[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[spatula]

Option A: If the price falls, we don’t pay out the contracts. In this case we’ve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.

Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.

Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and don’t support USD based contracts at all.

Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.

Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.

Paging TokNormal and BabyGiraffe

A: Not a great idea unless the contractors understand this possibility before starting work. This added risk would probably have the impact of increased costs but no burned bridges.

B: I really dislike this idea. Budgets should be capped to a limit. Going under is fine, going over and increasing output removes trust in the system.

C: I like this one the best, but obvious drawbacks are obvious.

D: This WOULD be a decent idea if it didn't dramatically reduce decentralization of the budget and project as a whole.

E: This is my second favorite after option C. Seems to alleviate the problems of option A.


my 2 cents.

[GhostPlayer]

Anyone else experiencing stability issues with their masternodes at the moment? Mine have been bulletproof for months but the last couple of weeks I'm constantly restarting them etc. I haven't made any changes to the underlying system. Has something on the network changed?

Walter

 What are your server specs?
 OpenVZ or KVM?
 When was the last time you dumped your debug.log?
 Have you tried to actually reboot it, or just re-start the daemon?
 Did you update the system by any chance?

[HinnomTX]

Anyone else experiencing stability issues with their masternodes at the moment? Mine have been bulletproof for months but the last couple of weeks I'm constantly restarting them etc. I haven't made any changes to the underlying system. Has something on the network changed?

Walter

Quite possibly. I had a reliable masternode (16+ weeks of uptime) go down twice in one day, which is very unusual. I reviewed my firewall settings and realized I was not filtering some incoming traffic properly. There could be malicious users out there trying to bang on masternode IPs, looking for exploits. So I would recommend closing all the ports you don't need.  

[Moloch]

Anyone else experiencing stability issues with their masternodes at the moment? Mine have been bulletproof for months but the last couple of weeks I'm constantly restarting them etc. I haven't made any changes to the underlying system. Has something on the network changed?

Walter

Quite possibly. I had a reliable masternode (16+ weeks of uptime) go down twice in one day, which is very unusual. I reviewed my firewall settings and realized I was not filtering some incoming traffic properly. There could be malicious users out there trying to bang on masternode IPs, looking for exploits. So I would recommend closing all the ports you don't need.  

That's a good point...

It's quite likely that someone is scanning masternode IP's, then searching each server for open ports.

If someone found open ports, they might be trying to brute force crack your password, which could look like a DDOS attack, slowing your server, possibly crashing the masternode...

[ddink7]

snip

What you’re failing to understand is the network is on the hook for volatility either way. USD solves this issue when the price goes up, but what happens when the price goes down?

I’ve been working on the V2 of the budget system for the last few days and I’m neck deep in code, this whole ordeal showed up at a good time actually. I think I have a pretty good understanding of where we need to go and basically the network needs to be able to promise a vendor to pay them for an extended period of time in Dash or USD. To do this I want to implement a new type of proposal, that is called a contract. This would also have some new thresholds so that this doesn't get abused:

- Month-to-month proposals: Requiring 10% support from the network
- Multi-month proposals: Requires 10% support of the network
- 3-month contracts: Requires 20% network support
- 6-month contracts: Requires 33% network support
- 12-month contracts: Requires 51% network support

Proposals can be voted down at any time, whereas contracts have a voting window which is no less than 30 days long. Contracts should be very carefully considered by the network because they are much more dangerous and expose us to a liability and market risk no matter how they are denominated.

USD valuations would also be created via quorum and an average price over a period of 7 days would be used to stop people from attacking the implementation. (e.g. if you dump 10000 coins right before the budget is finalized, you could drop the price by 10% and get 10% more coins as a result, right? To stop this we’ll use quorum based averages).

So assuming this technology exists and we can denominate in Dash or USD, we need to have an entirely different conversation about when to use Dash and when to use USD.

To figure out which denomination is better, let’s consider some examples

250 DASH Proposal - At time of submission we agree to pay $1000 USD in Dash.
$1000 USD Proposal - At time of submission we agree to pay $1000 USD.

UP - Let’s say Dash goes up 100%.

250 DASH Proposal is now worth $2000 and takes the same amount of Dash from the budget.
$1000 USD Proposal is now worth $1000 and takes 50% the amount of Dash from the budget

DOWN - Let’s say Dash goes down 50%

250 DASH Proposal is now worth $500 and takes the same amount of Dash from the budget.
$1000 USD Proposal is now worth $1000 and takes 200% the amount of Dash from the budget

Let’s say we only utilize USD based contracts in the system and in one 6 month period we have obligations for $33,000 per month. At $4.20 per Dash, we should have $33,692 dollars available per month, so that seems reasonable. Let’s say the price goes down 50%, now our budget is $16846.20. Now we have a problem, we’ve promised more money than the system can create in a month.

