Reduction in proposal fee to 1 Dash (Pre-Proposal)

Should the proposal fee be changed to 1 Dash?


  • Total voters
    55

Acedian

Member
Mar 17, 2017
243
71
88
Dash Address
XeMABbcebB5yeZH2HxsV7yLNJA9hbzMgpz
With regard to the current USD price of Dash, I think the proposal fee should be reduced to 1 Dash.

Without this change, I feel that opportunities will be missed. This is because a high proposal cost will discourage submitting of anything but "guaranteed" proposals.

The 5 Dash fee was introduced primarily to prevent spam. This was successful when this fee was only about $15. I see no reason why a fee of about $100 will not successfully discourage spam.

This is still an increase in the proposal fee (in USD), but I deem this to be acceptable and necessary as Dash increases in popularity.

Please indicate if I would have your support.

Thanks for reading and opinions are always welcome.
 

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Core Developer
Dash Core Team
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
I was thinking about this more recently and it starts to feel like it's our own "block size issue" - some hardcoded number which we (devs) use to guess some limits on how many and how large proposals MNOs are willing to review instead of a) asking them directly b) let market decide if their decision was wise. Having governance mechanism and falling into the same trap as bitcoin would be sad, so +1 for creating (pre-)proposal :)
 

Naruto

Member
Dec 26, 2014
176
89
88
Agree with the proposal. But I just want to know is it possible to set The proposal fees to a percentage to the fund that are going to receive? E.g. If a proposal demands for 300 DASH and the fees will be 0.5% I.e. 1.5 DASH?


使用Tapatalk 發送
 

raze

King of the Morlocks
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 9, 2014
337
372
233
Dash Address
Xtrdw361DvoyDhxL5XoeAvTxTPvM4dXuLW
I was thinking about this more recently and it starts to feel like it's our own "block size issue" - some hardcoded number which we (devs) use to guess some limits on how many and how large proposals MNOs are willing to review instead of a) asking them directly b) let market decide if their decision was wise. Having governance mechanism and falling into the same trap as bitcoin would be sad, so +1 for creating (pre-)proposal :)
Would it be possible to implement a dynamic proposal fee that floats on say an average USD valuation pulled from across various exchanges, for example? It seems that just manually changing the proposal fee whenever the price goes up or down doesn't do much to alleviate the situation since it's a slow process and volatility can cause things can change quickly, necessitating yet another change and another proposal.

Then again, maybe there's some technical limitations or weaknesses involved with setting up a dynamic fee structure that I don't know about.
 

lynx

Active Member
Dec 11, 2015
364
250
133
We could address this with sporks and MN spork voting.

For example, a mutually exclusive set:

SPORK_21_PROPOSAL_FEE_0_5_DASH": false (253 Y / 410 N / -157 NET)
SPORK_22_PROPOSAL_FEE_1_DASH": true (569 Y / 102 N / 467 NET)
SPORK_23_PROPOSAL_FEE_2_DASH": false (125 Y / 117 N / 8 NET)
SPORK_24_PROPOSAL_FEE_5_DASH": false (59 Y / 397 N / -338 NET)


And if the most voted spork is in the boundary (in this case, either 5 dash or 0,5 Dash) it is a signal for the dev team to create a new fee option.
 

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Core Developer
Dash Core Team
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
Agree with the proposal. But I just want to know is it possible to set The proposal fees to a percentage to the fund that are going to receive? E.g. If a proposal demands for 300 DASH and the fees will be 0.5% I.e. 1.5 DASH?


使用Tapatalk 發送
I guess it's possible but I would keep some minimal amount otherwise the fee wouldn't make sense - it wouldn't discourage people from spamming with thousands of tiny proposals. 1 DASH seems like a reasonable amount at current prices imo. So maybe "fee as a % but at least 1 DASH" would work but people include fee into proposal usually, so I'm not sure if that would help in any sense.

Would it be possible to implement a dynamic proposal fee that floats on say an average USD valuation pulled from across various exchanges, for example? It seems that just manually changing the proposal fee whenever the price goes up or down doesn't do much to alleviate the situation since it's a slow process and volatility can cause things can change quickly, necessitating yet another change and another proposal.

Then again, maybe there's some technical limitations or weaknesses involved with setting up a dynamic fee structure that I don't know about.
Tying fee to some outside value would require everyone to agree on that value in the first place i.e. you need some trusted party/source. Or an oracle. Which is interesting, since this rises another question - can proposal fee be determined by the masternode network as a vote result? Basically, it's like a spork activated by masternodes. This is not as automated as pulling rate would be (requires MNOs to manually vote) but it's also not that vulnerable. Seems like an interesting idea to think about :)

We could address this with sporks and MN spork voting.

