli could refine her proposal to her liking and then make it official if she is satisfied with the discussion. She could even come to the realization that the proposal might not be a good idea.

All I'm saying is it might help you get your proposal passed if you give the community an unofficial proposal and a few days to discuss it.

*edit some typos and added some stuff to last sentence.

Hi buster,

Thank you so much for your support and encouragement... You understand very well how many of us feel. Your suggestion is excellent, so if you and the guys would like to open a discussion about this, please do so. As for me, I need a break, as I also have many real-life obligations to finish.

You've helped the community a lot and we love you.

 

[raganius]

So 10% proposal is needed to be active is:
(Number of "Yes" minus number of "No"s) ?

(not only "Yes"? not "Yes+No"?)


And "rating" of every proposal (to compare all of them) is:
(Number of "Yes" minus number of "No"s) ?

We definitely need a new, specific, thread to introduce these official voting rules to the community, and to answer all our questons and doubts.

 

[Sub-Ether]

Respect to Moli for standing her ground, she had my vote (and for doing a hell of a lot of testing work for the last year).
Better luck next time, Moli!

 

[elbereth]

Changed my budget page.
Information should be correct now. Thanks to thelazier for the infos.

 

[buster]

Hi buster,

Thank you so much for your support and encouragement... You understand very well how many of us feel. Your suggestion is excellent, so if you and the guys would like to open a discussion about this, please do so. As for me, I need a break, as I also have many real-life obligations to finish.

You've helped the community a lot and we love you.

moli I think your post opened the discussion already so it might be a good idea to keep it going here. Also it looks like your proposal passed but I'm not 100% sure. Making this proposal took a lot of courage and people will certainly learn from the experience.

I would like to make an argument for passing this proposal with the 12 payments and not just 1. If we pass it with the 12 we can test the down-vote system after the testers receive one or two of the 12 payments. After that happens masternode owners vote it out. We are bound to vote a proposal off the budget in the future so why not test the system with this proposal. A few of you guys made this point already but we haven't talked about doing it intentionally.

 

[MangledBlue]

moli I think your post opened the discussion already so it might be a good idea to keep it going here. Also it looks like your proposal passed but I'm not 100% sure. Making this proposal took a lot of courage and people will certainly learn from the experience.

I would like to make an argument for passing this proposal with the 12 payments and not just 1. If we pass it with the 12 we can test the down-vote system after the testers receive one or two of the 12 payments. After that happens masternode owners vote it out. We are bound to vote a proposal off the budget in the future so why not test the system with this proposal. A few of you guys made this point already but we haven't talked about doing it intentionally.

?? Proposal:compensate-testers Yes: 176 No: 147

 

[moli]

moli I think your post opened the discussion already so it might be a good idea to keep it going here. Also it looks like your proposal passed but I'm not 100% sure. Making this proposal took a lot of courage and people will certainly learn from the experience.

I would like to make an argument for passing this proposal with the 12 payments and not just 1. If we pass it with the 12 we can test the down-vote system after the testers receive one or two of the 12 payments. After that happens masternode owners vote it out. We are bound to vote a proposal off the budget in the future so why not test the system with this proposal. A few of you guys made this point already but we haven't talked about doing it intentionally.

Hey, thanks for this suggestion. Funny that it was another idea i had in mind when i put in "12"... (Like after the first distribution and we don't need for it because of no testing, i would just ask for it to be voted down...) I guess i'm such an addicted tester that i wanted to even test this on mainnet.. haha...

My original thought was i wanted some reward go to testers not just for version 12 but for people who also did a lot of work even before, if they wanted. You have to wonder why they stopped helping... so i had a lot of conflicted thoughts in my mind.. At the same time who should be paid and how much... The spreadsheet i put up was just a tentative plan, subject to change, anyone didn't want to be rewarded or anyone felt they should be rewarded..all subject to be changed, (and the names on that spreadsheet were taken from the list of the V12 Release OP, I didn't pick the names myself, just to make it clear one more time for people who don't know this.) Also, another reason why "12" was i was thinking of long term for testnet.. It should be another discussion between the devs and testers on another thread, but seriously Testnet needs an established, allocated fund. The costs of testing are as real as the costs of marketing, if we're serious about this project software. People do not want to keep updating after updating after every release. So that was another reason for number 12 because I figured we would need testing for a while. Also, and this is another blind side from me: I thought everyone knows by now how this system works, I am appalled to see some members put up their posts on forums talking about this number like it's set in stone. Another reason for them to do testing on their own.

This budget didn't pass, it needs at least 10% of the mn count and one for each 'no' votes. But I'm glad it's raising awareness for how important testing Dash software is.. We're in the digital age, if people still don't care about how safe their software/wallet should be or do not agreed to this, they should not be involved in crypto .. just my 2 duffs

EDIT; edited for clarity..

