Proposal “DISABLE_REMOVE_PRIVATESEND_COINJOIN“ (Active)Back

Title:Disable & Remove PrivateSend/CoinJoin (from Official Dash Wallets only)
Owner:Apophis
One-time payment: 1 DASH (45 USD)
Completed payments: no payments occurred yet (1 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2022-12-10 / 2023-01-09 (added on 2022-11-17)
Final voting deadline: in 1 month
Votes: 152 Yes / 716 No / 43 Abstain
Will be funded: No. This proposal needs additional 948 Yes votes to become funded.
Manually vote on this proposal (DashCore - Tools - Debugconsole):
gobject vote-many d8cb9a9d5089b791fe945cf2986e802c5caedb9b48b85ddde5f6e4832544cd08 funding yes

Please login or create a new DashCentral account for comfortable one button voting!

Proposal description

First of all, i´d like to ask all MNOs to please calm down your feelings and emotions, and don´t hurry with this Governance vote.
Please do not allow your feelings and emotions to guide you on this vote, and don´t vote out of some self-imposed dogmatic ideology,
but only according to reason and good sense.
I understand and even share your fury and your wrath. But the wheel of history has turned, we either adapt or are being crushed.
Before voting, please take the time to read the full proposal text at least twice, and then consider wisely, because the very
survival of the Dash project is at stake, and given the fact developers require time, this Governance vote might well be our last
way out, before we are hitting the wall, and probably much sooner than most of you (especially all the MNOs from the U.S.) imagine.

Let me introduce myself: i am a multi-MNO since many years. So far i have remained always in the background, because i value and
appreciate privacy (whenever it is possible or isn´t suicidal). But now i can no longer wait and be silent, and watch the direction
our project is taking, because right now we are heading on a trajectory to our guaranteed demise.

I want to clarify something at the beginning:
Personally, i have nothing against PrivateSend/CoinJoin, in an ideal world financial privacy should be deployed by-default and not
just as an optional feature. In an ideal world, there would be no taxes, but rather an elected government (elected by the people,
not elected by Dominion Voting Systems) would expand the overall FIAT money supply by 4%, 5%, 6% or 7% each and every year, to pay
for everything that´s constitutional: Law and Order, Justice and Courthouses and Prisons, Firefighters and the National Defense (Military),
and when it comes to moneyprinting, always using the principle "as less as possible, but as much as really necessary".
That would allow government to fund itself without both, neither tyrannical taxes requiring financial surveillance of its citizens and
outlawing of all financial privacy, nor any public debt. But we are not living in such an ideal world, because people prefer to be ignorant.
In reality, the world we live in, is a world where most all the governments are working ruthlessly to perfect financial surveillance for the
final scope of financial slavery.

To make this clear: I´m filing this Governance proposal with a heavy heart.
I´d wish myself we could keep PrivateSend/CoinJoin without seriously endangering the future of Dash and without putting our project´s
very survival in severe jeopardy. But i am convinced, that by keeping PrivateSend/CoinJoin on our official wallets released by DCG,
in a very close future already(!), things will dramatically turn against us and it will be a dead-end, with a slow and protracted dying,
a sinking into meaninglessness and irrelevance, with an ever-shrinking market-cap (and price), all fueled mainly by mass delistings on
the biggest exchanges. And when (not if) those mass delistings will start, they will come very fast, without any warnings, and from all
sides, one blow after the other, and with no grace periods whatsoever. I am sure, many if not most MNOs won´t believe this, or they might
think all i say is exaggerated. It´s not exaggerated at all, and it´s coming, and fast.

Where has Dash already been delisted so far, because of PrivateSend/CoinJoin?

-Japan
-Korea(South Korea)
-Huobi Global


Where is Dash likely to be delisted next, because of PrivateSend/CoinJoin?

-European Union (all 27 countries, following a Czech lawmakers proposal which will be on vote soon and likely passing)
-Switzerland and the principality of Liechtenstein (as they tend to mimic EU legislation, not to finish on any black lists)
-Singapore (their government is much like that of Switzerland)
-India likely to follow as well


It is worth noting, that Dash has been delisted by Bittrex Exchange in the past, but after a lot of effort arguing with and educating them,
Dash has finally succeeded in getting re-listed on Bittrex Exchange again, at least for the time being. A won battle does not mean a won war,
however. I hope the majority of MNOs will not be misled and deceived by this insignificant victory, because it won´t always happen that way!
And sadly, this is a war we can never win, at least not as long the main trading volume is on CEXes, and as long Dash cannot survive on its
own without being traded against FIAT.

Why "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies like Dash, Zcash and Monero are targeted by governments,
and will likely have no future outside of DEXes and the Darknet/Deepweb:


It is a good sign, that governments - at least for now - seem to have abandoned their wish to completely outlaw and ban cryptocurrencies.
As they don´t want to ignore the industry altogether, they choose the path of strict regulation, explaining it with the need of fighting
money laundering and terrorist financing, both of which are largely the sphere of cash and are therefore just pretexts and poor excuses.
In truth, there is only one single main concern governments still have with cryptocurrencies. And it all boils down to the .. TAXMAN !
They want people having to fully disclose all their crypto holdings. And they are freakin mad as hell, if that doesn´t work out for them.
All the targeting of "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies comes from the government´s perception, that "privacy-enhanced" features are
detrimental to their tax-collecting efforts.

So what must we, being such a "privacy-enhanced" project expect from the worlds governments? In a word: the worst !
It should be clear, that they definitely want to completely outlaw and ban all those cryptocurrencies which they deem to be "privacy-enhanced".
Our project will likely not survive this impending attack from the worlds governments, if we don´t act now. And we are late, taking counter-measures.
We are simply not in the condition, of being able to afford keeping PrivateSend/CoinJoin in this regulatory climate they are creating right now.
Make no mistake, the governments of the world have already decided to go this route. They have secretly already taken this decision.
Right now they are preparing legislation and regulations almost everywhere to outlaw and ban all "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies.
If we decide to officially keep PrivateSend/CoinJoin, Dash price may never see $100 again, let alone anything beyond that.

Therefore this Governance proposal seeks to:

1) Disable and fully remove PrivateSend/CoinJoin from all Official Wallets, meaning:
   a) from all DCG-released Wallets
   b) from all Wallets published by developers which could be considered to be "close to DCG" or in "proximity to DCG" or from "a DCG environment"

2) Outsource and externalize all eventual remaining PrivateSend/CoinJoin functionality to an outside party or brand, which is officially unaffiliated
   with DCG, which will legally allow us plausible deniability, because we "must not have any influence over said entities". This also gives us the
   ability of officially "protesting" and "condemning" the existence of such counterpartyrisk-less mixing technology, by officially denying our blessing.
   It goes without saying, that in case this Governance proposal is passing, we must never publicly announce or advertise any inofficial mixing solution
   anymore, that may still continue operating.

3) Archiving and preserving all PrivateSend/CoinJoin-related Code, for potential future review or reconsideration, should the regulatory climate ever
   significantly change and the threats and persecution by the worlds governments be relaxed.

4) Sending an "Update Note" to all the Major and Mid-sized Exchange Players out there, that Dash is no longer a "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrency
   (this will potentially prevent any wrongful delistings, in case we vote to ditch PrivateSend/CoinJoin)

The passing of this proposal would allow the Dash project to at least stay alive, during the times of harshest persecution of "privacy-enhanced" coins.
If we are going to survive the impending mass delisting spree, we will at least have the time to overthink our strategy, adjust the project to the new rules,
while at the same time protecting and safeguarding our investment, while still being able to pursue future chances of growth and recovery.

Will we lose a considerable amount of users, by ditching PrivateSend/CoinJoin?
The answer is clearly: No. Not at all.
There are hardly any people involved in Dash only because of PrivateSend/CoinJoin, or who make their involvement dependent upon PrivateSend/CoinJoin.
The Darkcoin days are long gone. Nowadays, folks who are extremely focused on privacy are using mainly Monero, Zcash, PirateChain, Grin etc. anyway.
But the price we may have to pay for keeping this privacy feature is the likely death of Dash, a price we just cannot afford to pay, in my opinion.

I believe many MNOs will just refuse to realize how close our project is, to suffer the impending mass delisting doom.
It´s likely going to start, when Binance (the international branch) ultimately decides to delist all those "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies.
Coinbase and Kraken will then be the next ones to follow very soon thereafter, even if they will keep allowing their U.S. customers to trade those
"privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies for a transitioning period of time. It will be the final nail in the coffin for all those "privacy-enhanced" projects.
To all the still doubting MNOs out there, don´t think "i don´t believe it, lets just see what will happen" or "we can act afterwards, IF it even ever happens"
or "we can fight and appeal those delistings after they happened". No we cannot. Afterwards, the damage will already be done. And our market-cap on the way
shrinking back down to $100M. Once those delistings begin, they will come very fast, we will have no time to react, our project will get hammered from all sides.
Even if we would then, by that time, try to correct course, remove the feature, we would likely need to pay a fortune in re-listing costs, which we can´t afford
with our shrunken budget. We will be done. It would be over. We would be caught with our trousers down, and no real options to mitigate the evolving situation.

Many MNOs, especially those from the U.S. will obviously vote against this, because they perceive this threat that is very real and very close already, to be
"far, far away" from them, or that i made this all up or that it is somehow exaggerated. No it is not exaggerated. This is because, to some extent, people in
the U.S. live in a perception bubble, because so far the U.S. is the least inimical government against "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies, for the precise
reason that the U.S. is the only country on earth, which has an effective "Crypto Lobby" which is lobbying lawmakers, and has done so for many years already.
But unfortunately, Dash cannot survive long-term, even if it would remain listed on Binance.US and only for american users of Coinbase and Kraken.
Do not underestimate the impending danger our project is facing with the upcoming mass delistings of "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies in all of the world.
It is likely the most risky time for Dash, since its inception back in February 2014. The potential doom of our project is so close, yet most don´t notice !!
To the MNOs who still have doubts whether it is really necessary to at least officially scrap PrivateSend/CoinJoin, ask yourselves: What if you are wrong?
Can you handle a future Dash price of $10 with the onset of those mass delistings? Can our budget handle that? Can DCG? We are at the breaking point already.

Risking the very survival of Dash, and all because of a rarely used privacy feature, that doesn´t attract these days any users or investors anyway,
just doesn´t make any sense. Our investment in Dash will end up like cash thrown in the oven. Lets be wiser than that, guys.

Disabling and removing PrivateSend/CoinJoin from all official wallets is the safe and responsible thing to do right now. And it´s already 5min to midnight.
If this Governance proposal is passing, it will turn Dash into an outside observer to all this privacy-related persecution that is coming to pass.
And if Zcash, Monero, PirateChain, Grin etc. will do so well and great despite (or even because!) the mass delistings they will have to suffer,
then we always have the possibility to re-integrate and re-enable PrivateSend/CoinJoin again in a future version, in order to emulate what good happened to them.
But most likely they will end-up decimated to pieces, without mercy. Do we really want to experience the same?

Obviously, in case this Governance proposal is passing, we should be able to get listed in Japan, South Korea and on Huobi Global again, after it takes effect.
But the main reason why we need to do this and do this now, is to spare us from the same fate that´s waiting for Zcash, Monero, PirateChain, Grin etc.
If passing, it is intended to be enacted by Dash developers ASAP to not waste any precious time, because we probably don´t have a lot of time anymore.

Do not underestimate, what the governments of the world can (and will) do to us. And there will be no relief and no indemnities or restitutions paid to us.
The time to defend and rescue Dash is now. (in a worst-case scenario it could already be too late, though)
Be wise as serpents and vote wisely, guys!
Thanks to all the voting MNOs (regardless of how they vote) for the attention and patience to read it all.

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
0 points,2 days ago
Its so frustrating to see people clinging to privatesend. It would be one thing if people actually used it for privacy, but the sad fact is privacy minded users have moved on to shinier coin like those mentioned above.

You all want to cosplay as people standing up for privacy, but our current implementation of privatesend is borderline useless anyway since there are like five people using it, without more people using it, it would be straight up dumb to rely on it to provide any amount of privacy.

This is the worst of all worlds, we should either enhance privacy to the point that we are in the conversation of true privacy coins again, or we should remove it so we don't get penalized for no reason.
Reply
2 points,2 days ago
strong claims require strong evidence. Please provide some.
Reply
1 point,2 days ago
This is pure nonsense, there is strong evidence on the blockchain that PrivateSend is used by a lot of people. If name3 doesn't like PrivateSend, then he doesn't have to use it, others will, he should not force them out.
Reply
4 points,5 days ago
No.
Reply
6 points,7 days ago
Just sell all your crypto and open a bank account or buy Bitcoin Core if you want this.