Option A: If the price falls, we don’t pay out the contracts. In this case we’ve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.

Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.

Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and don’t support USD based contracts at all.

Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.

Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.

Paging TokNormal and BabyGiraffe

Evan, would it be possible to code the revised system so that contracts were paid first, always? If so, then Option E wouldn't result in contractors ever getting burned. Some one-time proposals would essentially get burned by being bumped from the payment list due to inadequate funds on occasion, but if contracts get paid first then contractors should be satisfied.

[eduffield]

Anyone else experiencing stability issues with their masternodes at the moment? Mine have been bulletproof for months but the last couple of weeks I'm constantly restarting them etc. I haven't made any changes to the underlying system. Has something on the network changed?

Walter

Quite possibly. I had a reliable masternode (16+ weeks of uptime) go down twice in one day, which is very unusual. I reviewed my firewall settings and realized I was not filtering some incoming traffic properly. There could be malicious users out there trying to bang on masternode IPs, looking for exploits. So I would recommend closing all the ports you don't need.  

That's a good point...

It's quite likely that someone is scanning masternode IP's, then searching each server for open ports.

If someone found open ports, they might be trying to brute force crack your password, which could look like a DDOS attack, slowing your server, possibly crashing the masternode...

How much ram does your masternode have available? The budget system is being used pretty actively, that could possibly be taking up more memory.

[afreer]

Option A: If the price falls, we don’t pay out the contracts. In this case we’ve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.

Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.

Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and don’t support USD based contracts at all.

Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.

Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.

I like Option C.

Because I think the current problems are for contractors who win contracts that involve settlement to a 3rd party in a particular FIAT (which happens to be all USD right now), e.g. acting as an agent between the network and the upstream supplier or a contractor and a subcontractor.  

Dash's contract is between the network and the contractor (regardless of their upstream chain for goods or services) and it would be a minefield to start adding other currencies into the core agreement between the network and the contractor (whether they are a supplier or an agent).

If suppliers are acting as agents for a 3rd party supplier then they really need to carry the fluctuation risk the same as happens in the real world.  For example if I award a contract to manufacture my socks to a company in Guangdong in RMB and they get the cotton from India and INR drops against RMB, that's the supplier's problem, they can't come back and say 'exchange rates changed with one of my suppliers so i want more money than we agreed'.  Likewise if I hire a patent lawyer in London who takes Dash and he needs to pay for searches in USD and GBP drops against USD, that's his risk and it should be priced in it's just part of the risk of being a supplier and that's why we have a market in DGBB, people can compete and price all this stuff in (not yet obviously).

I get that this means that it's going to be harder to honor USD contracts with the current setup, but i think we should find another way, adding other currencies in the 1st tier contract between the network and the supplier is complexity as I see it.  Just thoughts though.

[eduffield]

snip

What you’re failing to understand is the network is on the hook for volatility either way. USD solves this issue when the price goes up, but what happens when the price goes down?

I’ve been working on the V2 of the budget system for the last few days and I’m neck deep in code, this whole ordeal showed up at a good time actually. I think I have a pretty good understanding of where we need to go and basically the network needs to be able to promise a vendor to pay them for an extended period of time in Dash or USD. To do this I want to implement a new type of proposal, that is called a contract. This would also have some new thresholds so that this doesn't get abused:

- Month-to-month proposals: Requiring 10% support from the network
- Multi-month proposals: Requires 10% support of the network
- 3-month contracts: Requires 20% network support
- 6-month contracts: Requires 33% network support
- 12-month contracts: Requires 51% network support

Proposals can be voted down at any time, whereas contracts have a voting window which is no less than 30 days long. Contracts should be very carefully considered by the network because they are much more dangerous and expose us to a liability and market risk no matter how they are denominated.

USD valuations would also be created via quorum and an average price over a period of 7 days would be used to stop people from attacking the implementation. (e.g. if you dump 10000 coins right before the budget is finalized, you could drop the price by 10% and get 10% more coins as a result, right? To stop this we’ll use quorum based averages).

So assuming this technology exists and we can denominate in Dash or USD, we need to have an entirely different conversation about when to use Dash and when to use USD.