 

[qwizzie]

Thank you Minotaur & Elbereth, the https://dashninja.pl/budgets.html site makes things a lot more clear now as well.

Moli : sorry about my earlier post about your budget proposal having passed, i should have checked through my wallet earlier.
I did vote yes on your proposal so there is that, good luck next time.

 

[Minotaur]

Deleted my post as it was confusing, https://dashninja.pl/budgets.html makes it perfectly clear. Thanks qwizzie for pointing it out.

 

[fible1]

Moli, I understand you!

I just want to remind that budgeting system isn't only the great opportunity, but the great danger also,
let me quote old tungfa's post here:
"I really want to emphasise the importance of our volunteers !
This is an Open Source Project, and everybody is encouraged as always to do their part.
We need you (volunteers) as much as always and probably even more in the future as the project is
growing and more work will come our way !
We can NOT do it without you !"

And when we start paying some people, we really "open Pandora box" that will be hard to close. There are always problems with people - they (in general) too often think they do the most important job, but get less than others... (and no budget distribution can satisfy everybody - so some people will start feeling unhappy... )

So I would advice not to pay to people at these first stages (except super-trusted team members with absolute trust) - but to pay direct expanses in crucial processes.

It'll be great if Evan create the list of infrastructure we need to support regularly: hosting for dashtalk, dashninja, and so on, hosting for testNet Masternodes and so on - with detailed calculations so everybody can check (and offer optimizations) and vote to support it.

I would like to express my support for Alex's statements in general. I too feel like we have to keep as many aspects as possible running on a volunteer basis. I myself went through several of the iterations on testnet and contributed to the best of my ability; but I did it because I felt it was the appropriate thing to do. Paying people for this kind of thing feels like the wrong move.

Pablo.

 

[patrolman]

I would just like to clear some things up here in point form. Please correct me if I am wrong.

• There are 315 blocks remaining until the superblock.
• 315 blocks at an average of 2 and a 1/2 minutes per block is 787.5 minutes (13 hours, 7 minutes and 30 seconds).
  
• A budget proposal is established when it is older than 1 day, therefore it is too late for a new proposal before the superblock is created.
• The 1588 DASH requested in this proposal will never be created if Yea votes minus Nay votes is not more than 10% of total masternodes
• 0.8 DASH not requested for any proposal will never be created.

I have to admit that I am not in favour of allocating the 1588 DASH to testers for the whole next 12 months but I do believe the testers deserve to be compensated in some way and I would much rather all you testers received those funds, as opposed to them never being created.

I understand that even if it is approved of now, it does not necessarily mean it will continue to be approved for the next 12 months, and I think buster's idea to test downvoting is a nice one. How exactly would this work? Would this mean voting on all recurring payments again? What is the process for downvoting? I am not necessarily going to downvote the proposal next month if the proposal somehow gets passed, but I would like to know what I'm signing up for here if I do vote yea.

 

[raganius]

I am sure that a specific thread will be created, by someone who knows well the voting rules, in order to explain it clearly to the community.

 

[stan.distortion]

Hi. Reading through the thread and not quite done yet but had a thought and wanted to throw it out before I forget. On page 4 at the mo where something like a pre-proposal is being discussed and wondered if a version control type system could come in there, something where edits can be up or down voted for inclusion and majority consent decide final submission as a proposal.

Supporting, some points I'd disagree with but ultimately Dash simply can't have too much testing considering the waters its swimming in, would suggest assigning the funds to a key member to distribute as they see fit and a means for members to accept or decline contributions though, decline here.

 

[camosoul]

Testnet... Last time I participated on that, it was hard to move blocks because nobody was mining. It was a long time ago... I couldn't find a way to be useful because I seemed to be the only one running a testnet daemon. TestNET? It was TestME, lols.

I hear the current test candidate supports full frontal IPv6?

I donated a bit of vultr machine time...

If someone could help me get a 6to4 set up to escape my retarded ISP prison, I've got several machines that I'd leave available for testnet 24x7x365. 3x Pi2Bs and soon to be 2x ODROID-XU4s. That's support for 23 permanent testnet daemons by current memory use understanding. It would be a big deal to people playing around on these ARMv7 platforms to know that development was native...

I don't mind contributing generic resources, either, like with the vultrs, again. But, there are much cheaper VPSes to be had...

I really don't think it's appropriate to pay testers tho... I say that even as I purport to be one of them. The real testers are the developers, and they get a token pittance already. Increasing that token pittance, and providing them with test platforms that they don't have to pay for, seems the more appropriate route.

We're really just a bunch of nerd cheerleaders... The people doing the actual work deserve a raise long before we pay ourselves for cheerleading.