BIG NO! x16

I'm proud of the Dash community for voting no to this proposal so overwhelmingly. I would have sold all my Dash if the network had decided otherwise.
Reply
5 points,7 days ago
I do agree with the fact that most people are sheep's and today government has to much power.
However i see crypto as our last stand! If we don't take over our destiny and vote with our money and technology then we are no better then the rest of the sheeps.
Even LTC has added privacy now. So if they ban monero, LTC, Dash, Zcash there wont be that many good projects and i'm sure smart people will find a workaround. And there is many already like Thor and atomic swap. Government will push people into decentralized solutions which in the end benefit our cause.
So no for me.
Reply
3 points,7 days ago
This is the world view that makes sense to me.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
Give to them nothing, but take from them EVERYTHING!
Reply
4 points,8 days ago
Perhaps one day we may have to revisit this but for today it is a 'no' from me. I have been patiently waiting many years for Dash to blossom and spring forth its 'platform', when that happens I want that to have the option of privacy.
Reply
1 point,8 days ago
Thanks for weighing in
Reply
5 points,9 days ago
Two letters, alphabetically arranged. "N" "O"
Reply
7 points,9 days ago
Ok, read the whole thing.

I have yet to see a _shred_ of evidence that removing CoinJoin would get us re-listed, or prevent us from getting de-listed on other exchanges. Dash is no more private than BitCoin or LiteCoin after the user tacks on an independent mixing service. I was privy to the highest level conversation between the S Korean exchange and the Dash leadership when the ban was in process. The people at the exchange fully understood that Dash is no more private than Bitcoin. The process was not driven by logic, it was driven by the S. Korean government.

The premise of the OP is logic, "If we remove CoinJoin, they will stop banning us." If the OP can provide actual evidence, like a statement from the EU that affirms that Dash would be welcomed with open arms if we would remove CoinJoin, I would take the proposal seriously. Appeasement rarely (if ever) works.

I am speaking only as MN owner Solarguy. My personal view in this post does not represent any official policy from the Trust Protectors or DCG.

Solarguy

ps, get out there and pump up the votes for DCG funding. We need every Duff to get Platform shoved out the door ASAP.
Reply
1 point,2 days ago
On what grounds would they ban us if we weren't privacy enhanced? The goal of regulation is to get actors to behave in a way that lawmakers want. What would they gain by continuing to go after people that have adjusted their behavior based on regulatory changes
Reply
1 point,9 days ago
Thanks for sharing your opinion on the matter, Solarguy.
Reply
2 points,9 days ago
So.......no evidence? Not being disrespectful or snarky here. If there were firm commitments with teeth to back them up from governments, regulators and crypto exchanges, the conversation regarding your proposal would be very different.

just solarguy
Reply
-4 points,9 days ago
There is actually a ton of evidence out there of what is coming, if only one is willing to take a closer look.
And it won´t happen in all countries simultaneously, but still at some point there will be a "hot phase" where many of the big and important CEXes will delist "privacy-enhanced" projects in a relatively short period of time.
This process has already begun.
There are some first-world countries where we are outlawed and banned from all CEXes already.
(Japan, South Korea, soon probably Singapore, Indonesia, etc.)
Other first-world countries are preparing the legislation to outlaw and delist us is from CEXes right now. (European Union)
And then there is the only country on earth (USA) with the least hostile regulatory environment, because of the crypto industry´s yearlong lobbying efforts, but ultimately the U.S. will outlaw and ban all "privacy-enhanced" projects too, even though being one of the last first-world countries doing so.
Reply
2 points,8 days ago
I meant evidence that in the event that Dash completely gives up CoinJoin, that the countries and exchanges that may take such actions, make real commitments to NOT de-list Dash. Nobody doubts that many governments will want their citizens to have less financial privacy. That's not the evidence I was asking for.

respectfully,
just solarguy
Reply
1 point,6 days ago
You know very well that such "evidence" is impossible to magically create. What, do you want a handwritten letter by the US president?
Can you show a evidence for the contrary? (not being disrespectful but i though what your asking is just not reasonable either)

The reason i say NO myself is that we need to collectively support privacy as it protect us from snoopy government + we stand-out as a project having this feature built into the wallet.
I do think at some point privacy + "privacy-enhanced" projects will come under heavy scrutiny and be delisted but then again we will find a way for that. As mentioned there is already several options like thor.
Reply
1 point,8 days ago
If you want to hypothesize the ditching of PrivateSend/CoinJoin, i doubt that in such a case going forward,
an outdated and no longer correct reputation alone, of having been such a "privacy-enhanced" project in the past, would warrant or justify any delistings or prevent us from getting re-listed.
Of course, this is not to say, that no mistakes by Exchanges could ever happen.
Reply
5 points,10 days ago
I'm speaking here as a MNO.

While voting has not yet finished there seems to be a clear mandate from the MN network at this stage to keep our coinjoin support.

We now know how the network feels about this topic and that is extremely valuable. Hence I appreciate Apophis making this proposal and I think the discussion he has created has been beneficial to us.

However I must say that I really dislike the personal attacks against Apophis and don't think he deserves them. I think he was very courageous to bring something so controversial forward. As a responsible community we need to be able to analyze proposals without resorting to attacking the proposal owners.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
I do hope people realize that this is a two-month Governance proposal, which means voting continues for another 4 weeks.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
Makes reading tweets like these very awkward : https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/z2uvet/dash_votes_on_privacy/
Reply
1 point,9 days ago
There's nothing "courageous" about concern trolling and using FUD to push a narrative. None of his assertions are backed by factual data and analysis, only scare-tactics and articles designed to generate as much fear and capitulation as possible. The Treasury WAS NOT designed to constantly have to vote on game-changing, network breaking proposals. The purpose of the treasury is to DIRECT THE 10% of the budget to adoption efforts, not to dismantle the network piece-by-piece.
Reply
7 points,10 days ago
Dont confuse things. Apophis is just an anonymous account.

Ok, we may know that he/she is a masternode operator of about 20 masternodes, we may even know what exactly he/she voted for all these years by tracking his/her masternodeIDs.

But if he/she does not like that , he/she can always change his/her IPs along with his/her masternodeIDs, and dive into more anonymity.

Thus, no personal attack can occur against anonymous.
Reply
4 points,10 days ago
Of course, in case privatesend/coinjoin is disabled, we can spot him/her even if he/she changes his masternodeIDs and IPs, by doing a blockchain analysis.

Thus, and thanks to Privatesend/Coinjoin feature, Apophis can always remain anonymous and be protected by personal attacks.
Reply
-1 point,10 days ago
Even without PS/CJ you can analyze only so much.
There are limits to the conclusions and the degree of certainty you are able to obtain from pseudoanonymous addresses anyway.
Will you be able to keep track and to trace, if an amount of Dash coins is deposited and withdrawn and thus being sent over two or three non-KYC CEXes or DEXes, if the amounts will be varying (multiple deposits and withdraws with varying amounts) and multiple destination addresses being used?

If converting into other networks/blockchains comes into play, you would probably lose track anyway.
PS/CJ is going to become a huge liability for us in the future, because we will have to suffer paying a huge price for keeping it.
Reply
3 points,9 days ago
Successful CJ requires a lot of care to be taken. If you just load up your wallet and start mixing, you will be identified in real time from your other unrelated network activity.

Also, it is quite frequent to spend CJ with more than 10 inputs, so the user needs do even more work to avoid this.

And finally, CJ only attempts to erase your history, it does nothing for the recipient. There are no shielded addresses, yet. If Platform launches (let's hope not), then usernames will function like shielded addresses, thereby enhancing privacy. So I hope you are not also voting Yes for Platform development.

Cross-chain analysis and tracing is a thing and requires good working knowledge to execute safely.

Law enforcement LOVE catching low hanging fruit, it makes their stats look great. Large crimes are addressed when you piss people off / embarrass people. Thus, dash CJ has enough weakness to keep them happy.
Reply
1 point,9 days ago
I personally cannot spot your individuality if you decide to sell all your dash in an exchange, then buy from another exchange new dash again. Especially if you convert your dash into FIAT money. But the government's agents and the tax hunters can spot your individuality that way, actually I think you are making their job easier. So your anonymity and privacy is not protected that way. Better stay into dash, avoid exchanging dash and use coinjoin, if you want to protect your privacy.

Of course if you constantly hide and discard your individuality within the dash ecosystem in order to prevent fellow dashers to spot you, you may protect your privacy that way, but you lose political power. Very few Dashers take seriously the newbies or those who hide their individuality. So whatever you may propose , you will probably get negative feedback due to the lack of trust.
Reply
3 points,10 days ago
Yeah, he was so courageous that he abandoned his previous DC handle and started a new one, so his past history could not be linked to this proposal and more importantly, so when this one goes up in flames, he can drop the 'Apophis' handle and go back to using his prior one. Real brave dude, next thing he'll be storming Putin's ass in Ukraine and winning the war for us, riiiiight??
Reply
3 points,10 days ago
You are making an assumption that he had a previous MNO handle or has his MNs registered on Dashcentral.
Reply
4 points,11 days ago
I do wonder why OP (a multi-MNO since many years, but completely unknown to us) did not get involved with Dash Governance system before, during times when we had some very important decision proposals to vote on (decision-proposal-block-reward-reallocat proposal / Decision-Vote-Improve-Proposal-System proposal / Decision-GrantLeftoverFundsToMasternodes and other decision / governance proposals over the years).

Why is OP only launching this decision proposal / governance proposal now, right after a misinformation campaign on several news outlet occured that spread misinformation about EU supposedly considering a ban on privacy-enhanced coins, when a simple look at the actual EU regulation (Markets in Crypto Assets / MiCa, reached signed agreement 30th June 2022 and to be implemented most likely in 2024) has zero mention of a ban on privacy-enhanced coins ?
Reply
4 points,10 days ago
Our friend does have a long voting history going back to some of the oldest reports on MNOwatch.org, you can search them with this collateral 64d02f249f8b2e03f7e8642eb2d8f073f174a9c7ed48d965911f85a382ff6066 as an example. More than likely he already has a DC account, but decided to create a new one because he felt the chances of the proposal passing would be greater with a clean slate so to speak, so we can only imagine how awful his prior history must be.
Reply
4 points,11 days ago
On the other hand, if Apophis (Multi-MNO with some 20 masternodes) indeed does have multiple Dash Central accounts (could be up to 20 really), then this person could be known to us by his other Dash Central accounts i guess.

I do admire the subtlety at which Apophis is trying to influence the discussions, not by upvoting or downvoting with all of his Dash Central accounts, but only with a select few of them and on certain comments. Much less suspicious, then what we have seen in the past on Dash Central.
Reply
-2 points,10 days ago
Ahh, misinformation you call it.
Its as much "misinformation" as the Election Steal 2020 was "baseless misinformation" or "conspiracy theory".
Nope, it is what lawmakers and regulators are preparing right now and what is coming within one or two years.

Know what is truly sad?
That 4 or 5 individuals (of which i bet half of them don´t even own a single Dash coin) are trying real hard to influence the discussion in here and are trying to steer voting behaviour of those MNOs who are really (and still!) heavily invested in Dash, who are the ones who really still have skin in the game and are risking a lot financially after this Governance proposal fails.
(in contrast to those who obtained their MNO badge from owning 1,000 Dash for a week 7 years ago)
But here in DashCentral (and the former DashWhale) we have had this problem since ever:

The loudest voices are usually the exact same individuals who own the least amount of Dash coins.

And while i appreciate and respect every comment and every differing opinion, and even welcome it,
i really wonder, how it was possible for a few individuals to create such an atmosphere of intimidation and group-compulsion in which so far none of the Yes voters have dared to come forward and write a comment.
(except TroyDASH, whom i want to thank even more so for coming forward and taking a stand, than for his voting support, for which i am grateful as well, of course)
But i for one, would have liked to read the opinion and the reasoning of other Yes voters as well.
And i really wish they had come forward, even if it takes a lot of courage to do so.
I´d also like to read the opinion and the reasoning of other members of the Dash community (regardless of how they decide to vote!), but those who already expressed themselves with countless comments, i think we know their stance and their views by now.

I don´t want to silence anybody, and those individuals who already wrote 10 comments or more can write another 100 comments as far as i am concerned, its just getting ridiculous and pathetic how desperately they are trying to dominate the outcome of this Governance proposal.