To figure out which denomination is better, let’s consider some examples

250 DASH Proposal - At time of submission we agree to pay $1000 USD in Dash.
$1000 USD Proposal - At time of submission we agree to pay $1000 USD.

UP - Let’s say Dash goes up 100%.

250 DASH Proposal is now worth $2000 and takes the same amount of Dash from the budget.
$1000 USD Proposal is now worth $1000 and takes 50% the amount of Dash from the budget

DOWN - Let’s say Dash goes down 50%

250 DASH Proposal is now worth $500 and takes the same amount of Dash from the budget.
$1000 USD Proposal is now worth $1000 and takes 200% the amount of Dash from the budget

Let’s say we only utilize USD based contracts in the system and in one 6 month period we have obligations for $33,000 per month. At $4.20 per Dash, we should have $33,692 dollars available per month, so that seems reasonable. Let’s say the price goes down 50%, now our budget is $16846.20. Now we have a problem, we’ve promised more money than the system can create in a month.

Option A: If the price falls, we don’t pay out the contracts. In this case we’ve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.

Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.

Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and don’t support USD based contracts at all.

Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.

Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.

Paging TokNormal and BabyGiraffe

Evan, would it be possible to code the revised system so that contracts were paid first, always? If so, then Option E wouldn't result in contractors ever getting burned. Some one-time proposals would essentially get burned by being bumped from the payment list due to inadequate funds on occasion, but if contracts get paid first then contractors should be satisfied.

Contracts will be paid first by V2. Option E results in contracts getting burned if the price falls more than 2 standard deviations from the historical price average. I'll modify my previous example a bit to show how it can happen:

Let’s say we only utilize USD based contracts in the system and in one 6 month period we have obligations for 75% of the total budget, which amounts to $25471.50 per month. At $4.20 per Dash, we should have $33,692 dollars available per month, which will more than cover our expenses. Let’s say the price goes down 50%, now our budget can pay out a possible $16846.20. We have a deficit of $16846.20 - $25471.50, totaling -$8625.30. That's nearly $10k of work that we promised to pay that won't get paid now, thus burning bridges.

[eduffield]

Option A: If the price falls, we don’t pay out the contracts. In this case we’ve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.

Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.

Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and don’t support USD based contracts at all.

Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.

Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.

I like Option C.

Because I think the current problems are for contractors who win contracts that involve settlement to a 3rd party in a particular FIAT (which happens to be all USD right now), e.g. acting as an agent between the network and the upstream supplier or a contractor and a subcontractor.  

Dash's contract is between the network and the contractor (regardless of their upstream chain for goods or services) and it would be a minefield to start adding other currencies into the core agreement between the network and the contractor (whether they are a supplier or an agent).

If suppliers are acting as agents for a 3rd party supplier then they really need to carry the fluctuation risk the same as happens in the real world.  For example if I award a contract to manufacture my socks to a company in Guangdong in RMB and they get the cotton from India and INR drops against RMB, that's the supplier's problem, they can't come back and say 'exchange rates changed with one of my suppliers so i want more money than we agreed'.  Likewise if I hire a patent lawyer in London who takes Dash and he needs to pay for searches in USD and Dash drops against USD, that's his risk and it should be priced in it's just part of the risk of being a supplier and that's why we have a market in DGBB, people can compete and price all this stuff in (not yet obviously).

I get that this means that it's going to be harder to honor USD contracts with the current setup, but i think we should find another way, adding other currencies in the 1st tier contract between the network and the supplier is complexity as I see it.  Just thoughts though.

I think we'd be hard pressed to find a lawyer that will take Dash or even Bitcoin directly. The lawyers we've been using want to use Bitpay, which allows them to invoice us in USD. They keep their books in USD, not in Bitcoin, which is very common. We can't really toss away 99% of the possible contractors just because we want them to take market risk, which they're uncomfortable with. I would say it's very important for our growth, to allow us to work with as many contractors as possible.

[ddink7]

snip

snip

Evan, would it be possible to code the revised system so that contracts were paid first, always? If so, then Option E wouldn't result in contractors ever getting burned. Some one-time proposals would essentially get burned by being bumped from the payment list due to inadequate funds on occasion, but if contracts get paid first then contractors should be satisfied.

Contracts will be paid first by V2. Option E results in contracts getting burned if the price falls more than 2 standard deviations from the historical price average. I'll modify my previous example a bit to show how it can happen:

Let’s say we only utilize USD based contracts in the system and in one 6 month period we have obligations for 75% of the total budget, which amounts to $25471.50 per month. At $4.20 per Dash, we should have $33,692 dollars available per month, which will more than cover our expenses. Let’s say the price goes down 50%, now our budget can pay out a possible $16846.20. We have a deficit of $16846.20 - $25471.50, totaling -$8625.30. That's nearly $10k of work that we promised to pay that won't get paid now, thus burning bridges.