For example, a mutually exclusive set:

SPORK_21_PROPOSAL_FEE_0_5_DASH": false (253 Y / 410 N / -157 NET)
SPORK_22_PROPOSAL_FEE_1_DASH": true (569 Y / 102 N / 467 NET)
SPORK_23_PROPOSAL_FEE_2_DASH": false (125 Y / 117 N / 8 NET)
SPORK_24_PROPOSAL_FEE_5_DASH": false (59 Y / 397 N / -338 NET)


And if the most voted spork is in the boundary (in this case, either 5 dash or 0,5 Dash) it is a signal for the dev team to create a new fee option.
Haha, I almost clicked "Post Reply" when I saw this new message from you! :D
Yes, having multi-month proposals like that for signaling could be a workaound while spork voting is not implemented.
This however still requires 1) implementing fee as a regular spork for us being able to change it on the fly 2) implementing some logic for not dropping old legit proposals with lower fee if we decide to rise it one day. This shouldn't be hard to implement though, however it would require another hardfork too, just like if we would remove devs from this decision completely like I suggested above. Anyway, good idea :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: akhavr

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
I know that my opinion does not count, but I voted yes. And thank you that you still allow my non accountable vote to reside nearby the vote of those who have the power to decide. By the way, I believe that the proposal fee should be less that 1 Dash.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,139
1,227
1,183
I like the dynamic approach via voting. And I don't mind vote spamming so much if I'm receiving a cut of it (instead of it being burned).
 

raze

King of the Morlocks
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Mar 9, 2014
337
372
233
Dash Address
Xtrdw361DvoyDhxL5XoeAvTxTPvM4dXuLW
Tying fee to some outside value would require everyone to agree on that value in the first place i.e. you need some trusted party/source. Or an oracle. Which is interesting, since this rises another question - can proposal fee be determined by the masternode network as a vote result? Basically, it's like a spork activated by masternodes. This is not as automated as pulling rate would be (requires MNOs to manually vote) but it's also not that vulnerable. Seems like an interesting idea to think about :)
Won't there have to be some trusted source regardless? Consensus of the markets seems like the most decentralized and least prone to abuse since it's automated. As long as the pool of sources is large and diverse enough (maybe along the lines of how CoinMarketCap determines price from a long list of exchanges and trading pairs), and the code used to determine the valuation is open source and publicly audit-able then I don't see the issue.

It seems like having the MN network decide opens up the possibility of conflict of interest if MN operators (large ones in particular) are also proposers; for example, voting for lower fees to get proposals in cheaper and voting for higher fees if they suspect a competing proposal may be coming. Or large holders/proposers might support higher fees in general since they could more easily afford them, thereby reducing competition for funds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Acedian

Acedian

Member
Mar 17, 2017
243
71
88
Dash Address
XeMABbcebB5yeZH2HxsV7yLNJA9hbzMgpz
From the people that would like to see a dynamic fee.
Why should someone asking for more funding have to, potentially, pay more to submit their idea?
The fee is just to prevent spam, shouldn't it be fixed at a price that is just high enough to prevent it?

I will criticise my own proposal here:
Reducing it to a fixed 1 Dash isn't a long term solution. It will have to be adjusted again and again.
I just don't know how the fee could be linked to something external to Dash and still get people to agree.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,139
1,227
1,183
From the people that would like to see a dynamic fee.
Why should someone asking for more funding have to, potentially, pay more to submit their idea?
The fee is just to prevent spam, shouldn't it be fixed at a price that is just high enough to prevent it?

I will criticise my own proposal here:
Reducing it to a fixed 1 Dash isn't a long term solution. It will have to be adjusted again and again.
I just don't know how the fee could be linked to something external to Dash and still get people to agree.
Personally, I would like to see all proposals translated into at least five major languages as a free inclusive service to submitters. So I think the cost needs to be dynamic, possibly based on word count.

Governance proposals from MNOs would ideally be cheaper, but still there are translation costs.
 

TroyDASH

Well-known Member
Jul 31, 2015
1,254
797
183
I voted no, but as long as the dev team does not have any major concerns from a network security point of view, I would be okay with a 1 DASH fee. Spam from the "too many proposals to review" perspective doesn't bother me actually -- no matter how many proposals there are I think the best ones are still going to be the ones that get funded. But spam in terms of negative consequences to the network if someone decided to spend $200k to create 2000 proposals, is more of a concern. So as long as the DGBB system is not going to crash even under heavy spam load then I'm okay with it
 

Chadrick

New Member
Mar 22, 2017
15
11
3
46
It would be great if a pre-proposal could have some kind of multi-sig address where backers could pool their money for proposals they like. It would be a kind of pre-proposal, "put your dash where your mouth is" - that doesn't quite roll off the tongue does it... Then if the proposal amount is hit the official proposal could use these funds to post the official one. Would be great if you could pull your own "pledge" if you decided something else was better.
 