But from 97% of the Dash community so far only silence. Sad :(
Reply
1 point,10 days ago
'But from 97% of the Dash community so far only silence. Sad :('

Why so sad? You still have 5 weeks to reach that 97% of the Dash community and get a response. Hell, you even asked MNO's to take the time and not to hurry with the vote.
Reply
1 point,10 days ago
Of course you do need to put the effort in there yourself, day after day, week after week untill those 5 weeks passed. You can do it, i have faith in you.
Reply
0 points,10 days ago
Because it seems they all hurry more with the vote, than with participating in a discussion here, or with sharing their opinion or explaining their reasoning.
Which of course they have every right to, but the silence of the overwhelming majority of the Dash community is saddening to me.
Reply
0 points,10 days ago
Currently there are 265 votes casted. Decision proposals with a valuable topic usually have between 800-1100 votes. Normally most votes are cast at the very end of the voting period. For this 2-month Governance proposal that could take some time.
Reply
1 point,9 days ago
I am grateful for Sam´s comment.
But so far no statement from our CEO Pat Quinn, but of course i respect if he prefers reticence.
And only silence from TaoOfSatoshi, Mastermined, Joel, strophy, Walter, tungfa, and the remaining gang of OG's .. strange.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
Why do these people matter? I'm here.
Reply
1 point,9 days ago
Interim CEO of DCG Pat Quinn gave up his interim CEO position recentely
tungfa has left Dash years ago
have not seen anything from Tao for awhile now
Reply
1 point,9 days ago
Yes, but having left DCG does not necessarily imply having sold all their MNs as well.
Reply
0 points,10 days ago
See : https://imgur.com/Vl5QAwZ
Reply
-3 points,9 days ago
Hey guys, CryptoSI here, I was a DASH community member and still a masternode owner, not linked to this account because of the obvious personal attacks that are a response to proposals sometimes.

Here's my two cents....... I left DASH when it became clear that CoinJoin would not be replaced by 'serious' privacy, that was in 2016. Now you have CoinJoin which is not (in my humble opinion) serious privacy, yet it certainly leaves you open to 'regulatory pressure' from the US or Europe. Now there is no clear evidence that privacy coins will be banned, but judging by the fallout of Tornado cash on ETH its probably prudent that DASH has some form of contingency.

The tone of this proposal is horrible, patronising and sensational in parts, DASH will not die, PIVX was born from DASH, has a far smaller budget and is still building, I doubt things are critical. However I certainly agree that 'some' planning should be in place.

How about looking at what other Privacy projects are working on and joining them? Serai DEX is an initiative/project being supported by Monero and allows cross chain swaps, BlockDX and there are probably more, perhaps consider supporting or collaborating with them as a means of mitigating any potential danger from delistings.

finally its great to see discussion like this, keep it positive and respectful and....... shameless plug, I'll be reviewing this proposal in my DAO focused VLog, Daowatch.blog. will release on the 25th.

I personally will support this proposal, but I doubt it will pass, however I'm quite certain nobody cares for coinjoin and those that do, will not overlook DASH if it was removed, as a bunch of us left already because Coinjoin 'wasnt' removed and replaced. Serious Privacy is not DASH, no need to keep Coinjoin and risk the fallout, especially with no contingency plan.

Love to you all, have a blessed week.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
Please sell your Dash if you "left" and leave all the way.
Reply
0 points,3 hours ago
Thats not kind :(
Reply
6 points,9 days ago
it is honestly such a ridiculous argument. How can people keep suggesting coinjoin doesn't work, WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE. Instead says its not serious. What does that mean? Nothing.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
"I use Monero via this online portal/online app on my gps tracked and IP logged smartphone.. it's so much more private!"
Reply
1 point,8 days ago
I have no doubts, that in many ways PS/CJ is superior to the privacy of Monero (XMR) for example.
But if judging by both, the costs of mixing and the time required to do so, its certainly far from ideal.
It´s lacking ease of use, if you are honest with yourself.
Reply
1 point,8 days ago
I didnt think this was the correct time to discuss the effectiveness of COINJOIN, however, that was only a small part of my input. Even if you personally feel COINJOIN to be the most effective privacy ever created (not that I'm assuming you do), it doesnt change my main point which is firstly that its good to discuss the potential of government action against privacy coins, and secondly that continuing on without some form of contingency isnt pragmatic.
Reply
1 point,3 days ago
>I didnt think this was the correct time to discuss the effectiveness of COINJOIN,

Why wouldn't you? Dash uses coinjoin and you basically called it 'not serious' privacy. Which is not only GROSSLY incorrect, it is basically slander. Coinjoin is the most effective form of blockchain privacy and trying to break it is such a serious matter that it hasn't been done yet (except on some edge cases that have long-since been hardened against).

So just the fact that you thought that throwaway comment wasn't a big deal indicates to me that you're at the least tone-deaf, if not wildly ignorant of the things you're speaking. Not a good position to be in when you wish to be taken seriously.

>Even if you personally feel COINJOIN to be the most effective privacy ever created

Its not a feeling, its a fact. For the price and ease-of-use, coinjoin is the best option for privacy. It also easily scales in strength as you add rounds. Which means that it is verifiably the best version of privacy since it technically doesn't have any upper limits (just increase the rounds).

Dash's Anonymity set size went from like, 40,000 to 40,000,000 with a single increase of the total rounds to 16. ZCash had to completely rewrite their privacy protocol to acheive a similar gain. BCH is STILL trying to get their coinjoin to work. Monero only has an anonymity set of 16 which means its vastly inferior to Dash. That means that Coinjoin is the best.

>it doesnt change my main point which is firstly that its good to discuss the potential of government action against privacy coins

Discuss it? Sure, no problem. Remove coinjoin because of FUD? Absolutely not.

>and secondly that continuing on without some form of contingency isnt pragmatic.

We have a contingency already. Dash is a blockchain, which means its a global decentralized nearly-autonomous organization, outside of the DAO that is emboddied in the Masternodes. This means that Dash can do what it wants and continue to develop on our chosen path. Dash has the same privacy specifications as BTC (coinjoin is possible on most blockchains (except Nano)) which means that for Dash to get banned for privacy, BTC would have to be as well. That's a hell of a deflection shield.
Reply
1 point,2 hours ago
I hope you dont mind If I just skip your first two points and the insults contained within, we are both very aware that this discussion/argument has raged on for a while. Lets just agree to disagree and try not to insult each other as its not helpful.

My position currently is that Dash possibly isnt in as safe a position as we'd like to believe, I accept that Dash has the same privacy as BTC at a strictly technical level, I also dont think this really matters, I dont think the people who sanction protocols are in the business of making sure they act fairly, consistently or even sensibly, Tornado Cash is all the evidence we need to start taking the threat seriously. Judging by the passion in defence of CoinJoin, I definitely must rethink my position of 'nobody cares', however this passion should not be blind to the dangers that clearly exist.

Being a blockchain does NOT protect against sanctions, Tornado Cash was and is totally decentralised to the point you can still use it right now (though its illegal to do so). The OP suggests rightfully that being sanctioned would automatically cut DASH of from ALL exchanges unless they want to tangle with the US Govt. It's not FUD, perhaps its unwarranted fear, but the logic is solid.

Tornado Cash fell for privacy, Dash has privacy, if Dash gets treated like Tornado Cash it will mean tough times for Dash, can we mitigate that threat beforehand yes, should we? yes. Does that mean removing CoinJoin, I'd personally say yes, but if that doesnt happen then what are we doing to mitigate both for the coin value and the safety of the developers and masternode owners who could find themselves in the firing line.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
doing nothing is the contingency plan. Dash needs to embrace decentralization in all its forms. This means Dash will be acquired on Decentralized Exchanges and not Centralized ones. Eventually this will happen. Will regulation push this eventuality. Yes, probably. Will that be soon? That is yet to be soon. Is Dash nearly ready to do this in a big way? Yes, I believe so.
Reply
0 points,2 hours ago
Yes, I agree with the second half of this, I dont think doing nothing is a contingency, pushing for closer parnerships with dexs, or adding liquidity and resources to increase users on dexs may also help. also what fiat-Dash bridges exist that are immune to an OAFC sanction?
Reply
3 points,9 days ago
The burden of evidence is on the claimant to prove their claims. Can you prove that Coinjoin is not effective privacy? Monero is not a good standard to judge by. Monero has actual research that has been done showing that its privacy is ineffective and has been for years. There is no similar research available suggesting any weaknesses in Coinjoin. It seems you're attempting to manipulate the narrative around privacy and force your competition (us) to be less effective so you can gain. This is an unethical practice and is grounds for permanently banning your masternode, just FYI.
Reply
1 point,8 days ago
I didnt expect the COINJOIN statement to ruffle feathers, and in all honesty I dont want to detract from the real purpose of the proposal, which is, does keeping this feature leave Dash open to attack from authorities? Dash is NOT my competition, I view ALL crypto as part of a growing ecosystem built to allow an alternative to the fiat system, just because I'm not a maxi to any particular solution doesnt mean I cannot support them all in my own way. As for banning my masternode, I would LOVE to see you try, and any such threats to censor opinions which differ to your own are the true unethical practice. Your tribalism is both petty and unhelpful.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
there is no mechanism to ban masternodes and it would be challenged in much the same way any censorship proposals are put forth. It is anti-ethical to dash
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
>there is no mechanism to ban masternodes

This is wrong. Masternodes are PoSe banned every day. That is a mechanism to ban Masternodes. It is not censorship to ban the masternodes of provably bad actors. It is not anti-thetical to Dash anymore than PoSe bans are. The purpose of PoSe bans is to make sure that Masternodes aren't getting paid without performing their part of the "services contract" (Masternodes provide instant transactions and mxing, as well as governance, as a service).

In other words, whenever there's a failing in ANY ONE of those responsibilities, it is standard procedure for that masternode to be banned. Voting on and dealing with governance proposals is part of the MNs tasked duties, which means doing so in bad-faith is grounds for a banning. Do you disagree?
Reply
0 points,2 hours ago
Please prove that I'm a bad actor. I dont want to be a bad actor, so if your requests are reasonable I'll adopt them.

If you simply dont like my opinion then, thats not grounds to label someone a bad actor.

If I own other crypto currencies then that is also not grounds to label me a bad actor.
Reply
4 points,11 days ago
Asteroid 99942 Apophis is a near-Earth object (NEO) estimated to be about 1,100 feet (340 meters) across. When it was discovered in 2004, Apophis was identified as one of the most hazardous asteroids that could impact Earth.

However, a radar observation campaign in March 2021, combined with precise orbit analysis, allowed astronomers to conclude that there is no risk of Apophis impacting our planet for at least a century.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/asteroids-comets-and-meteors/asteroids/apophis/in-depth/

I predict the same will come of the POs dire predictions and alarmist opinions and Dash will do well in the next bull market as it will be one of the few coins left standing and offer features that few coins do, in particular a privacy feature integrated directly in the main wallet.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
Apophis was also the bad, but underwhelming, villain of the Star Gate series.
Reply
8 points,11 days ago
I disagree with a fundamental assumption here, which is that it can be decided what an "official wallet" even is.

Does Crowdnode run an "official" custodial wallet, given that they've received DAO funding?

How about when Electrum and Bitgo were receiving DAO funding -- were they "official" wallets? Are they still?

And what if some DCG employees released a wallet update, but said that they did it as volunteers and not as employees -- would it still be an "official" wallet? Was it ever?

What if the DIF developed a wallet using some of its investment profits? Would that be "official"?

I understand and deeply appreciate your concern for the future of Dash, as it is concern that I share. But your underlying assumption here -- that there are official and unofficial wallets within the Dash ecosystem -- is simply a false assumption.
Reply
1 point,10 days ago
...except DCG who drive dash protocol development are the same as the wallets, this is how I say they are the "official" wallets, because they are built as a reference for other developers.
Reply
1 point,10 days ago
Fork-based governance is not a real choice. It is a centrally controlled choice. Blockchains should not be centralized and decisions around the technological content and the integrity of the protocol should not be left in the hands of developers, it should be in the hands of the communities.
Reply
3 points,10 days ago
This is a great idea!!!

Lets rename all the DCGproposals to (lets say) QuantumProposals (in order to honor QuantumExplorer). Lets rename the CoreWallet to QuantumWallet, and the Coredashd to QuantumDashd. After all, what DashCore means? Nothing.

Problem solved, nobody can blame Dash's "core team", the only possible blame is the sponsorship which is by far lighter.

