• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Refund Proposal Fee.

Acedian

Acedian

Active member
For governance questions and failed proposals, I feel that the proposal fee should be refunded if the question/proposal was sensible.

An example; "Reduce Proposal Fees to 1 Dash" looks like it will fail, yet has had close to equal "Yes" and "No" votes. I don't think anyone wants the proposer to lose their money for this.

How to implement; add a 4th option to voting possibilities. Have "Yes", "Abstain", "No" and "No + Refund".
Or have "Abstain" be the option that stops the vote passing but provides a refund.

Please let me know what you think.
 
Also last time someone proposed simply that if there were more yes than no, that the refund would automatically be made. I think that would be better.
 
Oh, it's unreasonable!

Who will refund time for the voters who have to read many poor quality proposals?

If someone who submits proposal he must commit to the success of the Dash network. If he doesn't have a level of commitment why will we need to vote for him?
 
bhkien said:
Oh, it's unreasonable!

Who will refund time for the voters who have to read many poor quality proposals?

If someone who submits proposal he must commit to the success of the Dash network. If he doesn't have a level of commitment why will we need to vote for him?
Click to expand...
I didn't suggest we refund all proposals, just the useful ones that give clarity (in the case of a failed governance questions) or a proposal that is good but for a valid reason isn't accepted (like one that is good but not viable at the time of submitting).
 
bhkien said:
Oh, it's unreasonable!

Who will refund time for the voters who have to read many poor quality proposals?

If someone who submits proposal he must commit to the success of the Dash network. If he doesn't have a level of commitment why will we need to vote for him?
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I didn't think that our conversation was that unclear, I think you missed our point.

The discussion is basically about acknowledging, as far as I'm concerned, that sometimes a majority of the network agrees to a proposal that is not passing (such is the case with the vote to take the proposal cost down to 1 dash) as a proposal needs 10% yes votes more than no.

So, the idea, as far as I'm concerned, :
  • is to not change a thing : if there is 10 % yes more than no, then proposal pass.
  • but to add that : If there is more yes than no (but less than 10 % difference), then the proposer is reimbursed his 5 dash (or whatever the cost of the proposal is at that time)
 
I agree - I think that proposal fee reimbursement should be divorced from the funding request. I don't like how every proposal needs to tack on 5 dash for fee reimbursement, reducing the total budget available ever so slightly. I would like to see fee reimbursement automatic for anything that passes without having to be part of the funding request, at the least, and ideally fee reimbursement threshold should be lower than the 10% threshold for funding itself. For example I would like to see auto refund for anything that finishes with more yes votes than no votes. A proposal that gains a plurality of yes votes without getting in funding, could be argued to not be a waste of time even though it ultimately failed.

As for technologov's proposals, I would vote for a one-off reimbursement for 5 dash to cover one of the two proposals (the first one for 0.1 was a waste of time and should never have been submitted). Because I think there was value added to the network by simply having the question answered, even though it is on track to fail. Not sure if realistically this would be feasible to pull off right now without wasting even more money, but I would support it.
 
Last edited:
bhkien said:
Oh, it's unreasonable!

Who will refund time for the voters who have to read many poor quality proposals?

If someone who submits proposal he must commit to the success of the Dash network. If he doesn't have a level of commitment why will we need to vote for him?
Click to expand...

Ah yes, what a great response... the same lazy ass that says no to Adaptive Proposal Fees. No wait, you wasn't so lazy to keep marking me down as "dumb" or coming here to say no to refunds.
 
So why aren't the proposals split depending on their function?

Feature requests\enhancements like the reduction in fee cost incur no fee where anything related to producing a product or business related outcome for Dash would incur a fee?
 
I have the same question with Gunna

Feature requests\enhancements like the reduction in fee cost incur no fee where anything related to producing a product or business related outcome for Dash would incur a fee?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top