Welcome to the Dash Forum!

Please sign up to discuss the most innovative cryptocurrency!

Sub-dao, voter delegation, or lowering the proposal fee. Best scaling options?

Discussion in 'Pre + Budget Proposal Discussions' started by Plateglassarmour, Dec 20, 2017.

  1. Plateglassarmour

    Plateglassarmour New Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    3
    This thread is for the discussion of ideas to help alleviate some of the issues regarding our rapid growth, such as the increasingly large barrier for proposals.

    All ideas welcome.

    Please be civil.
     
    #1 Plateglassarmour, Dec 20, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2017
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Plateglassarmour

    Plateglassarmour New Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    3
    So clearly, there is an acute need to start discussing scaling options.

    The proposal fee is now more than $7500, and that is a huge barrier to entry for smaller scale proposals.

    Unfortunately, lowering the proposal fee could lead to the breakdown of the ability for masternodes to actually review each proposal.

    I can't see the network handling more than 100 proposals in a month successfully.

    My initial inclination is a sub-dao, funded by a normal proposal, that would seek to fund smaller scale projects and provide reporting based on the outcome of these projects.

    At least as a stop-gap measure, a simple sub-dao could be relatively fast to set up, and would help alleviate a lot of the short term issues.

    Over time, more complex structures of oversight and accountability could be worked in, but an initial model could be as simple as one or two trusted members of the community holding funds that are disbursed based on discussion in a forum thread to small projects that have the potential to help the network without presenting a major risk of disappearing with the funds.

    Lets hear your thoughts.
     
    #2 Plateglassarmour, Dec 20, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2017
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. solarguy

    solarguy Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    413
    Trophy Points:
    133
    There are a hundred ways we could set this up.

    The person or persons in charge of the sub-dao could collect promising smaller proposals and then submit a prop for the total aggregate each month. A periodic report would demonstrate the various degrees of success for the various projects.

    Another method would be to pick a number based on previous data and just assign x Dash to the subDao for them to fund various proposals. The number could be adjusted up or down based on feedback on the projects, ROI, the number of submissions, etc.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. TroyDASH

    TroyDASH Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,251
    Likes Received:
    794
    Trophy Points:
    183
    I would be open to the idea of a sub-dao but I think the scaling is already occurring somewhat naturally. It is getting much more common now for proposers to represent companies or teams of more than one person. Having hundreds/thousands of sub-$10,000 projects is not going to be the way to go in the long run, and it doesn't make sense for the MNOs to be making decisions on that level of granularity. If a sub-DAO would be useful to manage smaller projects (probably by category), the market incentives are already in place and it would be an inevitability for such organizations to pop up.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Crypto Eric

    Crypto Eric New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2017
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I agree that $7,500 for a proposal is a problem. The sub-DAO idea is intriguing to me, but who would be in charge of the voting process for the sub-DAO to fund smaller projects?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. dancefordistribution

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2017
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I read the pdf in
    https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/additional-network-layers-and-governance-v3.19766/
    and it looks great in terms of presentation layer and new interface for proposals.

    Regarding the delegation model I had in mind is simply the ability to delegate your votes to another masternode so say that an owner Alice has 10 masternodes and wishes to delegate to BOB who has one masternode. BOB then gets 11 votes to cast for each proposal thereby 'voting for alice' in a sense. Say then that Alice whishes to vote on specific proposals anyhow where she thinks BOB is mistaken, she can then override BOB's vote and reclaim her voting power for that specific proposal (or all if she wants to), Alice can also at any time un-assign BOB as a delegate through the power of Alice's private keys on the Masternodes she has. Ok so lets say BOB's masternode goes offline for more than 24/X hours then the power should be handed back to Alice.

    Another idea is that voting could be granted/delegated to anyone else not just masternode, say a person/team working for dash as a 3rd party

    I am not so familiar with the internal structure of dash on a protocol level as of yet but I think it should be possible to do this with some kind of signature of 'voting power' or the like.. something that can be build into the protocol itself so to speak.. but this is something that the core-team have to implement in that sense.

    This according to me could go well in hand with the additional network layers / presentation layers / proposal gateway DashGov.com where a user can delegate his/her votes to a trusted person and cast votes for proposals also. One problem is the anonymity of people granted voting power from others but that is simply unavoidable I think.

    In any case we NEED teams/people who goes over the increasing number of proposals and makes decisions or suggestions also for masternode owners that do not have the time lets say. Such a service should be paid, and I do think as mentioned earlier that SUB-DAO is very good initial start and it could also take a 'salary' to take care of small-scale projects / proposals..
     