Amanda, if you add a governance proposal about it, you have my (single) vote.
Reply
-1 point,11 days ago
Thanks for your comment Amanda, i appreciate it.
You are correct, that the funding of an inofficial wallet could potentially be deemed as sponsorship by government and regulators, and therefore imply responsibility, but they will likely not recognize such funding or even find out about it.
If a privacy feature will be available, it will most likely depend a lot on:
1) how near and close such a privacy feature is originating from the official project team (DCG)
2) how easily it is accessible to ordinary users of such a cryptocurrency (the vast majority)
The closer the source to the official project, and the easier its accessibility for ordinary users, the higher the risk of getting categorized as "privacy-enhanced".
Reply
7 points,12 days ago
Our competitors are moving to add Privacy features to their coins.
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/11/18/cardano-is-launching-new-privacy-blockchain-and-token/
Let's not fall behind and instead re-double our efforts to enhance our privacy and make it available in all our wallets especially the Android and iOS wallets.
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
Hoskinson is too smart to dare to enable this on Cardano (ADA) itself.
Therefore they are launching a new blockchain and a new token for it,
sort of outsourcing and externalizing the feature.
Basically the same (or similar) thing i proposed.
Reply
3 points,11 days ago
Litecoin's MWEB was sponsored by the Litecoin Foundation. How much closer to home could it be?
Reply
0 points,11 days ago
If Litecoin won´t remove MimbleWimble, then Litecoin will get treated just like Monero, Zcash and Dash (unless we change course) and share our fate, meaning Litecoin will over time also get delisted from CEXes around the world.
Litecoin has already been delisted from about half a dozen of CEXex, because of its recent privacy feature.
This is only the beginning.
Reply
7 points,12 days ago
This is a hard no from me. Privacy is a fundamental human right and Dash needs to take a stand for this, not cower in fear. Our current pullback from privacy has already significantly hurt our reputation. If dash pulls its privacy features, I'm out.
Reply
-2 points,12 days ago
We are tax slaves, and as such have no privacy (versus authorities, IRS, etc.) with our bank accounts.
(CRS the international version of FATCA is now already implemented in most countries for telematic exchange of information)
Same reason they will strip us of privacy in crypto.
Why would they allow you to have in crypto what they don´t allow you to have in banking / traditional finance?
Authorities and Law enforcement want to have the ability to track and trace.
Keeping PrivateSend/CoinJoin and being responsible for it as a project, will result in being kicked off from CEXes soon.
Surefire way to bankrupt us.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
I will eat potatoes grown in the forest while hiding from the anal swab drones before I bend the knee.
Reply
3 points,12 days ago
In the bitcoin world they say, "how many times was bitcoin going to die?". But then the maxis say, "all alts are going to zero"... like when? - they've been saying that shit for years. If bitcoin is "anti-fragile" then I say dash is also anti-fragile, give me one reason why it is'nt?

In contrast, in 2007 Northern Rock was collapsing and there was a run on the banks, people queued for miles in an attempt to get their money out. Wasn't very anti-gragile was it?

Your proposal says bitcoin has anti-fragility and dash does not. I disagree and I'll explain by example...

Schnorr signatures in bitcoin is only the beginning. The devs are planning more privacy enhancements. Now let's just say, for example, that bitcoin follows litecoin's lead and adds MWEB, do you imagine all those exchanges you talked about will also de-list bitcoin? And why are exchanges adding LN, knowing full well it is more private?

If you truly believe dash is not anti-fragile then I suggest you sell now while you have the chance. Nothing like putting your money where your mouth is.
Reply
-2 points,11 days ago
LN has a good chance to get outlawed and banned as well, with CEXes no longer allowed to use it in future.
Regarding Litecoin, if they will not remove MimbleWimble, they will share the same fate as Monero, Zcash and Dash (unless we change course).
If Bitcoin developers proceed further in the direction to add more privacy, Bitcoin will get outlawed and banned from CEXes as well.
Bitcoin is not "untouchable" and will not get much of exemptions or special treatments from governments.
Reply
2 points,11 days ago
Bitcoin is not untouchable? lol

2022-04-01 (not an April Fool!) -

"Kraken is thrilled to announce its support for Bitcoin’s Lightning Network, which is now live for all clients. Finally, traders have an instant and inexpensive way to move bitcoin on and off the platform."

Now show me _any_ regulators concerns for Schnorr signatures.

At this point, it looks like you are desperately clutching at straws. Let's face it, with this argument of yours, you are not just declaring the end of privacy coins, you're also effectively saying the end of bitcoin and the effects that would have on the entire industry. Again, if you TRULY believe this outcome is likely, it makes complete sense to cash out now while you can, regardless of what happens to dash. I mean, if bitcoin is going to be de-listed then this is not a PrivateSend issue at all.
Reply
0 points,11 days ago
If a feature prevents traceability (or significantly makes it more difficult), then such a project will get outlawed and banned from CEXes over time. (if its easily accessible for ordinary users)
If a feature doesn´t promote and grant any privacy, it will be no concern to lawmakers and regulators.
For categorizing projects, they are likely going to use some risk score assessment model, similar to AML risk scores. This is how they are going to put a lot of pressure on developers to "behave well" or "else".

I have not predicted that Bitcoin will get delisted no matter what.
What i said is, that LN has a good chance of getting outlawed and CEXes no longer being allowed to use it in future, but this will depend whether its transactions are traceable or not.
I said, IF Bitcoin developers are going to add more privacy, THEN and only then, it will also get banned from CEXes, albeit perhaps with some delay, but thats the only special treatment it will get.
Reply
1 point,11 days ago
Can't help you tbh. It's like you're holding bitcoin and LN + Schnorr signatures to a different standard than Litecoin and MWEB.

The risk score is based on people. Mixed coins do not automatically make people guilty, which is why Coinbase launched a lawsuit against the U.S. Treasury:
https://cryptobriefing.com/tornado-cash-got-banned-coinbase-government/

Could of sworn you said the exchanges would just roll over.
Reply
0 points,11 days ago
Yeah, the AML risk score is about people.
But they are likely going to create a similar type of risk score (if it doesn´t exist already) for the purpose of categorizing projects, meaning that if a project´s score will be too high, the project will be categorized as "privacy-enhanced".
There is no other way for them to put pressure on developers.
Reply
8 points,13 days ago
I can understand how the PO came to this conclusion but I profusely disagree and vote No.

I must begin with a very important quote by Whitfield Diffie, the father of public key cryptography (alongside Martin Hellman and Ralph Merkle).

"If you say to people that they, as a matter of fact, can’t protect their conversations, in particular their political conversations, I think you take a long step toward making a transition from a free society to a totalitarian society."

This principle applies to money and blockchain transactions, executed as a series of permissionless instructions. Sometimes to drug lords and terrorists, and other times to activists, journalists and whistleblowers. You can not censor one without censoring the other, Diffie understood this and was part of the 1990s “Crypto Wars” when encryption tools, such as pgp, were categorized as “munitions”. Since then, governments have repeatedly continued their attack on encryption and privacy, whether it was the Five Eyes alliance, iphone cracking, WhatsApp backdoors, and now the right to financial privacy.

For some background see “Doomed to Repeat History? Lessons from the Crypto Wars of the 1990s":
https://www.newamerica.org/cybersecurity-initiative/policy-papers/doomed-to-repeat-history-lessons-from-the-crypto-wars-of-the-1990s/

On a related note, I believe another attempt will be made to produce a more advanced Clipper Chip and it will be used in the name of “climate change”. PoW mining will eventually be identified and shut down. They want to weaken us, one cut at a time:
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/the-pow-extinction-event-within-10-20-years.51906/

Back to this proposal…

This proposal is trying to appease many government agencies and regulators whom thrive on abusive behavior and control. A lack of privacy is but one part of what they seek. If someone has registered with an exchange and the exchange has applied the toughest of AML / KYC processes, what difference does it make that the crypto being bought is “private”? I mean, it’s clearly not hidden from them or the agencies / regulators that the identified person exchanged X for Y. They know who, where and what. The answer is simple, they fear what you might do outside of the exchanges and outside of their control. To collect taxes they must weaken our position while advancing their own agendas and narratives with fear, uncertainty and doubt. More so that they are attempting to implement CBDCs and this, I think, is what you recognize, the origin of your fear. The EU (and others) will continue to diminish privacy and promote surveillance. It’s not that surprising. The more threatened they feel, the louder they will scream and kick until it’s all over.

Keep in mind, dash’s coin mixing is very limited in scope i.e. it only protects the source of your income, it makes no guarantees to the people you are sending to. In comparison, litecoin’s MWEB is live and implements something akin to shielded addresses. AFAIK, litecoin has only been de-listed from a couple of exchanges. In recent times, litecoin has actually been increasing in rank and value. This may change in the future when mobile wallets implement the MW feature, but for now it’s actually looking quite promising. And in any event, litecoin is available on the Thorchain DEX whereas dash is not, go figure.

We must also consider that dash coin mixing is largely done at the protocol level, facilitated by masternodes. So I’m not sure how convincing it is to say we don’t own the code. It’s like being teetotal indoors while keeping the alcohol in the garden shed.

Ryan Taylor previously pointed out to exchanges and regulators that the bitcoin Lightning Network was perhaps more private than coin mixing. In which case, why don’t exchanges de-list bitcoin? More so, bitcoin can now use Schnorr signatures to obfuscate spending and hinder chain analysis.

Once the regulators have eliminated “privacy coins”, who’s next? PoW coins (“climate change”), DAOs (“evading sanctions”), self-custody staking (“unregulated securities”), unregulated stablecoins (“protect the consumer from themselves”)? How do you imagine this ends?

And so we make this decision, not for dash but alongside all the people and organizations fighting for human rights and privacy. Principles can come with a heavy price but I refuse to sell out. Yes, the price of dash might collapse but I conclude it may well do so anyway.

All these years we endured DCGs position to engage with regulators while simultaneously ignoring MW and ZKPs. How much of the EU’s thinking comes from our education and compliance? I don’t understand the logic that says we managed to get on hundreds of exchanges but now we must remove features to remain in a captive market. If we had more ways for people to earn dash, we wouldn’t be so dependent on regulated CEXs.

AML policies are intentionally inconsistent and never final. A regulator will issue laws and guidelines and every institution will implement their own interpretation, often over-compensating to effectively lick the regulators ass. Which is why some businesses will block fiat to crypto exchanges (Wise) while others will allow them (Revolut), even though they share the same regulator(s). In fact, it doesn’t even have to be crypto, it could be a gambling site or some other politically correct agenda. I refer you to the recent changes to Paypal’s ToS with heavy fines for various transgressions. Thus, we can not simply say “we will do X, Y and Z” and they will comply, the exercise is futile.

I want dash to improve on privacy, not to take it away. I’d be more than happy to accept a proposal from David Burkett to add MWEB to dash.

To all those bankers and regulators that originally called crypto a scam, a ponzi and a toy, And to all the banks that closed at weekends and made the simplest of purchases or transfers a fucking nightmare “to protect me” - I say Fuck You. This is our time, I can feel it, can’t you?
Reply
3 points,8 days ago
GrandMasterDash, we are in complete agreement. I very recently wrote a blog article for Dash.org regarding financial privacy, governments, the legacy banking industry and crypto. The take home message was that financial privacy IS going to happen, regardless of what the banking industry and various governments think about that. The other message is that anything the world does to strengthen AML/KYK laws and regulations will unavoidably harm the poorest and most vulnerable groups of people people on earth. The unbanked, the refugees, the women in countries that still use banking laws to oppress them, etc etc etc.

It's not a short read (26 minutes) but I think a very good overview of the problem. https://www.dash.org/blog/searching-for-the-balance/

just solarguy
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
Well written, thank you.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
Thanks for your comment, it was so far the best one from all the No voters, and it was an interesting read.
As i already predicted, people living in the U.S. tend to underestimate the nature of the risk we face in other jurisdictions all over the world, and the general regulation climate in other countries of the world.
Of course i respect your differing opinion, even though i cannot agree with some things you mentioned.
Dash is so much more than just PrivateSend/CoinJoin, all of which is going to get sacrificed on behalf of keeping PrivateSend/CoinJoin, when our project gets devastated with mass delistings from most CEXes.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
Before I dived into crypto I had numerous highly charged arguments with people about the tech and government intervention. It was not an easy baptism, I was kicking and fighting. Much of what I predicted came true. Back then I was laughed at when I said companies and governments were free to create their own crypto projects and would likely do so.

It's actually one of the reasons I went ALL IN, because it was obvious to me what was coming with governments fighting back. I could of decided, given the intensity of the push back, crypto would simply die and that would be it.

But look at what happened. In the same way torrents are still thriving, bitcoin and dash is still standing. In terms of time, we have escaped velocity, we are officially an OG.

HTTP came before HTTPS. It was a long road but we got there, everywhere. If the web had been encrypted from the start, the road would of been shorter. Unfortunately, bitcoin is HTTP and we have to do it all over again, and once again we will prevail. Because privacy is our fundamental right.