Chadrick

New Member
Mar 22, 2017
15
11
3
46
I voted "yes" because I think $500 (as of current USD prices) is too much for one person. But I also think proposals should be a community thing. If we had a pool like I suggested above then $500 USD would be a good anti-spam price for a community of like minded folks to come up with...
 

paragon

Member
Dec 30, 2016
42
50
58
36
Reducing the price of a proposal to 1 Dash is logical at this point especially because the USD equivalent of 5 Dash at the time this policy was instituted was actually significantly less than what the USD equivalent of 1 Dash is now; this is because Dash's price has gone up nearly 9-fold in under 3 months
 

Naruto

Member
Dec 26, 2014
176
89
88
From the people that would like to see a dynamic fee.
Why should someone asking for more funding have to, potentially, pay more to submit their idea?
The fee is just to prevent spam, shouldn't it be fixed at a price that is just high enough to prevent it?
The reason for me to think about dynamics fee is fixed fees will require people to constantly review is the fees is enough to stop spamming. I didn't think that details about the fairness part.
Even if dynamic fees with upper and lower cap will have the same problem. ... [emoji848] difficult


使用Tapatalk 發送
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,139
1,227
1,183
We are hopefully about to lower the proposal cost from ~$500 to ~$100. If you want your proposal translated, hire a translator.
No, no, no. Re-think what you're saying here. Dash is Digital Cash, that means it absolutely must be inclusive and incentivise people globally. If it doesn't, then you automatically exclude more than a billion Chinese speaking people, they'll end up doing their own thing in their own language, and maybe they would be inclusive where dash isn't. Dash is also meant to be "easy to use", therefore not tackling language barriers would be a serious and costly mistake.

I'm not suggesting we cover every language, but there are probably five or six languages that can't be excluded. Of the top of my head I would say, Mandarin, English, Spanish, Russian, French, and Arabic.

The submitter would also feel they are at least getting something for their hard earned money, instead of the dash getting wastefully burned. Let's not forget, dash is very much in the service industry. Good customer facing support, not just to end-users but a pain-free experience for submitters too.
 

lynx

Active Member
Dec 11, 2015
364
250
133
@GrandMasterDash
The end user never needs to know anything about the DDGB. You don't need to know how a company runs to use their product, you use it because it works.
Dash's whitepapers, tutorials, faqs, how-tos, advertisements, wallets, costumer support, etc should be available in every language, proposals don't need to be. And if any proposal submiter thinks it should, they are welcome to provide the translation.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,139
1,227
1,183
@GrandMasterDash
The end user never needs to know anything about the DDGB. You don't need to know how a company runs to use their product, you use it because it works.
Dash's whitepapers, tutorials, faqs, how-tos, advertisements, wallets, costumer support, etc should be available in every language, proposals don't need to be. And if any proposal submiter thinks it should, they are welcome to provide the translation.
How does a native Chinese person make their proposal if there is language imblance among MNOs? He must assume the language of dash is English? How do they get the approval of Russian speaking MNOs? Are you going to be happy when the day comes that a lot of proposals are being successfully passed when they are only written in Mandarin? - I think not.
 

Gi01

Member
Apr 7, 2015
80
21
48
Extremely in favor of reducing the fee to 1 dash. I am extremely convinced that we are missing some opportunities here, cause people are not happy to submit a proposal where they have to burn 500$ in advance; also, the "risk" to make a proposal if the required amount is lower then 5000$ ( make it 50 dash) is probably pushing out all the people that might create a low cost, but useful, proposal cause the risk of failure destroys the gain that the proposer is expecting.

Regarding the language, i am not english native. I am here as an informed investor, to use my votes, and english is the international common language. If a chinese speaker owns nodes, believe me, he has the chance to translate a proposal (if he's interested in).
 

lynx

Active Member
Dec 11, 2015
364
250
133
How does a native Chinese person make their proposal if there is language imblance among MNOs? He must assume the language of dash is English? How do they get the approval of Russian speaking MNOs? Are you going to be happy when the day comes that a lot of proposals are being successfully passed when they are only written in Mandarin? - I think not.
Ok, then. Convince me there is a significant demand for it. Ask around in the international section and get MN badge-wearing forum users to post something like "I don't understand English and need proposals translated" in a dedicated thread.
 

