Topic: [NXT] Community nominations to the funding comittee - page 8. (Read 9897 times)

This is sign of apocalypse!
I keep agreeing with everything you are saying today!

I don't think we need 2 or 3 or 5 committees. We need 5 smart trusted people to divide the money between them and create a committee.

The problem of all money in one person's hands is solved regardless by splitting the community funds between the comittee members, and having one buffer account to issue payments in one chunk. The safety measure is well worth the few extra Nxt in fees, I think this was discussed elsewhere. Sorry I cannot provide the link.

Marketing and development funds, and any discussion about project approval, will be more productive if both sections are connected. They have a lot of intersection, and it will be very positive to reflect that in the funding comittee. I vote for a mixed group, just my 0.02.

Sure in an ideal world a constantly updated OP would work.
You have to understand how marketing works. You send PMs back and forth, emails back and forth, skype back and forth.
hell I got more than 270 PMs on Nextcoin forum alone directly tied to marketing.
I got more than 100 email adresses directly tied to NXT marketing and SWARMing.

The only way this works is if the committee members don't have jobs and is ALWAYS ready to be updated with new info.

It is so much easier with real time chat (skype for instance) where you can discuss back and forth or on camera, have real conversations and work out details. Then you put that proposal to vote and if it gets passed through then you have a consensus and from that point you have to detail everything and publish it publically so everyone can see. And of course the committee must take notes from the community.

But having a disconnected community will only be a huge obstacle for a lot of projects that aren't static.

How does your second sentence follow from the first? A constantly updated OP in a discussion thread, or a proposal on a wiki page hashed out by many contributers, could simultaneously serve as both discussion summary and the proposal, wouldn't it?

EDIT: Regarding super detailed proposals, consider mine here: https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=710. (No takers yet unfortunately.) This was proposed by just one person (me!), took me some time to think through and to write, but certainly doable. It convinced jl777 to offer additional funds as bounty, so I guess it was detailed enough for him. I haven't accepted the offer though, I'd like to see whether this can work on tip offers and potential future tips, and general goodwill alone.

I will serve if tapped to do so.

All I say is think ahead and plan for the future.  

This fund will be FAR more valuable, and will be able to do FAR more for NXT, the further in the future it is tapped.

(This post is predicated on a "hands-off" style committee, as decided by Poll 2)

One backup would suffice, if it's done this way: all members with a conflict of interest abstain from voting. If the vote is not a tie, then the decision is carried out. If the vote is a tie, the backup member casts the deciding vote.

It's a simple solution, but maybe too simplistic? Could maybe too many members have a conflict of interest, so you end up with only say 3 members? Should a 2-1 vote be considered decisive?



I like this way much better, decisions are clearer. We could try it out first, see if it works? If such a committee keeps getting deadlocked, then we could switch back to a majority vote style.


(I have no comment on whether or not to split the funds and committee. I don't know how to value tech against marketing.)

This is the only guarantee, so...



I think the idea of a disconnected committee that is just going to be handed proposals is extremely time consuming and detrimental.
You'd have to write up a super detail proposal every single time you have an idea. This is not a healthy ecosystem.
The committee should definitely be dedicated members and not just dictators who aren't really qualified to say yay/nay to anything.

Co-operation has got us this far. I see no reason to fix what ain't broke. Just look at the fuckfest that is started everytime we try to bring in people to vote on something they haven't been a part of: it doesn't work.


Obviously everything must be transparent and the community shall be able to see exactly what NXT is being spent on. This is what is important: transparancy. But we shouldn't mess up efficiency.

+1

I am afraid we either end up with US Congress or won't make it in time, because, well, "we're so decentralized..."

Could work.
The only "problem" is see there is that a committee of experts is not always totally good.

I'd actually welcome a few people outside of PR and marketing on the marketing committee, if only because they would provide a counter.
It also leaves the committees open to accusations of only funding "pet" projects.

My ideal would be a mixed group that has a definite deadline to finish discussing about a project (say two, three days or any other number shorter than a week) after which they had to vote. All should be committed to get all "fors" or "againsts" on the table in that time.

After that: a binding vote: yay or nay.

It will never be perfect. The "voting" discussions already proved that we can only approach it.

That said

I would support any plan that allows us to move more quickly on some key points.


I see we are talking about two kinds of committee. I am talking about a committee that just approves and disburses, but won't tamper with the plan. You talk about a committee that would become co-collaborator in plans. I thought that the prior votes (vote 2) had already established that the committee would be responsible for giving out funds for open bounties and not initiate its own projects? In that scenario, my argument makes sense. In yours, it is indeed not workable and rather artificial.

I am definitely ok with not voting specifically on our own submissions, but when you submit something and it's put up to vote and you just refrain from voting, then it's basically the same thing

From experience it doesn't work quite as "binary" as you seem to suggest. In my experience one guy comes up with an idea and then you discuss it back and forth. Some people chime in with ideas, build on eachothers ideas and suddenly it's no longer "one person" who did X, Y or Z.
A committee must be able to communicate and collaborate with eachother. Otherwise shit will just become a neverending debate.

I think we will achieve much better results, if we just split 9 millions into 6/3 for dev/marketing, as many people seem to agree.

Then make TWO committees: one marketing and one dev.