Actually, I think Zooko explained it best when he said privacy is about consent between two or more parties. It doesn't make you an inherently bad person. If you're going to do stupid things and harm others, then you need to know good old fashioned criminal investigation is still alive and well.
Reply
4 points,12 days ago
I have favored outsourcing Dash's privacy for quite some time now for precisely this reason. Working on migrating to a solution to have Dash's privacy facilitated in a different way than it currently is (maintained by DCG and enabled by masternodes) is the smart move to further DECENTRALIZE and thus improve the resiliency of both the network and its privacy features. I will be supporting this proposal.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
I am confused : how does removing PrivateSend from the official Dash wallet further decentralize the network or improve Dash privacy feature, specially considering there is currently no third party Dash wallet that does Dash mixing anyways ?

Sounds like another hollow vague promise of some third party wallet team taking PrivateSend over, but this never getting materialized and ultimately PrivateSend getting abandoned, just like Dash Electrum got abandoned.

Why would people even trust their dash with a third party Dash wallet for mixing purpose ?

Anyone voting yes on this is voting for :

- centralization of PrivateSend on some third party Dash wallet (if it even materialise on a centralized third party Dash wallet in the first place, most likely it is just the death of PrivateSend)
- safety risk (i have some trust in DCG, i have zero trust in some third party wallet that require your dash to mix .. not your keys, not your coins !!)

Also i find it doubtfull that this will change the view of governments with regards to Dash, who's circulating supply has been mixed to a degree for 8 straight years. Removing PrivateSend from the official Dash wallet does nothing to Dash circulating supply being already affected by PrivateSend mixing.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
You decentralize things when you need censorship resistance, and you centralize things when you need efficiency. Which of those do you think we need for privatesend? The current situation has masternodes (critical infrastructure and investors), and DCG (the critical entity that is controlled by the network), both having a target on their backs for regulatory attacks.
Reply
4 points,12 days ago
That current situation has been the situation from the start. The moment Dash started to integrate PrivateSend in its codebase, Dash became a target for regulatory attacks .. which we have seen plenty of over the years.

You can't put back a baby after it has already been born. Same for PrivateSend mixing, which already affected Dash circulating supply in its 8 years of PrivateSend existence.

Removing PrivateSend from the official Dash wallet with a vague statement to 'outsource and externalize all eventual remaining PrivateSend/CoinJoin functionality to an outside party or brand, which is officially unaffiliated with DCG', when there is in fact no longer any third party Dash wallet that provides Dash mixing, and there most likely never will be any third party dash wallet that will provide PrivateSend, is just deceiptfull and dishonest.

This is not about outsourcing PrivateSend, this is about killing PrivateSend off completely.
Lets at least be honest about that. Same way Dash Electrum got killed off.
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
Well said. We've bumped heads here before, but this time I'm in agreement with you 100%. That's exactly the plan. Attack and suffocate our proposals (already succeeded, we used to have many more people vying to spread Dash around the world for us, now its barely a trickle), then once that's done begin to whittle away at our featureset to deliver the final blow. These are deliberate, tactical, and highly strategic actions and goals that did not arise by coincidence nor happenstance. Gentlemen, we have infiltrators afoot.
Reply
5 points,12 days ago
With regard to my vote I am considering the entire proposal as a whole, not just the part about removing PS from the core infrastructure. If this vote were to pass I would consider it a signal for the direction I want the project to follow, not necessarily an ultimatum on DCG for "remove it now with no plan or else". I can't speak for other yes voters but imo the lack of other solutions at the moment which you have keenly observed, is precisely because we have not made it a priority, and I would like to make it a priority.
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
I would expect and hope that DCG would fight back against such a preposterous and egregious breach of protocol as this. The treasury vote was designed to decided where the 10% extra budget is to go, if anywhere. "Decision proposals" have made up a very small fraction of total proposals for a reason.

MNOs are not in a position to shepard the network to success. We rely on the direction of DCG and the talented developers, business managers, and other outreach PROFESSIONALS to do their job and recommend to the network the best way forward. All in coordination with Dash's overall stated goals. A proposal like this is, to me, a grevious breach of protocol.
Reply
3 points,12 days ago
To OP :

Why would disabling and removing PrivateSend/CoinJoin from official Dash wallets prevent or stop exchanges from delisting Dash anyways ? A certain amount of Dash circulating supply has been thoroughly mixed over the last 8 years, so why would removing PrivateSend/CoinJoin from our official Dash wallets now, change anything about how governments / countries view and deal with Dash ?
Reply
4 points,12 days ago
Just trying to understand your mass delisting of Dash by exchanges logic here and how removing PrivateSend/CoinJoin from official Dash wallets prevents that .. eventhough Dash circulating supply is already affected by all the mixing.
Reply
0 points,12 days ago
The Dash coins which have already been mixed in the past do not matter at all.
It is not "my" logic, but the way the legislation in the various countries is drafted.
If a cryptocurrency facilitates privacy or allows easy access to private/anonymous transactions,
it will be considered "privacy-enhanced". It is never about what happened on a blockchain in the past,
but only about whether a project offers such a privacy feature now (i.e. after such legislation takes effect).
Over time, those projects will all get outlawed and banned from mostly all CEXes all around the world.
The U.S. may be one of the last countries to outlaw and ban those "privacy-enhanced" projects, but they will too.
Reply
4 points,12 days ago
Outlawed things that are difficult to get never go up in value? What about the war on drugs? Real crypto is designed to survive bannings.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
That is a pretty naive baseless personal view of yours about governements and legislation regarding privacy enhanced coins, that according to you have such a hostile stance on privacy-enhanced coins, that it will lead to a speedy and abrupt mass delisting of Dash on exchanges that will be the death of Dash, unless Dash removes PrivateSend from its official wallets. Yet different governments and different legislation worldwide will just ignore the use of coin mixing that already occured on the Dash network, if Dash would just remove PrivateSend from its official Dash wallets. Governments and legislation will then just stop using their tracing tools and analytics on the Dash network and they will not go after Dash addresses that have Dash mixing history associated with them, because of the way the legislation in the various countries is drafted. Lets talk about how the legislation is drafted, as you really don't provide any specifics and keep it rather vague.

The reason there is currently a leaked draft floating around from the Czech member state about the EU considering a possible ban on privacy-enhanced coins, is because of the upcoming Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulation, which was published on September 24, 2020

MiCa remains a draft proposal of a regulation, evolving and in the process of review, with a plan to implement the blockchain and virtual asset regulatory framework by 2024. However, there are not any specific implementation timelines as of yet.

So there is no mass delisting on the nearby horizon for Dash as there is no implementation timeline for the upcoming MiCa regulation and the MiCa draft regulation itself is scheduled to stay in draft phase at least untill 2024.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
And that MiCa draft regulation by 2024, could very well exclude the Czech draft change.
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
Correction : looks like there was an agreement reached on MiCa on 30th of June 2022 by EU member states and MiCa regulation is most likely to be implemented in 2024.

See : https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022/06/30/digital-finance-agreement-reached-on-european-crypto-assets-regulation-mica/

However the ban on privacy-enhanced is not mentioned anywhere in that agreement, which makes me wonder if the leaked Czech draft change, was actually part of the review of MiCa, before all EU members signed this agreement and the Czech draft change simply got rejected / excluded in the final agreement text.
Reply
3 points,12 days ago
There is actually a deleted paragraph 53 in the MiCa agreement text.

The actual MiCa agreement text is 'Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Markets in Crypto-assets' and is a pdf document of the actual MiCa agreement and can be found on my previous comment as a reference / source.

I asked both Coindesk and the Council of the EU - Public Information Service for clarification.

To be continued.
Reply
4 points,13 days ago
PRIVACY IS A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT!

The PO is a coward, he would have you believe that trading in your financial privacy would grant you instead financial gains, but who is going to buy a coin that cheats its users and walks back on its user's privacy and safety? At the heart of the matter is the OP's assumption that so called mass de-listings are sure to come (they are not) and that they would have an adverse impact to price, they may not. For a long time Dash has already been battling the dark forces that are against your financial privacy, the PO himself listed, Japan and South Korea as recent examples where Dash is no longer listed. If the PO's assumption is correct then we should see the gold standard in privacy coins be impacted. Let us now examine the situation.


Here is a chart of the ratio of Dash to Monero on the weekly time frame. Since 2018 Dash is down 94% against Monero.
https://www.tradingview.com/x/LSBNa7ng/
I would like the PO to address this. How is it possible that Dash has sunk so much against Monero? The answer is because Dash has already over that period been very soft on privacy and betrayed many of the Darkcoin dudes who've since sold up and gone to coins with stronger intestinal fortitude.

On the 19th of May 2022 the Litecoin network activated Mimble Wimble https://www.elliptic.co/blog/explaining-mimblewimble-the-privacy-upgrade-to-litecoin and thus increased privacy on Litecoin, recall the PO is wanting Dash to remove easy access to privacy, the exact opposite of what Litecoin did!

Here is a chart of the ratio of Dash to Litecoin with the vertical blue bar showing the introduction of MW to Litecoin.
https://www.tradingview.com/x/coELk6Vh/
We are currently down 33% versus Litecoin. I would like the PO to explain that, how is it possible that a coin that enhanced its privacy is outperforming Dash? Dash, a coin that is seen as soft on privacy, doesn't mention it anyone on any official website, hides the option in the Core wallet, turns it OFF by default and even de-branded it from trademark PrivateSend with lots of SEO to plain Jane CoinJoin with zero SEO leading back to this project. How in the Lord's good name do you explain that! Because I have an explanation! Our already soft approach to privacy has massively hurt us as would be investors skip over us and seek out coins with stronger privacy!

Also, a point of clarification, for some reason Dash is getting mixed up in the group of coins called "privacy-enhanced" coins, this has long been a mis-categorisation of Dash since it has no special technology over and above mixing to make it qualify for that term, eg shielding, zk, lelantus, MW etc etc, as such DCG have been able to argue in the past that Dash's privacy features are most similar to Bitcoin's thus be exempt from this ruling. I would rather see this effort expended on education of exchanges and your elected representatives on what Dash is how it does not qualify to be in this group, than wasting time trying to sell the MNOs on a lie, that the coin would pump if only they walk back on all the values they hold dear in life.

The PO would have you believe that if the PS/CJ feature were removed from the core wallet that few people would be bothered by this and the selling would be minimal, but that is a lie. I for one would sell all my Dash and here is why, take out the built PS/CJ feature from Dash and what are you left with? a coin not much better or useful that Bitcoin itself, sure it has fast conf times and cheaper TXes, but heck these days who doesn't accept a Bitcoin zero-conf and which merchant doesn't accept Bitcoin that also accepts Dash? Take out one of the key differentiators from Dash and suddenly the reason to hold this coin just becomes that much less. Many others will feel the same way and sell with those heavy hearts for better options, including the other privacy coins like Litecoin and Monero! Had I not verified with my own eyes that the PO actually does own 20 masternodes, I would have assumed this was a psyops by a competing coin to gain market share. But I can confirm 100% that the PO does in fact own 20 masternodes and thus is invested in this project, however deeply misguided.
Reply
4 points,13 days ago
You can try to argue your point of view with governments who mercilessly push against all "privacy-enhanced" coins because of their tax-collecting efforts, or with CEXes who will delist us just because they want to stay in business and not being targeted themselves by governments.

Do you really believe that the governments are going to make an exception ruling for Charlie Lee and his Litecoin? LOL
Litecoin will not get away with it, either. But they could get hit with some delay, because until recently nobody considered Litecoin to enable any privacy, and many still don´t know this.
Any project which solicitates or facilitates or directly makes privacy more accessible, will eventually share the same fate being banned from all the CEXes around the world. Its only a matter of time. And not a lot of time.
Reply
4 points,13 days ago
They make exceptions for bitcoin with LN and Schnorr signatures.

But you know what, I give this to you, the EU may well de-list privacy coins and it will work just like the china ban on mining. The tide is too strong, they will learn the hard way.
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
The EU has a population of nearly 450 million people, that´s about 33% more than the U.S. has.
And those people, along with the U.S., Canada and Australia/Newzealand belong to the top 1 billion of people with the highest standard of living, highest net worth and income per capita.
Those are the people who have savings and are able to invest.
And the EU will not be the only area that will outlaw and ban all "privacy-enhanced" projects from CEXes.
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
I am familiar with the EU, thanks.

