Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1734. (Read 9724017 times)

So it was more than 0.28 million? I read that it was 1.9 million in 24h? That seems a lot...
How can we be sure the coins got distributed like the article says?
These coins could be responsible for the downtrend, no?

And "between 18 and 22 million". Do we have an exact figure?

I'm thinking now that maybe it was better to start the network again when Evan discovered the bug. But I guess it's too late now...

Still interested in buying more though, I placed an order for 180 coins (when filled I'll own 200)
I hope these 1.9 million coins won't raise problems for future adoption. The tech is interesting, so maybe we can overcome this problem.

Yes, in this occasion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NfNwjJfrOg&t=48m18s

Andreas has talked about dash, or darkcoin at least. I believe he said something to the effect that if governments didn't like bitcoin and successfully attacked it that they really wouldn't like darkcoin replacing it.

Was there, don't you saw it?

He says that 'over time I think we're going to see some improvements to that".

Well, not at protocol level we're not. Only at "boilerplate" level.

I think he was uncomfortable answering that question because he basically didn't have a clue what to say (since they're isn't anything to say - as I just pointed out, 'fungibility' in bitcoin is as good as it's ever going to get at protocol level). He ends up deviating and attacking governments and blacklists instead.

I don't know any of that to be a fact, I'm guessing this might happen because I know Evan wants to protect the ideas from being stolen until we've got it working.  Now I don't see a problem with that.  I'm sure it'd be open sourced before actual implementation.  I don't think there is anything wrong with protecting our head start.  I know we need to be open sourced, but I don't see why we'd have to be open until it's actually in use (or about to be in use, with lead time for people to review what was changed).  And again, this is my guess, not trying to say I know what will happen

I would LOVE to see a DASH banner behind him.   

BTC vs DASH?
Andreas on fungibility(33:08).

Does that mean we could vote for it now if we wanted to? Does a proposal denied funding ever get eliminated? It might not be such a problem now but over time those lists are going to be enormous!

No idea, it just shows the result of "mnbudget show", and for whatever reason this server did never get this proposal.

I just switched to its backup instance which works fine.

The Proposal for Testnet Contributors Fund was denied funding for the first superblock, about a month ago. If I'm not mistaken, to be considered for funding again another proposal would need to be lodged and the associated 5 Dash fee.

Thanks

That's a very nice addition. I use this page all the time and find it very useful.

Thank you

http://178.254.18.153/~pub/Dash/masternode_payments_stats.html

Can someone point me to more information about how to vote on budget proposals if you have a masternode.. ?

Somebody earlier on proposed a small subscription to Dashwhale from masternodes - like 1.23 Dash per month or something and that even with the current level of subscribers that would get them their funding. I sure pay that without hesitation but maybe Rango is planing to implement subscriptions on top of the blockchain budget. I don't know.

P.S. I found the post....it was Icebucket.

I'm really caught in two minds about this proposal! Ultimately, I admire greatly what Rango has achieved, however, I see it as a commercial venture and one for which Rango needs to find a commercial business model with which to fund it - should he wish to develop it further. I don't doubt that the site is beneficial to the ecosystem as a whole, but it does set a dangerous precedent should a centralised commercial venture such as this gain blockchain funding.

I haven't made a decision which way to vote yet. I'm going to wait and see, hopefully we'll have some more discussion on the matter


Walter

P.S. I'm a masternode owner and I'm a happy user of dashwhale. I'd certainly consider paying a subscription for such a service if that was what's required to 'make it pay' for Rango. Do I think that my usage of the dashwhale website (an associated costs) should be 'socialised' and funded by the network as a whole? This is the bit that doesn't sit well with me imho...

Would it be possible to separate the budget proposal aspect of the website from the masternode monitoring part of Dashwhale? Maybe having separate sites and a more appropriate domain name for the budget proposal site would be a good idea. At the moment it seems to me like work on the masternode monitoring would be subsidised by the blockchain but most of the arguments we're hearing for this proposal refer to the budget proposal work.

I think you're probably right in saying that a decentralised platform for discussion of budget proposals would be costly and time consuming. My opinion is that ultimately it should be the goal too, but for now a centralised solution, be that Dashwhale, DashTalk etc. is fine. That said, I don't think the centralised platform dedicated to budget proposal discussions should be privy to information about which users cast which votes. I know it's not necessary to cast your votes there, but I feel a separating of functions would make things much clearer - I think it would be a mistake for new users to believe they have to vote on Dashwhale.

You are absolutely right, will you come to Dash's funeral ?

edit : oh shoot i forgot, Zombies are not allowed.. sorry

I went through all your ideas. Thank you very much for this awesome active dispute so far, guys. I condensed all concerns to one central issue:

How to allow an active and easy democratic process for budget decisions with raising amount of proposals?


The issues:
1. We will have 10-20 proposals per month in the near future
2. With high amounts of proposals it's illusional to do the discussion in multiple threads of the Dashtalk forum (untructured, unprofessional information process)
3. Information get lost. To cope with this we need one central place to be.
4. Budget review, discussion and voting has to be easy for high voting participation
5. From finance and technical perspective it's not possible to do proposal presentation & discussion on a "decentralized platform" within reasonable time and money

Possible solutions:
1. Core team puts up a +10k USD proposal to create a new "centralized" platform (compareable to Dashwhale)
2. Core team looses focus and implements a "decentralized" proposal presentation and discussion feature. To my opinion technically challenging if not impossible within reasonable time. Somebody external will charge about 50-500k USD
3. Sit and wait. Ignoring the issues outlined above decreases quality of the democratic process, leading to a) malallocation of funds b) loss of ideas c) loss of central discussion issues by time => hurting DASH investor value
4. Monetize Dashwhale like any other website. Monetizing Dashwhale a regular way hurts open access to the platform and impairs democratic process (ads, highlighted proposals)
5. Invest 2% of the total budget for 6 month to see, if Dashwhale can solve these issues relevant for every masternode owner and every DASH owner.

Best,
Rango

Voting: mnbudget vote-many 4f8b12279629b8126ba7b1a378cd3ef6e3bb88d7fb04cb6db424edf4c95f6780 yes / no