OK I see what you're saying now...my bad!

Is it possible to code a system that will keep up with the amount of dollars paid and if necessary extend the contract into additional months (or subtract months, in the case of price appreciation)? Such a mechanism could track the actual cumulative USD value of all the Dash paid out, and could automatically tack months onto the contract as-needed. This could get is in trouble with credit terms (the contract should have been paid over 12 months but actually took 14 months to pay), but at least contractors would be guaranteed to get their money eventually.

An example would be a contract for $10,000 that is intended to be spread over 12 months, equaling a payment of $833.33 per month. At $4.20 Dash, that would be 198.4 Dash per month. Now let's say that we don't ever allow the system to spend more than 198.4 Dash per month on the proposal, since that could cause problems with other approved non-contract budgets. But if the budgeting system took into account the USD value of the paid Dash at the time it was paid and kept a cumulative record of the USD value paid, then one of two things could happen:

Dash price goes up, and the budgeting system continues to pay 198.4 Dash per month until the $10,000 is paid...which could happen in 10 months, hypothetically. Let's say:

Month 1: 198.4 Dash Paid = $833; Total USD Paid = $833
Month 2: 198.4 Dash Paid = $900; Total USD Paid = $1733
Month 3: 198.4 Dash Paid = $790; Total USD Paid = $2523
Month 4: 198.4 Dash Paid = $810; Total USD Paid = $3333
Month 5: 198.4 Dash Paid = $990; Total USD Paid = $4323
Month 6: 198.4 Dash Paid = $1100; Total USD Paid = $5423
Month 7: 198.4 Dash Paid = $1050; Total USD Paid = $6473
Month 8: 198.4 Dash Paid = $1600; Total USD Paid = $8073
Month 9: 198.4 Dash Paid = $1440; Total USD Paid = $9513
Month 10: Dash = $6; Remaining Balance on Contract = $487; 81.2 Dash Paid
Month 11: 0; Contract Paid Off
Month 12: 0; Contract Paid Off

Dash price goes down, and the budgeting system continues to pay 198.4 Dash per month until the $10,000 is paid...which could happen in 14 months, hypothetically. Let's say:

Month 1: 198.4 Dash Paid = $833; Total USD Paid = $833
Month 2: 198.4 Dash Paid = $900; Total USD Paid = $1733
Month 3: 198.4 Dash Paid = $790; Total USD Paid = $2523
Month 4: 198.4 Dash Paid = $810; Total USD Paid = $3333
Month 5: 198.4 Dash Paid = $600; Total USD Paid = $3933
Month 6: 198.4 Dash Paid = $625; Total USD Paid = $4558
Month 7: 198.4 Dash Paid = $770; Total USD Paid = $5328
Month 8: 198.4 Dash Paid = $910; Total USD Paid = $6238
Month 9: 198.4 Dash Paid = $800; Total USD Paid = $7038
Month 10: 198.4 Dash Paid = $715; Total USD Paid = $7753
Month 11: 198.4 Dash Paid = $660; Total USD Paid = $8413
Month 12: 198.4 Dash Paid = $550; Total USD Paid = $8963
Month 13: 198.4 Dash Paid = $620; Total USD Paid = $9583
Month 14: Dash = $2.40; Remaining Balance on Contract = $417; Final Payment of 173.8 Dash

As long as contractors know what to expect, most would probably be okay with such an arrangement.

In conjunction with this, could we limit the percentage of budget that is available for contracts? Your example above uses 75% as the amount of budget taken up by contracts, but what if we hard-code a limit to say 30%? That greatly reduces the risk of the budget running out of money. It's still possible, but much less likely.

[FeelTheBern]

@TDG (FeelTheBern)
Nothing to have with the voting or your opinion.

Why i got the sensation of seeing you everywhere, oh maybe because you were everywhere today, spaming all channel, Dashtalk, dashwhale and here, with negativity and not constructive coments.

Imho your comunication is not good.

I agree my language was strong but it was warranted.

DO you see me here still responding every 30 minutes? No? Thats because the people voted. Not me. The 1000 masternodes.


So why am I kicked again? Because I disagreed with someone "more veteran" than me? Please.

And I was referring not the approach and mindset from some individuals with clout around here.



“But the true measure of a society’s freedom is how it treats its dissidents and other marginalized groups, not how it treats good loyalists.”