    #6 dancefordistribution, Dec 21, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2017
  7. goto1415

    goto1415 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2016
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    3
    It is probably true that the number of proposals is kept low by the current high fee, but using a high fee on its own to filter proposals is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, it works but has some obvious consequences.

    Maintaining a high fee:
    • does not guarantee the quality of a proposal
    • unfairly penalises proposal owners who cannot afford the fee
    • has the potential for good proposals to never to get submitted
    • leads to proposal owners soliciting for donations to fund the fee in the Dash Nation discord
    The ultimate goal should be to provide a solution that ensure fees are not so high as to put unnecessary obstacles in the way of proposers and keeping them from submitting proposals that could provide potential benefits to the overall dash ecosystem, while at the same time ensuring administration overheads for MNOs are kept to a minimum. Any solutions would need to be thouroughly researched to ensure their plausibility.

    I like the idea of voter delegation, so long as I understand it correctly and there are mechanisms in place to avoid voter abuse. For example, would one MNO be able to delegate his vote(s) to a sub-dao or another MNO assigned to make decisions on their behalf (maybe using some sort of multisig?)
     
  8. goto1415

    goto1415 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2016
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I think it makes sense to have some guidelines for proposal owners. It could just be a standard webform with preset sections and Q&As and each one that is filled adds to a score. The more complete the information is that is provided the higher the overall score would be. The proposer doesn't get to see the score, only MNO's, which could help MNOs determine which are well formed proposals and which are not.
     
  9. dancefordistribution

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2017
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Yes exactly, I think firstly a one MN pointing to another MN could be a start as a delegate power, then perhaps even a tree model so that delegation can happen in several layers i.e. forwarding of votes ALICE[11]->BOB[1]->JANE[1] gives JANE 11+1+1 =13 votes representing both ALICE BOB and herself. So in affect BOB forwarded both his and ALICE votes to JANE..... of course representatives has to be somewhat public to get more votes.. and perhaps they(ie JANE) should be rewarded somehow also by the protocol itself for providing this service (ie masternode service) given that she actually votes for bob/alice
     
  10. TroyDASH

    TroyDASH Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,251
    Likes Received:
    794
    Trophy Points:
    183
    I don't think there can be an automatic way to assign scores...otherwise people can put whatever into the forms without any quality control.
    And as for manual scoring, there was already an attempt at that with the Proposal Evaluation Committee (PEC) which didn't really succeed.
     
  11. dancefordistribution

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2017
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Should we have a SUB-DAO that simpley takes all the leftovers from each months budget and actively searches for tasks/projects to do.. kind of like the core-team .. with trusted members accessing the funds like a multi-sig escrow. Right now as said earlier the model that we have is very 'reactive' to whatever comes along and dash does not actively go out and pursue new projects/investment areas, which we could with this ginormeous budget at hand.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  12. Crypto Eric

    Crypto Eric New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2017
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    3
    And it's becoming harder to proactively pursue projects that will benefit Dash via proposals because of the risk of losing your initial investment of 5 Dash ($7,500)
     
  13. AlejandroE

    AlejandroE Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2017
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    103
    I think it should be a fixed $ amount. I think $4000-$5000 is a good range where spam is prevented and small projects could pay for it.

    On another hand, a very simple solution is setting up a max. number of proposals per month, like 20. Then, if the room is full, you have to wait till any proposal closes its vote process.

    Thoughts?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Crypto Eric

    Crypto Eric New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2017
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I like the idea of a fixed dollar amount
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Plateglassarmour

    Plateglassarmour New Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I think the biggest potential issue with this solution is that it opens up an attack vector (albeit an expensive one) to spam proposals, so no valid ones could get through.

    In terms of potential solutions, a nice sophisticated one could be having a couple of "tiers" of additional governance layers as described in:
    https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/additional-network-layers-and-governance-v3.19766/

    The tiers could be 1)Full proposals 2)Pre-proposals 3)Sub-proposals

    I see the third layer (small proposals) as being voted on like usual by the masternodes, but they would be "optional" to review, and there would be no 10% voting threshold (maybe a 1-2% threshold instead).

    That way, any masternodes that have extra time and attention could look over some of the smaller (<10 dash or so) proposals without diverting time from reviewing the major proposals of the month.

    If this tier has a much lower barrier to entry, and tons of proposals pour in, you could just view proposals by category (like on kickstarter) for whatever category interests you.

    Plus there wouldn't be any issue with swamping out the major proposals with lots of tiny stuff, but you could still afford to properly review a lot of smaller projects.

    Since that solution (and a lot of the more complex solutions) would require waiting on evolution anyway, I think any good interim solution will have to be very simple, such as a fund payed for by a normal proposal that just directly pays out to some of the smaller projects like DashForce does for meetups.