Acquiring crypto is not the biggest problem. Give people some crypto and the first thing they want to know is, what can they do with it and what are the benefits? That's why vouchers are so popular and why we need DashDirect to expand globally. You give people the incentives and they WILL find a way to obtain it.
Reply
-1 point,13 days ago
I forgot to mention Japan and South Korea among the people with the highest standard of living,
where we are outlawed and banned already!
Reply
2 points,12 days ago
Yet we still have some masternodes that are hosted in japan!

for example:

https://mnowatch.org/the_results_dashd_2022-11-18-00-52-16.uniqueHashVotes.94.html?2=107.191.61
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
Crowincuketi12 is our newest discovered individuality, and he/she comes from japan!

https://mnowatch.org/Types/Crowincuketi12.php
Reply
-1 point,12 days ago
You know well, that hosted doesn´t necessarily imply the collateral´s owner is a citizen or resident of that country. It could be the location of a datacenter the owner (or his VPS provider) is using.
Reply
1 point,10 days ago
Crowincuketi12 is a discovered individual (thanks to voting analysis) who operates a single masternode.

This masternode resides in Japan, so more likeley Crowincuketi12 is a japanese.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
Answer the questions, muppet!
Reply
-3 points,12 days ago
It is just your assumption that the reason for Litecoin´s price performing well was their privacy feature.
But you cannot know for sure, what or who caused Litecoin´s price to perform so well.
It is pure speculation. It could have performed better, because it was so many CMC rankings above us, in the TOP30.
Anyway, don´t believe for a second, that Litecoin will get away turning into a "privacy-enhanced" coin, and being able to remain listed on all the major CEXes. The dice have rolled already.
It is just that governments are slow when it comes to implementing and enforcing.
Reply
3 points,12 days ago
If I am speculating, then you surely are too. However, I am not speculating because as you said yourself, we've already faced a hostile environment to privacy coins and these coins are doing just fine, so there is a demand for such coins, it's already been proven. All Dash needs to do is double its efforts in this regard and strongly promote the privacy feature and deploy it to all official wallets - the exact opposite of what you call for!
Reply
-2 points,12 days ago
It will only be a matter of time until Dash (and all other "privacy-enhanced" coins as well) will get thrown off from the CEXes.
And it will cause our price to collapse and our market-cap to implode.
Other countries are much more hostile towards the "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies than the U.S. is, but even they will outlaw and ban those projects from U.S.-based CEXes, just a little bit later.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
Just want to up-vote you 10x. Those could of been my words. Well said.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
I am starting to wonder if we have another case of someone having split their masternodes over multiple Dash Central accounts, in order to influence the upvoting / downvoting of comments in Dash Central and the upvoting / downvoting of the governance proposal in the budget section in Dash Central ..... all in an effort to influence the discussions about this topic.

Someone does seem to put a lot of effort in keeping the governance proposal in the budget section in Dash Central out of a negative number (keeping it at 0).
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
''Where is Dash likely to be delisted next, because of PrivateSend/CoinJoin?

-European Union (all 27 countries, following a Czech lawmakers proposal which will be on vote soon and likely passing)''

I don't think the European Parlement will vote in favor of this circulating Czech draft, that got leaked for a reason (i suspect the reason is to raise public awareness to this circulating draft and organize public resistance against it). However in the unlikely situation both the European Parlement and the European Commission approve of this circulating draft, it could only affect the DASH/EUR gateways. Which are pretty limited to begin with :

DASH/EUR

Kraken : 99,68% of trading volume
Coinmate : 0,20% of trading volume
CEX.IO : 0,12% of trading volume
LiteBit.eu : 0,0% of trading volume

So just 4 exchanges where Dash risks getting delisted on in case the EU indeed decide to ban privacy enhanced coins (including Dash), and looking at the volume most of the trading takes place at just 1 exchange.

Now lets take a look at some other Dash trading pairs :

DASH/USDT

73 exchanges that allow European traders to switch their Dash to USDT

DASH/BTC

59 exchanges that allow European traders to switch their Dash to BTC

BTC/USDT

100 exchanges that allow European traders to switch their BTC to USDT

USDT/EUR

16 exchanges that allow European traders to switch their USDT to EURO

Kraken : 68,58% of trading volume
WhiteBit : 12,89% of trading volume
Coinbase Exchange : 7,22% of trading volume
Bitstamp : 4,6% of trading volume

As long as there are ways for European traders to exchange their dash to either BTC and then to USDT or exchange their Dash directly to USDT, European Dash traders can ultimately exchange to EUR.

This is why it is almost impossible to ban a specific cryptocoin, as there is so much interchangeability between cryptocoins, that governments can not influence directly.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
I voted no by the way, Dash is and always has been about offering options to users. And the optional use of having some privacy on people's public transactions is a basic human right in my opinion. I don't see a mass delisting of Dash on exchanges occurring at all.
Reply
-1 point,12 days ago
It's really very, very sad. To have ones like you, Apophis, among MNOs.
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
Apophis,
I think you made a mistake when posting your governance proposal.

As with any other governal proposal, THE PROPOSAL SHOULD LAST 24 MONTHS, so that whenever (and if) things change the electorate could immediatly change their mind without the need of posting another proposal asking the same thing.
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
Of course the proposal during all these 24 months should be immediatly applicable, but only in case it surpass the 10% net threshold.
Reply
0 points,12 days ago
Agreed.
But wouldn´t this have caused a payout greater than 1 Dash, for all the remaining months after (and if) ever it reached a passing status?
Because i would certainly be accused of wanting to earn a quick buck from it, if that were the case.
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
Look at https://mnowatch.org/proposal-generator/

The minimum payment amount is 0.1 Dash.

If you don't want to be accused, you could at least make your governance proposal last 10 months.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
I vote no.

Because:

1.) Proposal is based on assumptions, but the PO does not have a crystal ball.

2.) Governments care about KYC, and CEXes can implement that with Dash as easily as with Bitcoin.

3.) If the mixing feature was really an issue, then it would impact almost every coin, even Bitcoin.

4.) "Officially" or not "officially", that just won't matter at all for CEXes or governments.

5.) Without coinjoin in dashcore, I would fork it, and release a dashcore2 with coinjoin.

6.) Among the 200 nations, there will be always at least one, where a CEX will be possible.

7.) Politics is very far from predictable.

8.) IMHO you are paranoiac or a troll.

9.) As already mentioned, let's see first, what will happen with Monero.

10.) Many more reasons, but I'm too lazy to continue...
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
Will the 32 yes votes sell their dash if they don't get their way?

Will the 14 no votes sell their dash if Dash gets perverted?

I am trying to wrap my mind around how people can own so much dash and not understand its value proposition. The CBDC are coming! Dash needs to remain viable. Otherwise what options do people have for financial sovereignty. Disgusted.
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
I am disgusted myself, that the governments will soon force all "privacy-enhanced" coins off from most all CEXes around the world.
Because this leaves us with having to decide between remaining listed on the CEXes or keeping PrivateSend/CoinJoin the way we have it implemented now. Unfortunately, we will be unable to keep both things.
If any of you MNOs really believe we can keep both things like we did until now, you are just fooling yourselves!
To the extent we want to keep some kind of PrivateSend/CoinJoin, we need to completely detach it from our Official Wallets, in order to divert responsibility away from DCG so that Dash cannot be held directly accountable for it and no responsibility for it can be attributed directly to Dash any longer.
As i predicted, many MNOs still live in complete denial and are totally underestimating the imminent risk of losing all the big and important CEXes, probably within the coming one or two years, but i cannot look in the future to know the exact timing, but its coming.
Reply
2 points,7 days ago
The FTX scandal has shown us that the exchanges don't hold Dash and Bitcoin Cash, but just short us. Fuck em all.
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
Exactly. I looked for Dash on Binance's page and didn't see it. But they do have 100,000 BCH. So its even worse than you say. The monero community worked diligently to get us blackballed from the rest of the industry out of hatred and spite even though if exchanges used Dash, they could make more money (instant transaction, low fee trades).

That's how powerful propaganda is. The most important cryptocurrency exchange doesn't care about the best and most important cryptocurrency. These are the kind of obtuse ironies that the monero community wishes to force on our narrative. "LOL Dash isn't a privacy coin any more because they voted it away. Told you it wasn't private!" (???)

Its this kind of juvenile and banal *evil* that I've been fighting against consistently since 2017. Things are DEFINITELY BETTER than they were when I started. Monero had full control over the narrative. Anything they said about us was upvoted and repeated as gospel despite being false. Now, they have no power. They can barely rely on the old fud while defending themselves from accusations of having an infinite supply, shitty privacy, and slow transactions.

However, there *was* the effect that the market basically doesn't have anything to do with us as a result of their fudding and lies. Thus doing both us and THE REST OF THE CRYPTOCURRENCY COMMUNITIES a disservice, by mentally forcing them to use shittier, slower, less private and less well-developed offerings. It truly is a travesty.
Reply
6 points,13 days ago
And how do you explain the fact that, despite the war agains all privacy coins, MONERO coin remains number 27 in coingecko( while dash fell to number 89) ?

Maybe it is wise to wait and observe whether MONERO will be finally destroyed by the governments.

If MONERO will be destroyed, Dash community may then consider removing coinjoin feature.

But If MONERO survives while being in the front line of the war against privacy coins, then Dash may also survive in this war.
Reply
-1 point,13 days ago
This extinction or blackswan moment has not occurred yet.
What we have seen so far is >nothing< in contrast to what is coming our way.
At the time when Monero and Zcash will both get killed at the same time (=under $200M market-cap),
we will share their fate, if by then we are still considered to be a "privacy-enhanced" project just like they are.
But there will be a difference, we would end-up much worse than them, because of
1) Our significantly smaller pre-impact market-cap
2) Because there is little to no demand for Dash on DEXes from the privacy/darknet/deepweb crowd these days
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
>1) Our significantly smaller pre-impact market-cap

Marketcap isn't a real metric, its fake. You can't make comparisons based on it.

2) Because there is little to no demand for Dash on DEXes from the privacy/darknet/deepweb crowd these days

Do you really think these are the only people who need financial privacy? And that is therefore a justification for preemptively nerfing ourselves before our competition? Where is your spine?
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
"There is little to no demand for Dash on DEXes from the privacy/darknet/deepweb crowd these days."

How do we know that?
Do we have statistics and evidences on this, or is it just a guess?
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
An educated estimate, i would say.
There is a reason, why most other "privacy-enhanced" projects have larger market-caps than we have
-> higher demand in the marketplaces for their coins.
Reply
5 points,13 days ago
Is it fair to summarize your position as the following: Governments of the world do not like permissionless and trustless cryptocurrency therefore Dash should become less permissionless and trustless?

Will you be selling your 20 Masternodes at this price if you the vote goes no?

Do you think people will be selling their dash if this proposal is voted for in the affirmative?
Reply
-1 point,13 days ago
I understand what you are saying. And i wish i could see another way for Dash to survive what is coming.
The truth, that you will not like, is, that most all cryptocurrency projects are vastly dependent on CEXes today for their very survival.
This means, we are subject (and potential victims) to their every whim and to their arbitrary and tyrannical decisions.
But CEXes are themselves (tax) slaves to the government in most of the cases. Especially the big Exchanges.
Because they will do everything not to end-up on national DNS blocklists, which would mean that ordinary folks will no longer be able to reach and open their Exchange website. This is how the government will blackmail all the CEXes into full compliance.

As for selling: Honestly i don´t know yet.
Selling would surely be the right thing to do after this Governance proposal fails, as long as the price is so high above $30.
After the mass delistings come to pass, our price will surely struggle for $10 and likely not able to hold that level, after all the large CEXes backstab us, because they just don´t care. For them, it´s just a rational business decision.
You know, to stay in good relation with the government of whatever jurisdiction they are headquartered in.
And after all, they will say they have no choice, than to fully comply with whatever the government demands.
To them, it will not be their fault. They will just shrug their shoulders and say government demands it.
Letting all this happen to Dash will not help us in any way.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
as far as I can tell, you are proposing the death of Dash. Dash is unique in that it is one of the very few cryptocurrencies that are designed to protect the individual. You get rid of that and why should anyone care about dash? You aim to please a centralized exchange (literally, an out-dated business model) at the expense of what makes dash interesting and relevant. You will surely alienate the majority of Dash supporters and kill the project.

