Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 825. (Read 9723733 times)

I understand that the incentives are all generally aligned -- to make DASH go higher in value.  But that doesn't keep people from voting to give money to themselves or their friends.  

Basically,with all of this talk of Governance, Dash is turning itself into kind of a corporation.  The MN owners are like stockholders, and the big MN owners (hundreds of MNs) are like the Board of Directors.  

It's gotta be bitstamp coinbase or kraken.

I hope it will be Kraken.

 

congratz on the $23,20 Dash price by the way guys.. forward and onward.

LOCALBITCOINS!

Just kiddin'.

Now for something completely different : i suspect only one or two months till we get the official announcement who will be our new major exchange supporting Dash also in FIAT pairs
(https://www.dashcentral.org/p/bsdev-general-201702). Who do you guys think it is ? Or hope it is ?

I don't think that 10% of Masternodes is nearly enough to commit funds --unless all "members of the board" / "employees" / devs / power-brokers recuse themselves from voting in every case where there is any possible conflict of interest.  Otherwise the "vote" is a complete sham.  Why even pretend to be democratic when only 10% of an already-elite group can make all the decisions?  You might as well just be Bitcoin.  If a higher percentage (at least 50% of masternodes) isn't required, then, Evan, et al (not sure who the other higher-ups all are -- but certainly anyone who is paid any kind of a salary out of the proceeds of the "development fund") need to publish their Masternodes and not vote -- let "outsiders" vote according to the merits of the proposals.

I see this as being like the ideological battle between communism and capitalism.  Bitcoin is, in a way, communist; 100% of the rewards go to the laborers (miners) (never mind that owning a decent mining setup nowadays requires a ton of real-world capital).  I like the fact that Dark/Dash has come up with a way for people to also earn rewards for simply owning enough capital.  I also like that the incentives are aligned; Masternode owners have to lock up their funds, so they can't trade in and out -- they've got to be long-term hodlers, and as more Masternodes are brought online, more Dash are locked up and out of the reach of the traders, thereby lowering supply and hopefully driving the price upward -- which rewards Masternode owners, miners, and small-time hodlers alike.  It's win-win-win.

But it's not win-win-win when somebody can propose something that exclusively enriches a certain few people, and those certain few people have enough power to make that proposal effective.  This is an effective kleptocracy, and I don't think that anybody really wants to be associated with that.  Yes, we all want to make money, but a system that basically ensures that the rich get richer is pretty sleazy IMO.  The Masternodes already do enough in that regard.  And Masternode owners are supposedly in this for the long-haul.  At current prices, a Masternode is over $20,000 -- that's a pretty hefty amount.  Masternode owners are keeping that money invested in order to earn a return -- paid in Dash.  Those Dash will be worthless if people decide to abandon the currency due to concerns about propriety among the whales / owners / developers (because they are largely the same people).  Think long-term.  The best possible proposals, for the long-term success of Dash, would be:

A) Change the voting requirement to 50% of MN owners;
B) Change the voting requirement to include some percentage of miners;
C) Dedicate some portion of the "10% funds" to trading accounts on major exchanges which is run exclusively to manipulate the price of Dash upwards.

That's my piece.  I may follow this thread a bit more, but I don't have the kind of time that I used to have for this kind of stuff anymore.  I do appreciate the further development of Dash, but I fear this self-serving "governance" is leading us all down a blind alley.

How is it "theoretically possible" ?

The only theoretically possible scenario I see is owners setting up proposals to pay themselves for doing work that doesn't have a favourable impact on the coin's future. But there would appear to be at least 3 aspects of the stakeholding that prevent that from happening:

1. There isn't a sufficiently large coherent holding group to dominate the voting in that way. (Even though people put about that Evan / Otoh et al own this & that - the fact is they don't. They can be outvoted at least 4:1 even by the most generous estimates of their holdings. By my observations it's more like 8:1).

2. There's nothing that anyone can do in terms of the protocol - even if they did dominate the voting - that doesn't still require a mining majority. So voting could say "do this", devs say "ok" and it still doesn't get adopted because the miners rejected it

3. Even if there was such a hypothetical way for an interested group to 'enrich itself' as you say then commercial pressures would start to manifest. The group can only pay itself in Dash, not any other currency, that is the catch. The wider community can therefore still mitigate said 'enrichment' because it has control over exchange rates

It's therefore far more profitable for 'interested parties' simply to do something beneficial for the project and get paid in a high value coin. (Which is what they are doing )

I apologize for the "misleading" statement on the wiki, and I would definitely welcome any assistance you can provide in "cleaning it up." However, when I wrote that particular page, my intention was to give an overview of the budget system to a complete newbie who has no idea how it works. There is a real danger in getting too technical (have you ever wondered about a technical question, searched Wikipedia, and ended up with glazed-over eyes and absolutely no understanding of the subject?)

I mean, if we want to get technical about it, the budget system doesn't allocate block rewards 45%/45%/10% like most people think. The 10% that's withheld for the budget system is actually hardcoded to the minimum block reward. If hash power is low, DGW adjusts the difficulty, and block reward goes up. It's possible for the block reward, for instance, to be 5 DASH. Yet only 0.388 DASH will be allocated to the budget system, for instance. (At least that's my understanding of how things worked before 12.1). Also, fees are split 50/50 between miners and masternodes, not 45/45/10 as one might assume. But for somebody new to Dash (my target audience) I think that's only going to confuse them, and I doubt they really care.

P.S. If you really believe we are ratio-bound and won't exceed 0.02 BTC/DASH, why invest in DASH? Why not just invest in Bitcoin, then?

YYou can't punish people for not voting, that's undemocratic. The addition of the abstain option in 12.1 helps some with this, but really, if I don't care one way or another about a proposal I am not gonna open my wallet to vote abstain, when I could just not vote. Even if I think a proposal is the greatest thing ever, if it's obviously going to pass with an overwhelming YES - No ratio, why would I vote? If you are holding on to $20k USD worth of an asset, you better damn well get to decide if you want to vote or not along with how you vote.

Just been hanging out on the XMR speculation thread. Icey was bragging about to 'start' trolling us 'at the protocol level' (although he's hastily deleted that comment now I notice).

edit: although I did grab this snippet, apologies for quoting him, will try not to do it again.

You are internalizing the DashHole's "The XMR vs DASH meme only benefits DASH at this point" meme used to deflect criticism and discourage whistleblowing regarding their instamined scamcoin.

Paraphrased:

"The Bitcoin vs OneCoin meme only benefits OneCoin at this point."

There is no need to concede the (asinine) DashHole belief that all criticism and condemnation of their coin is necessarily motivated by the desire to pump another.

If you see fraud and don't cry fraud you are a fraud.


We're not going to stop shining the light on those cockroaches simply because a little pump makes some nervous Nellies fretful and FOMO'd.   

In fact, the light is about to get brighter. 

PseudoNode is being forked into PseudoMasternode.

The discovery Dash relies on Proof of Ping is being used to create Lazy Masternodes.

Stack those together and add a Dash of secret sauce, then we start trolling them at the protocol level.... 

Just been hanging out on the XMR speculation thread. Icey was bragging about to 'start' trolling us 'at the protocol level' (although he's hastily deleted that comment now I notice).

edit: although I did grab this snippet, apologies for quoting him, will try not to do it again.


What a classic moneron he is!

Stack those together and add a Dash of secret sauce, then we start trolling them at the protocol level....