    The fund could just be directly curated by a couple of trusted members of the community that have spare time to run the thing, and they could just provide a summary of what they are funding.

    Crude, but I think it could work in the short term.
     
    #15 Plateglassarmour, Dec 21, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  16. AlejandroE

    AlejandroE Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2017
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Actually, sounds very interesting. The idea of viewing proposals by category is really usefull cause it organize the whole thing.

    Since you said
    Im concerned about what if any masternode dont read my small proposal? How can I ensure that my proposal will even be read? I know you said its a crude idea, but I think we can go building it up answeing these questions.
     
  17. Naruto

    Naruto Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    88
    A sub-DAO or DIN is ok if it can help follow up the passed proposal. We do need people to asset the effectiveness of some proposal. But make sure we define it's role clearly. What is it main purpose? If it have multiple funtions what are those?


    DiscordTag
    Naruto#5568
     
  18. iFr4g

    iFr4g New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2017
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Dash Address:
    Xd33EWFHJf9M8VkjuyN7yrDnFF7tCxyd1H
    We was just discussing this in the Discord, so here's my idea, Crowdfunding a proposal, with two different ways of attack:

    • <5 Dash
      • User has a proposal, but the cost to propose it to the MNOs is more than the finances required for the proposal (example, one of the Discord users is trying to promote Dash in Ghana and needs $700, that's approx 0.5 Dash)
        • Proposal goes to the Dash users, if the Dash users like the proposal then they can crowdfund the proposal to whatever the total is that is requested as long as it is <5 Dash
        • Think Kickstarter/JustGiving for Dash themed projects
    • >5 Dash
      • User has a great idea but they are unable to afford the cost to put forward a proposal to the MNs
        • Proposal goes to the Dash users, if the Dash users like the proposal then they can crowdfund the 5 Dash requirement for the proposal to go in front of the MNOs to vote
        • Proposer is required to make some sort of public donation to the proposal to show they have tried to finance the 5 Dash requirement
    Funds will go into an escrow in both methods and will have time limits, if the required funds are not raised in a certain amount of time then it shows disinterest and the funds are returned to the investors.

    Hope that made sense :)

    Edit: Added example for <5 Dash
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. JOL

    JOL Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Can this be implemented in the code?
    DAO :5 D for 5000 D / max 1000 D - 10% vote - MAX 6 months - escrow X x /X /vote NO 10%
    SUB-DAO LVL 1 : 1 D for 900 D / MAX 100 D - 9% vote - MAX 3 months - escrow X x /X /vote NO 9%
    SUB-DAO LVL 2 : 0.5 D for 90 / MAX 10 D - 8% vote - MAX 2 months - escrow 1/4 - 2/4 - 3/4 - 4/4 / vote NO 8%
     
  20. Plateglassarmour

    Plateglassarmour New Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    3
    The problem with this is that it leads to the same issue as lowering the proposal fee: a total number of proposals that is too high to reasonably sort through, regardless of their value.

    If We have a sub-dao, it needs to either be A)self contained and have discretion to spend funds on it's own, with some accountability afterwards that people can look at or B)mostly self contained, so that anyone who wants to vote on the sub-dao proposals can do so, but they don't take up the same space as normal proposals.

    If you don't divert the attention needed to sort through the proposals, you're not solving the underlying issue.

    Theoretically, it could be implemented in the code, but one of the largest advantages of a sub-dao is that it can be painlessly dropped if it is found to be under serving the network.

    As soon as you are talking about protocol level structural changes, it adds months to any timeline to add the features safely, and we need something soon.

    I think that the easiest interim solution will be a sub-dao that has discretion to spend its own funds on whatever project looks promising (like Dash Force for meet ups)

    It would be simple to set up, and simple to defund if the community felt it was not serving it's needs.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. GrandMasterDash

    GrandMasterDash Well-known Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,712
    Likes Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    183
    The lost opportunity is burning 5 dash without putting it to better use; review, escrow, proposal translation services, proposer identity checks and so on. These kind of services would improve the overall quality of proposals and reduce the risk of scams. Each masternode could vote for a Proposal Services Sub-DAO on an ongoing basis.
     
  22. TroyDASH

    TroyDASH Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,251
    Likes Received:
    794
    Trophy Points:
    183
    I'm not really a fan of having a generic sub-DAO act as a catch-all for any small proposals. The people best equipped to evaluate small or local proposals are the people closest to that location or area of expertise. I would be fine with funding regional teams or teams that have a clearly laid out mission/purpose, and then anyone who wants to do a small project that falls under those areas could solicit funds from those teams instead of soliciting funds from the masternodes at the protocol level.
     