Its all in the delivery in my experience.  I'm not sure if your new here or not...I suspect not, but we all have our own view points, experiences and expectations.   I am ok with voting yes on the said budget proposal...does that mean because I have a different view or opinion then you that I'm part of this claimed "centralization".  The community here is weary of people coming in here with agendas and trolling behavior.  Come in hard, and your likely to get the same effect as if you kicked a hornets nest.  You will certainly catch heat in here and other forums from some of those here like me that have had to put up with months on end of bullshit from those claiming to be "members" of the community and not, but in fact were/are trying to undermine all the work that has gone into this project.

Speak your points respectfully and those in here and other forums will respond in kind.  I certainly not accusing you of anything...just giving you my prospective.  Cheers.

As with so many situations in life:

" It's not what you say, it's the way that you say it"

In my opinion the whole community is very receptive to well written, well communicated, constructive points of view, even if it goes against their own opinions/beliefs. I personally understood your point of view after your first couple of posts. That's all that needed to be said on the matter. After that it it descends into bickering and I switch off from it. This may not be the best response from me but it's human nature..

This applies to all contributors, all of us are hardwired to respond in a fight/flight way to things that perceived as an immediate challenge or threat to our security, views or beliefs. Whether it's in the real world or on message boards. If we're mindful of this and write in a less confrontational manner then we're less likely to trigger unwanted/unexpected responses to our points of view.

Walter

Moral of the story: Be careful what you lobby for people! Theres an agenda at foot and speaking your mind is going to get you sidelined.


I have done more in 1 month than 95% of the Dash community, and I do not say this lightly.

If you'd like a short list of my time here I would be happy to supply it as everyone think's I'm here to do harm I guess? I'm just pissed off people feel the need to be disingenuous towards me because of my world view. Do you think I chose "feelthebern" for no reason? Really?


As far as me being banned/kicked from slack for as Flare said "posting over 1500 messages out of the 10k limit in a week. I speak in line format sometimes, so thats a bullshit excuse. Not to mention I was active in over 10 conversations a day from PM's to #Android, #General, #Marketing, #DGBB_Imporvements, #Budgets, #Dev and so on. Yet they are trying to make up a completely bullshit excuses I was spamming. It is true I was asked to write in praragraph format more, which I was attempting to do, but is not natural for me in a chat setting.

As far as me "not providing a solution and just bickering" thats bullshit as well, I provided ideas to solve the issue left and right. See DT threads for more information.

This is as authoritarian as I've seen a core team and its fucking sad. I have been around the block a few times and was introduced to Bitcoin in 11' so I know exactly whats going on right now. Someone higher up disagrees with me and was actively promoting kicking me from slack in private chats behind my back, never warned me, never gave me an ultimatum, just kicked. Not every a simple "by the way we kicked you from slack for XXX"

I started watching Evans videos on Dash on 12/1/2015 and since then here is a list of the things I have been doing, which for the record is more than all of you sitting around calling me a fucking troll. So forgive my language for feeling slighted.

My personal website/blog about DASH with a link directory, video library etc: http://www.thedashguy.com/
My twitter with 510 posts in under a 2 month period( I MUST be a troll huh?)  https://twitter.com/TheDashGuy
My instragram (originally started out with this): https://www.instagram.com/thedashguy/
My DT account with 629 posts, 539 likes on my posts in under 2 months: https://dashtalk.org/members/thedashguy.4535/

Not to mention I did dashndrink.com for FREE
AND I did thedailydecrypt.com for FREE.

edit: Oh an I can now say I was "responsible" for blowing up the shitty use of the budget on some half baked PR Company

My supposed 1500 messages in a week in slack are a side effect of my constantly being online and involved, I am sorry some of you don't have the same amount of time to devote to Dash as me, but why the hell are you dropping the hammer on me for doing so? This really goes against your whole message of decentralization, democracy, transparency and not to mention looks VERY authoritarian.

So I must ask, why are you SO deadset on a PR firm that hides in the shadows demanding to be paid in 3 month contract denominated in Dash? Seems like a scam to me at this point. I still stand by my message, show the me the analytics or I will KEEEP calling this out for what it really is.

An unfair deal to the Dash community with disingenuous motives. DOn't blame me because your fucking voters agreed. I apologize to anyone who feels offended and for any language considered rude. I'm merely standing up for the voters who don't have as much time to educate themselves on this slush fund that has been created.