If you plan to sell, do so now and help crash the price so those that understand why dash is important can get a nice black friday deal.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
Here here. Can't believe I'm agreeing with you. Strange times.
Reply
-1 point,13 days ago
No, i am trying to prevent the death of Dash by understanding the compelling circumstances that practically force us to decide between either economic suicide or the necessary evil of ditching PrivateSend/CoinJoin, at least officially.
You are equaling the removal of PrivateSend/CoinJoin with the death of Dash.
As things stand, PrivateSend/CoinJoin will very likely be the cause and reason of the coming death of Dash,
because it will get us delisted from all the big and important CEXes that right now, barely keep Dash alive.
Just barely...
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
PrivateSend is a fundamental principle of Dash. Dash started to facilitate user privacy in cryptocurrencies. So yes, it would be the functional death of Dash. Can you respond to the claim that your OP and other posts are FUD?
Reply
-2 points,13 days ago
What can i say?
A fundamental principle that will result in the killing of our project by government?
Technology is evolving, and times are changing. So are laws changing.
PrivateSend/CoinJoin has had its time, but perhaps that time is different from the future awaiting us.
Perhaps it can coexist inofficially to some degree without the government killing our project with mass delistings.
Maybe its time will come again, someday, but that time is clearly not now.
Dash doesn´t write the laws. Our project is not the main shareholder of all the most important CEXes.
I am not the one who has ordered the future delisting of all "privacy-enhanced" cryptocurrencies.

Honestly, what do you think will happen to Dash price and our market-cap, once all the big and important CEXes are going to delist us?
You do understand the consequences and repercussions if we decide to officially keep PrivateSend/CoinJoin?
Reply
1 point,13 days ago
>A fundamental principle that will result in the killing of our project by government?

That's a supposition by you that hasn't been proven.

>PrivateSend/CoinJoin has had its time, but perhaps that time is different from the future awaiting us.

That's not for you to decide based on your own suppositions. The MNOs are not supposed to vote on WHERE the budget goes, not on protocol changing proposals like this.

>Perhaps it can coexist inofficially to some degree without the government killing our project with mass delistings.

You're assuming that is the case. Monero is on fewer exchanges than Dash is and nobody is concern trolling them about privacy like you are here, which heavily indicates you're trolling.

>Dash doesn´t write the laws.

Dash is a supranational currency, it doesn't need to write laws. Still we pay DCG to have legal responses to this, you are trying to basically railroad the network with a destructive proposal likely designed to promote monero and other privacy coins that can't compete with Dash.

>Our project is not the main shareholder of all the most important CEXes.

You're very focused on CEXs. Dash was not created to placate these centralized institutions.

>Honestly, what do you think will happen to Dash price and our market-cap, once all the big and important CEXes are going to delist us?

It doesn't matter. Dash's price and marketcap are both being manipulated down by the monero community and have been for YEARS now. Dash used to be $1600 and the monero community has been manipulating our price down from there ever since. So what you're afraid of has already happened, which basically means you're gaslighting us.

>You do understand the consequences and repercussions if we decide to officially keep PrivateSend/CoinJoin?

Dash is a cryptocurrency that supports privacy for its users. You are trying to destroy our purpose and prevent us from servicing our users. That makes you an enemy of Dash. Where is your MNO badge btw?
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
No, i am not trying to destroy "our purpose", the governments of the world have decided to outlaw and ban all "crypto-enhanced" projects from CEXes.

You mean the MNO badge which everybody keeps, who has barely owned 1,000 Dash for maybe a week or two and 6 or 7 years ago? What does this MNO badge prove? Nothing.
I already revealed myself being a small, poor MNO with few MNs, but who wants Dash to remain listed on all the CEXes, even if we have to sacrifice something that will guarantee our survival. I wish we hadn´t to, but seriously what´s the alternative?
Reply
0 points,9 days ago
>No, i am not trying to destroy "our purpose", the governments of the world have decided to outlaw and ban all "crypto-enhanced" projects from CEXes.


Speculation. There are other privacy coins existant on CEXes. And cryptocurrencies were not created to get on exchanges, exchanges were created to facilitate cryptocurrency so you're making a fallacious argument by reversing this chain of causality.

>You mean the MNO badge which everybody keeps, who has barely owned 1,000 Dash for maybe a week or two and 6 or 7 years ago? What does this MNO badge prove? Nothing.

Not true, it proves that you at least once had a MN. Pretending like old-timers keeping their badge means you should be able to cavort without yours is a fallacious argument.

>but who wants Dash to remain listed on all the CEXes, even if we have to sacrifice something that will guarantee our survival. I wish we hadn´t to, but seriously what´s the alternative?

This is just your opinion. And anyway its inappropriate. The purpose of the treasury vote is to vote on where the 10% budget goes. It was not intended for what you're trying to use it for (dismantling Dash features without proper cause). Dash doesn't exist to cater to "regulators" and "CEXes" so the premise of your post is false to begin with. Getting people to believe in a false cause is a form of gaslighting and an attack.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
>I understand what you are saying. And i wish i could see another way for Dash to survive what is coming.

Why are you the authority on what's going to happen? Why should we believe that your position, which many would consider fud, is the only outcome?

Dash isn't dependent on exchanges at all. If you're really a longterm MNO, why don't you know this? Our treasury pays out all around the world every month. What's more there is no proof that we're going be globally blacklisted and thus should sheepishly destroy our user privacy.
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
Because this process of persecution of all "privacy-enhanced" coins has already started (in some countries) and in other countries the legislation is already in preparation. Research it. I gave you plenty of examples, i tried to warn you.
Call it FUD all the long you want, it won´t help our project to survive whats coming our way.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
>Because this process of persecution of all "privacy-enhanced" coins has already started (in some countries) and in other countries the legislation is already in preparation.

This is irrelevant. All you're saying is that a fight is starting and you want us to run away. Real men don't think or act like that. Real men protect what they care about. That's how I know you don't care about Dash. Its not "our" project because you're likely paid to destroy us.
Reply
1 point,13 days ago
All "privacy-enhanced" projects will share the same fate of losing all the CEXes around the world in the foreseeable future.
Perhaps some of those projects will be able to stay barely alive being listed only on DEXes, who knows?
But all "privacy-enhanced" projects will get decimated (if not devastated) in terms of price and market-cap.
Reply
0 points,9 days ago
>All "privacy-enhanced" projects will share the same fate of losing all the CEXes around the world in the foreseeable future.

It hasn't happened yet which means you're basically telling us we have to take your word for it and trust your prognistications of the future. For what? So you can "feel safer" knowing that Dash doesn't have privacy features anymore?

Its incredible watching you guys come up with novel ways to try and paint detrimental behavior as "pro-Dash". Price is irrelevant and manipulated which means that it doesn't matter what we do to our privacy. This is not a fight you can win by giving up (if there is even such a thing).
Reply
-1 point,13 days ago
We must have been stupid fools to list Dash on so many Exchanges, if we don´t even depend on them.
Tell that Ernesto Contreras and listen well what he will respond to that nonsense.
I get that you don´t care that we will soon get delisted from all major CEXes if not ditching PrivateSend/CoinJoin at least officially.
Of course will our treasury keep paying out Dash .. but maybe Dash worth a few dollars only.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
>We must have been stupid fools to list Dash on so many Exchanges, if we don´t even depend on them.

It was expedient at the time, but Dash has grown by leaps and bounds since then.

>Tell that Ernesto Contreras and listen well what he will respond to that nonsense.

You call it nonsense but nothing you say is sourced or even more than baseless speculations. So you are the pot calling the kettle black.

>I get that you don´t care that we will soon get delisted from all major CEXes if not ditching PrivateSend/CoinJoin at least officially.

There's no point in being listed on exchanges if you have to give up what makes you fundamentally "you". You are basically advocating that we sell our users out, change our social contract and say "F you" to previous investors. No.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
"Because they will do everything not to end-up on national DNS blocklists, which would mean that ordinary folks will no longer be able to reach and open their Exchange website."

First of all, privacy crowd are not ordinary folks.

Governments may succed to block DNS, but can they block IP addresses too? And even if they can block IPs, can they block TOR? For example, can any government block mnowatchr2h5d5nekj2ogfzigxpgyi75hx2o7xjon4twpwhbsylgefid.onion ?

DEXis that rely on TOR, may always be accessed by privacy crowd.

Furthermore, imagine Dash Platform being used as an irrefutable and uncensorable search engine.
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/should-platform-run-on-all-nodes-or-should-platform-run-only-on-high-performance-nodes.53374/page-19#post-232804

In case a ruthless war starts against all the privacy coins, Dash may get benefit from it by providing an irrefutable and uncensorable search engine service that could be used by the privacy crowd in order to spot all the DEXis that are DNS and IP banned by the governmnents.
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
No, government tech cannot block every paranoid prodigy hacker from connecting or doing a tx.
But this rare species will not keep Dash as a project financially healthy and alive.
Nor do the big Exchanges live solely on the commissions they earn from the 2% of users able to bypass a DNS blocklist.
Do you really believe any of the big CEXes will exhaustively debate a delisting with DCG?
They know full well, if they get DNS blocked by government, then 98% of ordinary folks cannot reach their business website anymore. That would be game over for them.
And this is why governments have CEXes at their very balls.
Unfortunately CEXes have cryptocurrency projects on their balls as well, if they want to maintain a healthy price level.

Of course we could retain PrivateSend/CoinJoin, we will just bankrupt our project and ourselves doing so.
We will see how MNOs will vote. Hopefully they will think it through well, before hitting vote.
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
Ordinary folks? Οrdinary folks will become mud and worms in the near future. Who cares about mud and worms? If nobody cares, and if their own very goverment certainly does not care, why should we care about them?
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
I know that you are highly invested in Dash, while I am not, and I respect your money investment. . But I have invested in Dash something that you did not invested (or at least not as much as I did). Time. And time is the most precious thing we have in this short life. I dont want my time to become a waste of time, and dont want to return to the goverments' worm hole.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
Voting absolutely no. Further comments to follow.

> So far i have remained always in the background, because i value and appreciate privacy (whenever it is possible or isn´t suicidal). But now i can no longer wait and be silent, and watch the direction our project is taking, because right now we are heading on a trajectory to our guaranteed demise.

I don't believe this is true, at least not at first glance. I may change my opinion as I read, but to me, anyone who truly cares about privacy would never support this.

> in an ideal world financial privacy should be deployed by-default and not just as an optional feature.

This is incorrect and is based on lies from the monero community (which doesn't bode well for my assessment of your motivations honestly). In fact, Dash's privacy is far superior to monero's by-default offering because Dash's privacy is vastly more efficient. In Dash you can mix 1000 Dash in a single session and that Dash is mixed for life. In monero, to privatize the equivalent amount of monero you would need as many transactions as you would make from that balance, fees and all. The size of the anonymity set is what determines truly effective privacy. Monero's by-default anonymity set is only 16 while Dash's is over 40 million IIRC at 16 rounds. Dash's optional privacy is clearly superior here.

>would expand the overall money supply by 4%, 5%, 6% or 7% each and every year,

This is a pro-inflationary stance (something the monero community is also famous for supporting). In Dash, we've agreed on a non-inflationary monetary model. How can you be a "years-long MNO" and not appreciate or agree with this?

>is a world where most all the governments are working ruthlessly to perfect financial surveillance
for the final scope of financial slavery.

All the more reason to KEEP privateSend, not get rid of it. Your words are at cross-purposes with your agenda here, not a good sign (doublespeak is often used by conmen and other sleight-of-hand artists/tricksters).

>things will dramatically turn against us and it will be a dead-end, with a slow and protracted dying, a sinking into meaninglessness and irrelevance, with an ever-shrinking market-cap (and price),

This sounds like FUD. What's the worst that could happen? Exchange delistings? That's a cowardly way to live. We should be as strong as possible in support of privacy, not cowering and hiding.

>all fueled mainly by mass delistings on the biggest exchanges.

That's what I thought. Dash doesn't need exchange listings in non-privacy friendly regions. This is a fight that I believe that we should be willing to fight to the end, not surrender to before it even begins.

>I am sure, many if not most MNOs won´t believe this, or they might think all i say is exaggerated. It´s not exaggerated at all, and it´s coming, and fast.

Again, this sounds like FUD. Its most likely that Dash would survive by the fact that its not truly a privacy coin. Coinjoin can be done on BTC. You're just going to make us less competitive with our peers and give the monero community, which spreads lies about Dash online using FUD like this, more ammunition against us.

>-Japan
-Korea(South Korea)
-Huobi Global

Being delisted on three exchanges in two countries and one global exchange is not sufficient reason to remove PrivateSend. Exchanges are not cryptocurrencies nor are they relevant to our decision making. We shouldn't seek to curry their favor at our own expense. PrivateSend should stay.

>-European Union (all 27 countries, following a Czech lawmakers proposal which will be on vote soon and likely passing)
-Switzerland and the principality of Liechtenstein (as they tend to mimic EU legislation, not to finish on any black lists)
-Singapur (their government is much like that of Switzerland)
-India likely to follow as well

Exchange delistings are unfortunate. But they're not the end of the world. Dash is trying to grow adoption while providing a certain featureset. Dash is the best offering of coinjoin in the space. No other privacy solution is as decentralized, permissionless, able to avoid capture and resilient, nor nearly as liquid as Dash. BCH has issues with CashFusion liquidity and centralization of the servers that do the mixing. Not a problem in Dash. You're basically advocating for us to LOSE features, which means we LOSE customers. Nobody who cared about Dash would want that imo.

