Welcome!

Only proposal I don't worry about the ask, you have done a great job so far.

Glad to see this is passing this cycle, good job at finding the hole in our budget this cycle.

Yes from me for now, this could change next month or the last month depending on future budget proposals getting created on our network and possibly competing with this one.

Thank you for being such an active and responsible MNO.

In dash communication channels a concern has been raised that the amount asked for might be too high. It's all well and good as this is a subjective judgement, but I'd like to provide some perspective.

Currently, we are investigating two opportunities out of Brazil. One opportunity I classify as optimistic without having completed our due diligence. The other one is in the introduction phase.

Upshot: if this proposal does not pass I would expect the DIF could fund both Brazil opportunities, that may require drawing down on our liquid account. As stated in our slides the DIF is making the new DASH/USD market on liquid. This course could result in low reserves for other opportunities.

If this proposal does pass, the DIF would could fund Brazil and would press forward looking for opportunities.

Also note, that the DIF could fund neither of these Brazilian opportunities, as they both may fail our due diligence. In which case reserves would be there for the future. We're not going to fund things for the sake of funding things.

When I was elected I found the DIF with 3000 Dash reserves. In the back of my head, I was thinking it would be nice to replenish that amount.

If this proposal passes that have a strong effect on our planning for the future. We'll be trying to get the most out of our reserves as we obtain them in all cases.

Best,

Darren

Voting no. I will also be voting NO to the proposals by the members of the DIF which include Dashnewsroom, Dash Brazil and all DCG proposals. If the members of these proposals do not value decentralization they should not be running a Dash project in my opinion.

Previously the DIF combined a network voting poll with a funding request. The voting poll stated that the DIF were requesting that they were asking not to get approval from the network to make voting decisions. That poll / funding request did not pass. This was a democratically decided vote by the MNO network. However the DIF has unilaterally decided that they will make their own decisions now and not get approval from the network. They did this without approval from the MNO network and they made investments without approval.

Therefore I cannot support the DIF going forward because it is undermining the core value of Decentralized decision making. If other MNOs vote for this you are also supporting the erosion of decentralized decision making. Therefore if you value decentralized decision making you need to vote NO for this proposal until such time as the DIF formal agree to re-instate the democratically voted decision by the network for the DIF to get funding approval through an MNO vote.

Also, since Rodrigo and Mark Mason are on the DIF it is clear they have demonstrated through this action that they do not value decentralized decision through the MNO network therefore I will also be voting NO to funding for Rodrigo at Dash Brazil and to Dashnewsroom - and also all DCG proposals going forward until such time that the DIF renounces its position and re-instates back the democratically elected vote by the MNO network for getting approval from the MNO network through a polling vote.

I have posted more details about the reasons behind my comments here on the DASH forum
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/09-decentralized-decision-making-proactively-building-dash-decentralization.51334/

They can be held accountable for taking the power to approve deals away from the Masternodes and consolidating it within themselves the next time they are up for election. Its not like this system doesn't have a way to hold the DIF board accountable. Personally I don't have a problem with it and it would seem enough masternodes don't care because that proposal got funded as well as several others from the DIF.

I get where you are coming from but I just don't think its important, we control the purse strings and the makeup of the board, we don't need granular control over decision making. We elected them to do a job, let them do it and then judge the result.

I pointed out two logical fallacies in your forum post. I also clarified your confusion about the US tax system and how taxes compound CrayPay savings.

Mark Mason also pointed out that you did not review our Q4 report slides before forming an opinion. We worked hard to report to the community with those slides. I'm always looking to improve our reporting and it doesn't do any good if you don't even look at it.

@DarrenT, I'm going to focus on one specific topic at a time because you've avoided the most important point I raised in my forum post. I will address all your points mentioned once you address this point I am making here. That is that the DIF went against a democratic decision polling vote by the MNO network. The network voted that the DIF cannot make an investment without first getting approval from the MNO network.

I encourage every MNO to visit the following page that shows the polling vote. You need to click the button that says "Show full description" because the DIF put the poll below the button - which is therefore not visible if you don't click on it. (I have created a screenshot of this polling vote)

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DIF-FUNDING-PROPOSAL-APR-JUN-3MONTHS

I am copying and pasting the exact text from the MNO network polling vote here:

"IMPORTANT: Material change request

After much internal discussion between the DIF supervisors we believe it’s in the DIF and the Dash network’s best interests to request a change to the current agreement that we submit decision proposals to the MNOs for approval on any investments, the requested change is to remove this requirement going forwards. In exchange for the proposed increase in autonomy, we propose an increased transparency of decision-making down to the individual level. In this way, the MN network can have further insight into each individual supervisor's thought processes, contributions and performance.

By voting Yes or No to this proposal you will also be voting on whether you agree to this change or not."

The polling vote was NOT voted through in favour of what the DIF wanted which was to make decisions without network approval. Therefore the DIF are obliged to post a decision vote to the network before they can make any investment. That is what was agreed by the Decentralization MNO network.

However the DIF have disregarded this polling vote and made an investment *without* getting Network approval via a polling vote by the network. Therefore the DIF have gone against what the network voted for in a democratic vote. The polling vote is still valid and was a democratically voted decision by the network. It was a decentralized decision. We are a decentralized project - right? This vote *cannot* be overturned without getting a separate polling vote that overrides it. Therefore Darren can you provide the network with a link to a polling vote that overrides the polling vote shown above.

Note that the DIF is now behaving in line with what Ryan Taylor wanted but did not get. Ryan's comments are as follows:

"" I don't feel that the network should be weighing in on this in the first place. This is not a decision that should be crowdsourced from MNOs... "

Here is the link where Ryan posted these comments:
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DIF-BTC-Echo-decision-proposal

Dash is a decentralized project. We have previously voted that the DIF cannot make an investment without approval. The DIF needs to adhere to what the network voted on. PERIOD to do anything other than this undermines DASH as a decentralized project.

Important correction. I made a mistake in mentioning Dashnewsroom. Mark or Dashnewsroom is NOT part of the DIF and therefore my comments DO NOT apply to Mark Mason or Dashnewsroom. My apologies go to Mark Mason. Sorry Mark I made a genuine mistake and sincerely apologize.

My comments however still stand regarding the DIF

Hi and thanks for the DIF great work.
Q: Is there any doc/spreadsheet with a detailed list of 50K annual cost items?

Also awesomedash,

The sixth slide has all of our expenses/outlays for the fourth quarter. The legal fees are what I'm classifying under the marginal costs.

The DIF is established as a stand alone corporate entity. We have two directors which charge $20k/year each. One is a lawyer and the other is an accountant. They help ensure that the DIF does not take on legal or tax liability. Our corporate office charges just over $6k a year. They house all our documents and they provide us with a mailing address. So that's just over $46k of the operations budget. Oh, this $46k has already been paid for 2021 so this proposal is just for reserves.

We're estimating that other fees
--Filing to keep corporation in good standing
--Asking office people to do things
--Filing with government to establish a change of supervisors
--Email/webhosting
--Proposal fees
--Other fees

won't amount to much over $4k.

Note that we also seek outside council in appropriate jurisdictions to draft/review Memos of understanding needed to close any deal the DIF engages in. These are marginal costs above the $50,000 estimated fixed costs.

None of the supervisors are paid for their time. Supervisors are happy to serve the network.

Perfect. Thank you!