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
I stand by the position that putting the lunatics in charge of the asylum is a bad idea that will have bad results.

I would vote against the change. Even 5 DASH is too low.

It's just going to flood the MNOs with a new batch of couchlocked dreamers and ideas with no know-how, backing, or substance.

Remember the ATMs to undermine the very point of DASH? Remember the PR to promote vaporware? How much was wasted on silly pork scams that any grown-up with the slightest business experience would have shot down?

I was right about this last time. I'm right about it this time. But if the MNOs want to throw away money on multi-million dollar fiascos that leave egg on their face, again, still, who am I to argue... It's all free money again next month...

The world sees you as a bunch of spoiled, inexperienced brats. The more you make fools of yourselves, the harder it is to convince grown-ups to take you seriously.

The only feedback that exists in the budget system is that of making a fool of yourselves by doing dumb shit and getting laughed at. But you're too damned arrogant and childish to accept the feedback, and keep on assing up... This is actually worse for adoption than IX still being broken. You need to grow the fuck up, snowflakes.
 
Last edited:

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
I voted "yes" because I think $500 (as of current USD prices) is too much for one person. But I also think proposals should be a community thing. If we had a pool like I suggested above then $500 USD would be a good anti-spam price for a community of like minded folks to come up with...
I can afford it just fine. I pay more than that just to boost morale on underappreciated projects that my name isn't even on, and which I have no control over...

Show me someone willing to fix IX, or even admit that it has a problem,and I'll cover the cost of that proposal submission with contingency that it be reimbursed upon successful vote. There. 0 DASH for that one. Happy?
 

TroyDASH

Well-known Member
Jul 31, 2015
1,254
797
183
The world sees you as a bunch of spoiled, inexperienced brats. The more you make fools of yourselves, the harder it is to convince grown-ups to take you seriously.
The world does, or you do? :D
To be fair, regardless of whether the proposal fee is 1 or 5, it is the same masternodes who are voting. The value of the fee isn't what causes bad proposals to get funded, it only influences how many get proposed. If masternodes get better at vetting proposals then the fee is less of an issue.
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,139
1,227
1,183
Ok, then. Convince me there is a significant demand for it. Ask around in the international section and get MN badge-wearing forum users to post something like "I don't understand English and need proposals translated" in a dedicated thread.
Dash was originally produced by an English speaker to a largely English speaking community. The question is not what languages MNOs currently understand, it's about significant lost opportunity from non-English speaking participants (proposers). Here's a new link that might give you some hope for English:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/266808/the-most-spoken-languages-worldwide/

It says that 1.5B people speak English (only 375M natively). But then world population is currently 7.5B.. that's just one in five people. Mandarin comes in at 1.1B. What percentage of Chinese people also speak English? - it's growing but it's still a small number:

https://www.quora.com/How-many-languages-would-I-need-to-know-to-speak-to-half-of-the-world?share=1

At best, one in three people might possibly speak English and Mandarin. But don't confuse that with reading because written Chinese is relatively universal whereas Mandarin dialects vary enormously. Let's just assume that one in three people can read both English and Mandarin (optimistic), then it's safe to say dash could significantly grow it's market cap if it was more internationalised.

I'm pretty sure a lot of MNOs would feel alienated if two in three proposals were appearing in Mandarin only. Ultimately, dash must consider itself, not just "digital cash" but digital cash for the entire world.
 

TroyDASH

Well-known Member
Jul 31, 2015
1,254
797
183
Dash was originally produced by an English speaker to a largely English speaking community. The question is not what languages MNOs currently understand, it's about significant lost opportunity from non-English speaking participants (proposers). Here's a new link that might give you some hope for English:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/266808/the-most-spoken-languages-worldwide/

It says that 1.5B people speak English (only 375M natively). But then world population is currently 7.5B.. that's just one in five people. Mandarin comes in at 1.1B. What percentage of Chinese people also speak English? - it's growing but it's still a small number:

https://www.quora.com/How-many-languages-would-I-need-to-know-to-speak-to-half-of-the-world?share=1

At best, one in three people might possibly speak English and Mandarin. But don't confuse that with reading because written Chinese is relatively universal whereas Mandarin dialects vary enormously. Let's just assume that one in three people can read both English and Mandarin (optimistic), then it's safe to say dash could significantly grow it's market cap if it was more internationalised.

I'm pretty sure a lot of MNOs would feel alienated if two in three proposals were appearing in Mandarin only. Ultimately, dash must consider itself, not just "digital cash" but digital cash for the entire world.
We're getting a little off topic but what do you think should be done about it? We do have some translators already doing things for the core team and Dash Detailed. Do we need a proposal to fund translations of budget proposals?