Keep trying to make me shut up, go for it, I will get 5x louder everytime until your little buddy buddy operation falls apart and the DGBB can be used as it was intended, to spur an online economy to help out the entire world, not the fucking rich useless PR companies who say "trust us, we don;t need to show you any numbers, its fineeeee"

Get over yourselves. Keep trying to kick me out and shut me down. I DARE YOU. Just because some of you feel the need to jump on the "bandwagon" per say, doesn't mean the people you are listening to are correct. The PR company is ripping you off. Otherwise there would be analytics. End of story. Do as you will with this rant, I care not. I will still be committed to spreading Dash, just now equally committed to spreading my opinion on the manner in which this was handled period. So good job whoever kicked me from slack for your own closed minded world view, you've just set a motherfucking fire under my ass. And don't forget people, I do have chat logs and screen shots of alot of this as proof. So fuck with me, I dare you.


Again, sorry to anyone who feels offended, the ones I am referring to here know who they are.

“But the true measure of a society’s freedom is how it treats its dissidents and other marginalized groups, not how it treats good loyalists.”
― Glenn Greenwald, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State

[GhostPlayer]

I have done more in 1 month than 95% of the Dash community, and I do not say this lightly.

 haha!

 That's like saying Hitler did good for mankind because he helped create Volkswagen.

 

[ddink7]

snip

snip

snip

As far as me being banned/kicked from slack for as Flare said "posting over 1500 messages out of the 10k limit in a week. I speak in line format sometimes, so thats a bullshit excuse. Not to mention I was active in over 10 conversations a day from PM's to #Android, #General, #Marketing, #DGBB_Imporvements, #Budgets, #Dev and so on. Yet they are trying to make up a completely bullshit excuses I was spamming. It is true I was asked to write in praragraph format more, which I was attempting to do, but is not natural for me in a chat setting.

In the last week, you made 20% of the posts. There are 69 people on Slack, so that's an astounding post count. Our account is limited to 10,000 messages, at which time older content is deleted. Your 1700 posts pushed a lot of older content off the application, resulting in people going back and looking for information, only to find that it was deleted due to your excessive posting.

You were also asked repeatedly to stop posting one and two word comments and instead use paragraph form. Multiple people asked you, multiple times, to use paragraphs. It's not really that hard to do...you think for a minute, you type out a detailed response of everything you want to say, and when you're done, you press enter. Everybody else manages to do this, but you can't?

You aren't a martyr. You are a spammer.

An unfair deal to the Dash community with disingenuous motives. DOn't blame me because your fucking voters agreed.

Check again. That proposal is scheduled to be paid with 1601 yes to 626 no.

[aleix]

Maybe there is a misunderstanding about the purpose of the Slack tool. I think Ghostplayer summarizes it quite well in this post in Dashtalk:

https://dashtalk.org/threads/open-letter-to-the-community-regarding-slack.7935/

[afreer]

Option A: If the price falls, we don’t pay out the contracts. In this case we’ve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.

Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.

Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and don’t support USD based contracts at all.

Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.

Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.

I like Option C.

Because I think the current problems are for contractors who win contracts that involve settlement to a 3rd party in a particular FIAT (which happens to be all USD right now), e.g. acting as an agent between the network and the upstream supplier or a contractor and a subcontractor.  

Dash's contract is between the network and the contractor (regardless of their upstream chain for goods or services) and it would be a minefield to start adding other currencies into the core agreement between the network and the contractor (whether they are a supplier or an agent).

If suppliers are acting as agents for a 3rd party supplier then they really need to carry the fluctuation risk the same as happens in the real world.  For example if I award a contract to manufacture my socks to a company in Guangdong in RMB and they get the cotton from India and INR drops against RMB, that's the supplier's problem, they can't come back and say 'exchange rates changed with one of my suppliers so i want more money than we agreed'.  Likewise if I hire a patent lawyer in London who takes Dash and he needs to pay for searches in USD and Dash drops against USD, that's his risk and it should be priced in it's just part of the risk of being a supplier and that's why we have a market in DGBB, people can compete and price all this stuff in (not yet obviously).

I get that this means that it's going to be harder to honor USD contracts with the current setup, but i think we should find another way, adding other currencies in the 1st tier contract between the network and the supplier is complexity as I see it.  Just thoughts though.

I think we'd be hard pressed to find a lawyer that will take Dash or even Bitcoin directly. The lawyers we've been using want to use Bitpay, which allows them to invoice us in USD. They keep their books in USD, not in Bitcoin, which is very common. We can't really toss away 99% of the possible contractors just because we want them to take market risk, which they're uncomfortable with. I would say it's very important for our growth, to allow us to work with as many contractors as possible.