  23. demo

    demo Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2016
    Messages:
    3,114
    Likes Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Dash Address:
    XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX

    1. Give voting power to more actors (see also here).
    2. Issue category tags to the proposals, and make them searchable.
    3. Change the linear structure of the governance proposal system, and make it a tree.
    4. Let the proposals be classiffied into the tree branches and let them stay there forever (see also here), waiting to be voted by all actors.
    5. Vote the numbers, thus vote a voting threshold (a percentage of the total number of voters). Whenever the votes of a proposal are above this voting_threshold/percentage, this proposal becomes a payee candidate during the budget finalization (that occurs periodically).
     
    #23 demo, Dec 21, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2017
  24. JOL

    JOL Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    78
    From my point of view, this is one of the reasons why MNs have rewards, read understand and vote. It's their responsibility. They already have the means to have at least one co-worker to assist them.

    Always from my point of view, soon each MN will have the means to be a sub-DAO to him all alone.

    We already had an example of a SUB-DAO that does not work with DASH GLOBAL.

    Dash Core, Dev Team, Dash Force New, ... are there for a reason, trust and work done. They all started by producing something that gave value to Dash, then they were funded to allow them to go further.
    In the first they worked and gave results.

    I think, as Evan himself says, if a person wants to invest funds as he or she wishes with discretion, he does it with his own funds.

    Nothing is urgent, we have time. Until this is incorporated in the code, it remains the posibility for a proposal owner to be financed by donations if the project is really a matter of life or death for Dash.

    On this point we have to make an important choice, either we share a model "LTC Lightning" out of the chain, or we continue to find solutions in our code as "instantsend"?

    The first question is:
    SUB-DAO in the chain YES / NO?

    If it's a yes, then we have plenty of questions to ask ourselves.
    We just need a SUB-DAO, or a descrow service, a smart contract. That in the main chain or in a secondary chain ....?


    I share your point of view, eventually in each country there will be a CORE TEAM agency.

    It was in a first time started and helped by the CORE TEAM, then become autonomous (financially).

    Co-ordination with CORE TEAM is important for everything to be coherent.

    We need people in those countries that we can trust. This trust is built with time and actions.

    It's a sharing of point of view, not an absolute truth
     
  25. feedbands

    feedbands Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How about we take a quick poll.

    How much should a proposal cost? Vote now:

    https://goo.gl/C3PYhW


    (if there's a way to embed a poll directly in the forum then my apologies, there was no immediately obvious way to do so)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  26. jeffh

    jeffh Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    78
    If you guys haven't already read the study by Input/Output, otherwise known as the Veritas Report and the subsequent response by Dash Core - you should.

    I think that's required reading for anyone contributing to this discussion as a lot of this has been discussed before.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  27. jeffh

    jeffh Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    78
    No way to put a poll in unless it's a new thread.
     
  28. carlosjem

    carlosjem Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Hey, thanks for write about this issue!

    I think a fixed $ USD ammount combined with a diversification system of proposals would organize better the whole process. It wouldn´t be so expensive to entrepenuers since DASH keeps growing strong, and it will become easier to masternodes to look for the proposals.

    I don´t throw away the idea of having a maximum number of proposals each month, it could work too!

    I think this problem needs to be solved very quickly in a effective way, because for example people in countries were crytocurrencies like DASH would have a high positive inlfuence (like for example: Zimbawe, Venezuela, Congo, Sudan, etc) couldn´t afford the fee to submit a potential great proposal, so even when the fee is a very nice filter it could be negative to whole community.

    I think we can find a perfect middle point to solve this issue!
     
  29. camosoul

    camosoul Grizzled Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,266
    Likes Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    1,183
    The budget isn't about making free money more available.

    It's about doing useful things for DASH.

    Which, right now, could only be done by major player for whom the current proposal fee is peanuts.

    This isn't a welfare system for do-nothing pie-in-the-sky dreamers.

    Frankly, I see it leaning towards being a "special expenses" system for Core. They get a salary, but a major TV ad campaign, or Integrating Wal Mart... Those sort of undertakings would require mass funds above and beyond their salaries.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  30. UdjinM6

    UdjinM6 Official Dash Dev
    Dash Core Team Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2014
    Messages:
    3,637
    Likes Received:
    3,536
    Trophy Points:
    1,183
    I like this way of thinking https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/...-sponsorship-dash-giveaway.22244/#post-156930
    Basically, as long as your project aims for relatively large amount of Dash, you just don't care what the fee is, it doesn't matter. You just need to find and incentivize smaller investors first and give them smth in return if your proposal was funded. If you can't find anyone who would like to put their money on you, then maybe your proposal is not good enough or isn't ready yet to be presented to MNOs and you should try harder.