>deceived by this insignificant victory, because it won´t always happen that way!

You really are putting a negative spin on this. Even a victory is somehow 'evidence' that your position is correct. That is logically fallacious

>at least not as long the main trading volume is on CEXes, and as long Dash cannot survive on its own without being traded against FIAT.

These are two assumptions that you have not proven nor provided a shred of evidence for. Certainly global delisting would be painful, but cryptocurrencies are inherently designed to survive that scenario. Indeed they started out that way in the beginning. Beware of arguments that take unproven assertions as fact! This is a common tactic of conmen (because if you believe an unproven argument then you're at fault for not being thorough).

>So what must we, being such a "privacy-enhanced" project expect from the worlds governments? In a word: the worst !

You shouldn't be afraid of taxes. If you pay taxes on the fiat money you earn and buy Dash, you don't need to pay taxes again unless you sell for a profit. Dash is rapidly approaching the point of having its own bespoke ecosystem outside of governmental strictures (get paid, spend and replace all in Dash). This is already happening in LATAM and will soon spread tothe rest of the world.

>It should be clear, that they definitely want to completely outlaw and ban all those cryptocurrencies which they deem to be "privacy-enhanced".

If they're going to do it let them. We should not attempt to do their job for them however and just give up. You're basically advocating that we roll over without a fight. Not the stance of someone who loves privacy as you advocated you do above (Speaking out of both sides of your mouth is a tactic conmen use to get you to fall for the opposite of what they claimed at the beginning, again making it your fault for not paying attention to the discrepancy).

>Our project will likely not survive this impending attack from the worlds governments, if we don´t act now.

Completely disagreed. This assertion is completely unsubstantiated and large changes to the protocol like this should never be undertaken without significant (months) discussion and back and forth with the community. The MNOs are not meant to vote on "protocol-breaking proposals". The MNOs were never meant to micromanage the protocol to add/remove features. In extraordinary circumstances this may be justified, but this is not such a circumstance. Breaking the network by using our voting mechanism against us is disingenuous, dirty fighting typical of the monero community, which hates Dash for unknown reasons. The MNOs are supposed to vote on where the 10% treasury budget goes, not on changing the protocol like this. So you're actually abusing the system by making this proposal imo.

>Make no mistake, the governments of the world have already decided to go this route.

Dash is independent of govts. You talk about govts a lot but you never seem to mention the most important part, the Dash community. What about what we want? We want privacy. Coinjoin works GREAT and we should keep it.

>Dash price may never see $100 again, let alone anything beyond that.

That's fine. The price of cryptocurrencies but especially Dash are being artificially manipulated precisely to give guys like you a reason to post fud like this so they can use social manipulation to attack cryptocurrencies that don't fit their interests. Obviously we can't give into that kind of blackmail "Hey, get rid of your features and we might give you some relief on the price." If you have to do that to get price relief then your price isn't real anyway. Better to stand strong against the manipulation until it stops (look at FTX for an example when these kinds of things blow up).

>Outsource and externalize all eventual remaining PrivateSend/CoinJoin functionality to an outside party or brand, which is officially unaffiliated with DCG,

The best part about CoinJoin is that its quick and easy in the core wallet to use. You seem like you're trying to make it so that coinjoin lives on in name only in Dash and is basically impossible to use. Not something that a "longtime MNO" would do if they were intellectually honest.

> the existence of such counterpartyrisk-less mixing technology, by officially denying our blessing.

Trying to win by decieving the govts of the world and relying on the stupidity of their investigators is a foolish and wasteful move. Not to mention low change of success. The best path forward is to pay DCG to continue lobbying for Dash as not an actual privacy coin, as similar to BTC in coinjoin function and put up a strong legal defense in all applicable jurisdictions. You really are speaking in a forked-tongued manner. First you advocate preemptive compliance with governments and regulatory bodies, but they you suggest basically lying to them and low-effect strategies like someone who lacks the maturity to recognize the legal framework they're operating in. This doesn't sound like someone who cares for the network and privacy.

>The passing of this proposal would allow the Dash project to at least stay alive, during the times of harshest persecution of "privacy-enhanced" coins.

Dash is on more exchanges than most cryptocurrencies are, and only delisted from 3 rather low volume ones. Dash is on way more exchanges than monero is, for example. This is literally Fud.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
>The answer is clearly: No. Not at all.

Again you ask a question and give a self-serving answer without any evidence. You haven't even asked the community how we feel about it. You're just going to try and strong arm everyone into dramatically changing the network based on Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt THAT YOU YOURSELF ARE CREATING. I mean, you look like a troll to me or someone from another community virtue signalling as a MNO but in reality trying to slowly whittle away at Dash's advantages over other cryptocurrencies.

>There are hardly any people involved in Dash only because of PrivateSend/CoinJoin, or who make their involvement dependent upon PrivateSend/CoinJoin.

How do you know this? Where is your proof? You can't say "low private send transactions" because as I showed before, you could mix a shitton of Dash and never spend it all, thus never needing to mix more than once.

>Nowadays, folks who are extremely focused on privacy are using mainly Monero, Zcash, PirateChain, Grin etc. anyway.

Nah, fud. I've seen at least twice in just the last week people referencing coinjoin as superior to Monero, Zcash and other "privacy coins". Dash has the best coinjoin, which means that Dash has the best privacy. Your proposal would alienate those users in our network.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
ZCash has an Israeli team and they even had a tranny, last I checked. I'm willing to give Monero the benefit of doubt, but zcash.. lol.
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
I'm not. ZCash is better than monero (much larger anonymity set at over 4 billion) while monero's is only 16. Monero also has tons of active research about breaches, breaks, statistical attacks. I used to post a whole list of 7 different ways monero is broken.

They used to even cover it themselves (so they can cover their asses and say, "Well we told you about the privacy bugs in the 'Breaking Monero' series so its your fault you got deanon'ed". Bottom line, coinjoin works and nobody else is being forced to virtue signal into destroying their privacy.

They're doing all they can to increase it. CashFusion, another new project on BCH to get traditional coinjoin back (because CashFusion has liquidity and single-server issues that make it suck to use). Imagine in 2022 still trying to get coinjoin right because you refuse to admit that Dash did it best. That's what all this is about. Validating the egos of those who refuse to admit that they lost. At least flenst had the balls to delete his account...
Reply
2 points,13 days ago
Haha, the day I am actually upvoting you! :-D

I will respond to this proposal later.
Reply
0 points,13 days ago
Ironically as we deal with a proposal partially made possible by your support for lowering the proposal fee. I think its the least you could do.
Reply
1 point,12 days ago
the proposal owner seems to have 20 MN you think 1 dash proposal fee factors in? Please.
Reply
0 points,9 days ago
Or maybe they're a group of individuals who bought masternodes to mess with our treasury and the 1 Dash proposal fee makes it cheaper and easier for them to game the system? You can't really be so naive to not even consider this possibility, right? I remember now why I don't like you.
Reply
0 points,7 days ago
Bro, think about what you are saying. A group of people have 20000 dash but they wouldn't be able to support a 5 dash proposal fee? Make that make sense.
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
A 5 Dash proposal fee was over $1000 not to long ago. Having 20,000 DASH doesn't mean anything. For it to be a masternode that has to be locked in a wallet which makes it an illiquid asset.

These teams are not given unlimited funds, they're given a budget and they have to work with what they've got or request more (which is not always likely to happen). So its VERY POSSIBLE that someone with that much Dash would want to lower the fee. Especially if they're not the team that would be making the fud-proposals.

The consistent refusal to even ENTERTAIN the idea that our enemies are plotting to attack us and use our network's beneficial features against us, especially after the years of evidence of them doing exactly that, is both perplexing to me and indicative of bad acting. Thank you for validating for me my general negativity towards you in the past up until this point.
Reply
1 point,13 days ago
ONE proposal? That's a strange definition of being flooded. And in any case, we just keep voting No. Let them burn dash with pointless proposals.
Reply
0 points,9 days ago
Where did I use the word "flooded"? We shouldn't have to vote on things like this AT ALL. The purpose of the treasury is not to be a sword of damocles hanging over the Dash network waiting on the right monthly propaganda from spineless liars before it falls and destroys us. The treasury is supposed to vote on where the budget goes and if there's a need consensus changes WITHOUT breaking the protocol. Lowering the barrier to entry for this behavior cannot be called anything other than stupid. CMM
Reply
0 points,9 days ago
Do you not suspect this proposal would of been put forward anyway, regardless of price?
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
Its irrelevant. We shouldn't care about that. We should only make the network as strong as possible and hard as possible to attack. Flooding the network with proposals is AN ATTACK WE'VE ALREADY SEEN BEFORE. They've done before several times already. Making that easier to do is clearly not in our best interest.

Deliberately tiptoeing the network into getting used to making irrational, bad decisions is a valid form of attack as well, even if the "immediate consequences" don't scream "End of the world". Basically, if its not broke don't fix it. Forcing through a "fix" like that is likely the work of a bad actor.
Reply
0 points,2 days ago
You do know dash is rank 79 and worth just 41 USD? All these _years_ of 5 dash proposals lead to this. You've had your time to prove that 5 dash proposals were fit for purpose and the facts are telling you it didn't work.

Should we count the numerous failed proposals that are no longer around. all of them went through at a price of 5 dash? The fact is, you are on here using Dash Central because Dash Nexus also failed, despite it being more user friendly.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
obviously. The idea that we would be attacked by powerful people who couldn't pay the proposal fee is totally confusing
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
Its only confusing if you don't know how these guys operate. They'll not want to risk wasting any money at all. The price also hasn't been this low in a while, but we've already seen propaganda about "the proposal fee being too high". There was a huge inorganic push to lower it with no need for such a change.
Reply
-2 points,13 days ago
Nowadays, folks who are extremely focused on privacy are using mainly Monero, Zcash, PirateChain, Grin etc. anyway.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
I saw that this was a typo/quote, I just want to address that Dash has a simpler solution for privacy than Monero. If both are equally good then that is to Dash's benefit.

1. If the Monero cryptographic is ever broken they are all screwed, it could be broken without them even knowing it right now. Dash has no such problem.
2. Dash has light clients like Electrum, Monero has scaling issues and you need to have the whole chain OR use some app/online wallet - This is ultimately MUCH less private and safe than Dash is.
3. Is Monero even limited in its amount of coins.. how would you even know if there was a bug or exploit in this regard? Again Dash has no such problems.

I'm a very privacy interested person and I use Dash. If my identity was revealed I would be in big trouble for tax evasion, thought crimes and participating in "extremist" right wing movements.
Reply
0 points,3 days ago
You are correct, and good news, both are NOT equally as good. Dash is MILES SUPERIOR! All of your numbered-points are correct. What's more:

1. Dash gives you a MUCH CHEAPER anonymity set for your transaction fee. Monero only hides you with a total of 16 other participants PER transaction. A 16 round mix in Dash gives you an anonymity set of 40,000,000. All for about the same cost (in terms of size and fee) as the much less efficient monero privacy solution

2. Not only that but Dash is actually USEFUL as a currency so you can mix and spend directly. Which allows you to have a ONE STOP SHOP for all your trading, spending, investing and privacy. I don't trade cryptocurrencies unless it comes from mixed Dash. Its just good hygiene. You can actually use Dash to mix and then purchase food, etc. You cannot do this with monero as its not adopted anywhere, leaving you with basically a digital paperweight

3. As you say in #3, Monero doesn't have a limited supply. So you can't use it as a transactional coin which is the only way monero can retain its value. Since it has infinite inflation, its only long term value is getting in, getting privacy and using it/getting out as fast as possible. But this isn't possible since its not adopted forcing monero-morons to hodl and shill it online...while it's continuously losing value...

Dash is good for privacy because it works, its cheap and you don't have to do a lot of moving around to different coins to get your cryptofix (i.e. fast, private payments on-demand 24/7/365 when you need to). Imagine dealing with the monero wallet-synicing issue, or 20 minute lockout in between tranasctions. Monero is just a terrible, terrible crypto. I can see why it was popular in the past, but it really has aged terribly. Thank you for your post.
Reply
1 point,7 days ago
#3 is the most significant issue with it. People like to make it seem like dash is at a disadvantage of having a public blockchain, but I would not be comfortable storing any sizable amount of wealth on an opaque blockchain. You have almost no way to verify what is going on.
Reply
3 points,13 days ago
Typo, this post was the result of a failed quotation, not a statement from me.
Reply