Sure, I get that it's not a solution as it stands and that became obvious in the last few days with contracts not being honored unexpectedly.

But in that example the lawyer is the subcontractor and the contractor is the legal entity that submits the proposal to 'the network'.  I think whether that contractor is the foundation or a contributor doesn't matter, 'the network' is this as yet undefined and mysterious legal entity that is purchasing the goods/service from the legal entity who put their name on the proposal and is therefore the contractor.  

I say undefined because lots of us talked about before if for example we all got hit by a bus or shutdown in one country, the network is international and would just spring up again with a new team because it can physically pay people to do that without needing any single individual to manage that.  Whatever legal status one jurisdiction tries to apply isn't really going to work in my opinion as I mentioned.  Bitcoin is easy, there is a company running it and no way to replace them if they got shutdown without the whole thing crashing probably.  But Dash is more like Bittorrent - how do you shut it down or who do you sue?

But yeah, what's happening right now is 'the network' is awarding contracts to individuals who then arrange something with another party a lot of whom realistically don't operate in Dash and want a FIAT currency, I totally understand that.  But the problems last few days are technical issues with the contracts that can be solved with tweaks in the system.

But the fluctuation problem hasn't really happened yet and on that side I think the contractors (party agreeing to supply the network by submission of the proposal and receipt of the funds) needs to take the risk and do the conversion themselves.  I don't know how we can do that because as it stands now that limits who will be prepared to take that liability / risk like you say and something needs to be improved but I don't think having 2 dynamic elements like DASH/USD in the pricing of the base contract (network <> contractor) would make it easier.

I don't know the solution, just more interested in the dynamics here because it's so untested and new legally, operationally, contractually, etc.

Whatever the solution, the system is really causing waves, Evan as usual you've created a monster and I don't think any of us know the full impact or things 'the network' can achieve now

[FeelTheBern]

snip

snip

snip

As far as me being banned/kicked from slack for as Flare said "posting over 1500 messages out of the 10k limit in a week. I speak in line format sometimes, so thats a bullshit excuse. Not to mention I was active in over 10 conversations a day from PM's to #Android, #General, #Marketing, #DGBB_Imporvements, #Budgets, #Dev and so on. Yet they are trying to make up a completely bullshit excuses I was spamming. It is true I was asked to write in praragraph format more, which I was attempting to do, but is not natural for me in a chat setting.

In the last week, you made 20% of the posts. There are 69 people on Slack, so that's an astounding post count. Our account is limited to 10,000 messages, at which time older content is deleted. Your 1700 posts pushed a lot of older content off the application, resulting in people going back and looking for information, only to find that it was deleted due to your excessive posting.

You were also asked repeatedly to stop posting one and two word comments and instead use paragraph form. Multiple people asked you, multiple times, to use paragraphs. It's not really that hard to do...you think for a minute, you type out a detailed response of everything you want to say, and when you're done, you press enter. Everybody else manages to do this, but you can't?

You aren't a martyr. You are a spammer.

An unfair deal to the Dash community with disingenuous motives. DOn't blame me because your fucking voters agreed.

Check again. That proposal is scheduled to be paid with 1601 yes to 626 no.

You just want me to destroy your reputation don't you? Keep following me and calling me spammer and I will keep dropping bombs on you.  have a point, its been made, the voters agreed albeit they have seen your point and do not necesarily agree with it or they would have never voted no in the first place. They are just voting in terms of damage control. The PR firm still is on its way out one way or another unless they provide analytics to prove to everyone they are not a complete waste of 30k.

Keep it up, you think i give a fuck what people think of me? Like you? Nope.

I can do this all day long, I can argue until you are blue in the face and still stick by my point.
 
Keep cherry picking my sentences, you are like a girlfriend I had when I was 15 who didn't have any interest in listening to anyone but herself. Get over yourself DDink.

And as far as your EXCUSE about why I was clicked for slack, you do realize I started typing in paragraphs well before I was kicked, so that whole argument is out the window. Everyone knows why I was kicked and the more you make these half ass attempts to defend it, the more you look like a complete tool.

Enjoy.

[ddink7]

And as far as your EXCUSE about why I was clicked for slack, you do realize I started typing in paragraphs well before I was kicked, so that whole argument is out the window.