They would work much more efficiently that way, because the polarizing issue of which type of projects to cover will be already decided by this split.

And this will also solve the problem of all money in one person hands.

I would refuse to vote on my own projects. I would have a conflict of interest. I would not even consider discussing one of my projects in any other capacity as submitter.
You're free to take another stance. I just want to make my position clear. It wouldn't be that much of a problem to just have a substitute to cast a vote on a project I would submit.

Maybe we are talking about different things, though. 

I actually disagree with this. I ahve a ton of ideas together with Klee, Nify, Salsacz and so on. We took the initiative for marketing back in mid December. If we aren't in the committee then nothing makes sense really.
We have barely been awarded anything for our work and we got a ton of projects upcoming.

We had a questionaire over at nextcoin where 70+ volunteers signed up, everything from graphics majors to PhDs in computer science and physics. But due to the communities inability to come to any consensus we have no NXT to give anyone for any work, so we have lost a ton of talent due to nothing but pure procrastination and that's just ridiculous.

I would accept. However, there should also be some backups for the committee.

I have some projects I possibly would like to put up for funding, which means that I would not and should not be allowed to vote on.
That means, to maintain an uneven number of members to avoid a tie in voting, there would need to be a substitute.

Sorry for cutting off the plan in the quote, but I want the thread to remain readable.

This thread is not for project plans, but for voting on a committee that will decide on funds that will specifically be spent on Nxt.

It may be that the people getting these funds will be used to fund projects like yours. But that's not up to the committee.

A request such as yours should probably be made to the Nxt community at large, maybe in the forums at https://nextcoin.org/ or https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/.

Good luck on your project!

Hi every one,  i dont know where to post my project but i see you are researching what to do with the pool3 and where distribute the funds.
And this is an ecological way where we need some help,

Do you think its interesting ?

Creation of a Network of farm decentralized in permaculture with cheap ecological habitation, autarkic alimentation and energy, spinning off into subsidiaries every half year to grow into community connected by NXT, that could be the central tool of a new society.

To enter NXT into solid existance.

Pay your vegetables, your honey, your fruits, with your NXT.
Live on fertile land and common, in your individual cheap eco-home,
Participate with the creation of a common house, general technological quarters of your eco-foundation.
Form new groups following the same idea of decentralized system, who want to live in their optimate autarcy, always connected to NXT;
And allow them access to land, to the financing of their ecological agricultural project.

We are at the beginning of the creation of decentralized  farming :
•   the economical gestion of a common wallet filled by the artisan and farmer members, and exterior part-takers;
•   Decisions are taken in a democratic way : for exemple : draw out treasurers and leader of groups, or : the coolest project is accepted by members.
•   The food and energy is re-distributed

NXT is achieved to permet all of that.

We will sell products with NXT, services, allowing advantages never seen before for all community NXT.

Participate the most solidary and exciting experience.
Build with us decentralized farm network, that belong to you.
Free to come to the place following availability, free to participate with breaking up  into subsidiaries of our civilisation that go to the earth, and that breaks intermediarie, that parasiting the development of the common good.
Discution and vote, purpose to NXT will be major tools.

We need:
Some financement, between 75k NXT and 500k NXT for land (we’ve already got some lands), and for 50 personnes in a few time.

We offer:
The possibility for all members of the greatest decentralized community to take part of the society decentralized and the most advance marketing :  proof by exemple that a network of autarkic decentralized community by the  draw democratie, or the vote of the majority of the popular idea and not political grups. NXT is the central pillar of this transition, that permit the transparance of groups economie, and allow to put togeterh money, that helps to go back to eco-site by vote of member.

As I read the polls, this is the situation

Poll 1: There will be a committee that will administer the 9 Mio. fund.

Poll 2: This committee will disburse funds according to an "open bounty" concept, so not propose projects themselves. I guess it would be within the committees purview to keep asking people for projects and make it know the 9 Mio. is available. The committee probably should also set up some guidelines that projects should follow, but only in the formal sense as "state what you will spend the money on and what will be the benefit", not the sense of "the project should be about X", because that would be interfering with the content.

We are now at Poll 3, in which we choose the people we trust to be on this committee and who we will delegate the power to make the decisions about the money to.
It has not been decided who or what will actually distribute the funds.
This could be one or more of the members, but also (and maybe preferably) a trusted 3rd party. If this means we are going to have a long discussion about account keys being shared however, I say "nevermind"

In short, it's about investing trust and the responsibility over 9 Mio of funds to a small group of people.

Correct me if I am wrong.

YES! We clearly have too large a coordination burden, we lose more from wasted time and energy than we do from the odd unconsented spending item.


(I would go further and suggest that more people get a small discretionary investment account (with the nxt held by someone else) which they can use for anything they feel is cost-effective and beneficial to Nxt, be it bounty, or compensating someone overlooked, or purchasing hardware/software/marketing materials. No consensus/voting needed to spend, only restrictions are they can't spend it on themselves, and all spending must be documented on a common spreadsheet which everyone can examine, and which will be regularly audited.

This is not the time and place for this discussion, let's decide on the committee first. I just want everyone to think about this idea, for now. I will bring it up again at another time.)


I nominate Damelon and jl777 as additional candidates. Will you guys accept the nomination?