Why ? because i wrote this new kind of stratrum protocol, the miner AND yiimp integration (yes the same stratum which is now also used in the bigger pools)
DCR team doesn't seems to want to give me one DCR for that, even if they take 17% of each block for new "devs" + the huge premine
That is not true. A
thread was started on the forum and the community supports reward for miner development. As a result of widespread community support for miner development, there will be a miner request for proposal (RFP) to fund work in this area. The funding process works differently compared to what we've seen in the community thus far. There is no bounty system. The entirety of the the Decred development team supports reward for tpruvot and his contributions are not ignored. A bounty would have to come from the developers personally, but we have no funds to do so - all developer funds are locked for 12 months (28% of funds) and 24 months (72% of funds). That means the developers your refer to have nothing to gift as bounties presently.
The development subsidy funds you mention are available for development funding. However, all those funds are tied to a process that must be followed. It's written in the
Decred Constitution. I do understand your frustration, but it does create a difficult situation when you ask for funds when no such work was asked for. The project then looks like the bad guy for not being able to accommodate that (after it was developed) without following the funding process. I have personally been contacted by a few people who have expressed a desire to address this, and I've responded to them asking for ideas and proposals of what the miner community would benefit from the most. So I want to ask directly and publicly, what is the optimal outcome for what can be developed in the future in this area, so that an RFP can be developed for this purpose. What will serve the common good for all miners? I would like to ask for input so we can identify areas of need, fill them, and stick to what's part of the process. You would be pretty upset if the project didn't stick to the process outlined.
It's really important to understand it's not just up to the current Decred developers to decide who gets what and send DCR their way. The funding framework was established exactly to avoid misuse of funds and show transparently where funds are spent. The downside of this is that it's a longer process, due to the checks and balances and the reliance on community input. These are worthwhile sacrifices if the outcome is responsible fiscal policy. So get involved, express openly what you'd like to develop, why it's important, and then let's all work with each other and put together a proper miner RFP that many parties can join in on. It's about maximum impact that everyone can benefit from - those are important goals for funding development projects as RFPs.
while I may agree with all this processes, I still think the main developers and founders of decred should direct some coins to tpruvot.
because he deserves it and because it's a wise choice, for them, to support who is currently making the coin work investing into.
from a business point of view: do it!
in agreement and addition to this ...
epsylon3 ( tpruvot ) has created something that is more viable to the community as a whole - than for personal benefit ...
what you are now asking him to do is put a request in for the project - then an rfp is to be created for this project - then the rfp considered already complete and closed - just so you can administer policies set by the decred constitution ... am i the only one seeing this as a governmental style of dictatorship of process? ...
ie - an entire waste of precious time and effort from ALL parties involved? ...
if an idea is presented - and ALL these steps of the decred process need to be adhered ... wouldnt that make the whole developmental process slower than the current state of the decred blockchain? ...
seriously - there needs to be a better way ... you remind me of government corporations ( yes - i said corporations ... as if they are there for the benefit of the community - pffft! ) that would rather go around on paper trails and policies - than actually FIX issues in society and homes ...
so like these government corporations - the community should band together and create their own subset of process-less rules that they can work with? ...
i fail to see the importance of such processes and rules - when the developer has already finished and succeeded with the project - even before it was proposed ...
here is an idea for you ...
how about allowing a donation-centric subset of rules and regulations ( that you guys CAN create within the decred constitution - doesnt sound governmental does it? ) that allow the community to donate a number of dcr to developers that have projects FOR the decred project via a list of community driven projects outside the jurisdiction of the decred constitution ... allowing the community to make up their minds as to what project they wish to donate to - simply by going through a list on a website ...
in any case - tpruvot is one developer that you really need to take note of ( amongst others of course ) - and so should be duly offered some remittance of a reward ... not because he supplied an answer to a question - but because he supplied the methodology to the answer BEFORE the question was asked ...
#crysx
)
...