As of 22 hours ago you were still posting one-liners:

thedashguy
1:27 PM how the hell is this trolling
1:27
please.
1:27
give me more ammo to go nuclear with(edited)
1:27
fine by me
1:28
im being completely fair


thedashguy
1:28 PM but stop brushing me off.
1:28
this matters.

thedashguy 1:49 PM yep, this was obvious from my first post, not sure why everyone thinks im hiding behind it. If I wanted to hide my identity I wouldn't be blatantly obvious with the exact same rant on all the forums. I just dont want BCT trolls tracking me down per say, bunch of twats on that forum.
1:49
Just trying to spark a conversation.


thedashguy
1:49 PM and its working very well.
1:49
the community.
1:49
keep this out of slack though please
1:49
im sick of being told im a troll.
1:50
and thats what this stuff brings on me in this setting.

thedashguy 1:52 PM you guys and your conspiracy theories
1:53
holy shit

thedashguy 1:53 PM i can just give a fuck about how fair this system is?
1:53
LOL
1:53
"clear"
1:53
ok.

thedashguy 1:53 PM i dont know many trolls building free websites
1:54
or helping the cause
1:54
but hey
1:54
define it however you want
1:54
sorry, I don't think I will ever be able to stop writing in small bits. I'm honestly trying.


thedashguy
1:55 PM there
1:55
now shutup I own no dash because im not a stupid bagholder


thedashguy
1:55 PM i axtually practice what I preach
1:55
crazy stuff
1:55
ok sorry.

My bad, you did use a paragraph that one time. Out of 30 messages =)

[GhostPlayer]

 TheDashGuy... we've been fencing off trolls since XCoin changed to Darkcoin  

 Dozens and dozens came with the same vini vidi vici attitude. Granted, you're a "positive" evolution from the second generation trolls we had. The first one was tough, we were inexperienced. The second was simply pathetic, we're not even sure they're extinct. Pay peanuts and only monkeys will show up I guess.

So kudos to you though. Don't know if it's genuine or a gimmick, but only because you actually did something towards the Dash project does not shield you from troll status. At best it gives you the benefit of the doubt, that EVERYONE gave you.

 Even people who initially vouched for you threw in the towel.

 A few days ago no one knew who on earth you were. Now everyone does for all the wrong reasons.
 Congratulations, keep it up. You seem to think you're doing it right.

  Wow! You actually said you did more in one month than 95% of the Dash community. What a gem of a statement.

  Here' a freebie -> You can't be mad! You have to try to make us mad!

 

 

[Solarminer]

- Month-to-month proposals: Requiring 10% support from the network
- Multi-month proposals: Requires 10% support of the network
- 3-month contracts: Requires 20% network support
- 6-month contracts: Requires 33% network support
- 12-month contracts: Requires 51% network support

I think adding a fixed contract for 3 months is a good idea.  I would even suggest 25% or 30% for approval.  This would be locked after the initial vote so a higher % is good.  I also like the idea of limited contracts to 30% of the budget.  With the volatility and possible growth we are seeing, I suggest we don't look at the 6 month or 12 month contracts until we don't change value by more than 25% in 6 months.

The suggestion for paying Dash out in the equivalent of fiat and varying the duration of the contract is interesting.  The key is picking a reliable fiat/dash and maybe that needs to be a manual adjustment every month as we have seen exchanges come and go.

We should also consider using a 3rd party to 'bet' on the future price of Dash.  There are a few options for smart contracts based on the blockchain and there could be a few big players that would want to take the risk.  My opinion is that if there is a sizable exchange needed with fiat/dash that it goes out to bid and the best option is taken.  Maybe the vender gives the best deal, but more likely a crypto investor is going to value a future price higher.

We also need to be aware that Dash has a nearly fixed total supply where Fiat is nearly exponentially created....until this debt deflation implosion we are having.  When all the fiat debt is finally valued at 0, anything other than Fiat will explode in price.  There is a real possibility of some exciting price jumps to the positive and proposal owners should keep that in mind when creating contracts.  I would expect any 3rd party that works with us to bet on the fiat forward price of Dash, would anticipate a price rise.  And likewise masternode owners should anticipate some price appreciation with Dash and vote on proposals accordingly.  (not giving financial advice just going by past performance.  Past performance does not necessarily guaranty future results....blah blah blah.)

I also disagree with a general slush fund to use for future proposals.  This exposes the fund to misuse and theft.  Any funds taken from the budget should be used or saved for a specific purpose now or in the future.

[FeelTheBern]

Just for the record DDink:

Voters still agree with me.

https://www.dashwhale.org/p/transform-pr

Want to shut up now and stop trying to trash me without any valid points? You are sounding like a troll yourself at this point.