Proposal “DarkcointvDeactivate“ (Closed)Back

One-time payment: 1 DASH (24 USD)
Completed payments: no payments occurred yet (1 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2016-07-06 / 2016-08-20 (added on 2016-06-11)
Final voting deadline: in passed
Votes: 504 Yes / 361 No / 0 Abstain
External information:

Proposal description

Dearest masternodes.You are called upon once again to wield your swords of collateral to settle a network matter. Thank you, in advance, for your time and attention.

This vote is simple and asks for no payout (well, technically it asks for 1 Dash because my wallet would not accept a command for 0 or 0.01).

The matter to be decided is whether Dash's former YouTube channel –, a replica of – ought to be de-activated.

(Here let us define that deactivation means a channel is no longer visible on YouTube – its videos will not show up in searches, nor will they be playable/embeddable to anyone but the owner, who can still view them and see their license settings when he's logged in to his account.)

Network employee tungfa created because the original (DarkcoinTV) had copyright violations against it, and he believed it was in jeopardy. This strategy, though noble in its intent, is unfortunately foolish from any kind of marketing perspective, because it:

A) Causes confusion for new visitors who might be searching for us
B) Splits view counts (making less for each)
C) Splits subscribership (making less for each)

These three things make us look bad. Like we're not the $51 million+ network that we are. A market cap of our size is certainly capable of maintaining a professional-looking presence on YouTube.

If you vote YES, you express a desire to de-active,enabling us to move forward with copyright strike-free replica and give ourselves the best shot at making a good impression on potential customers

If you vote NO, you express a desire to leave visible and searchable, knowing that at any point in the future, potential Dash customers may land upon it and wonder what the hell they're looking at – maybe they should try Ethereum, instead? They have just one channel, and it's not confusing.

'Yes' MANUALLY from wallet:
(dash-cli mnbudget vote-many 84dbe4421006991021dbba27a548e391e747027f17e4770e760e54a96ecc3f3c yes)

'No' MANUALLY from wallet:
(dash-cli mnbudget vote-many 84dbe4421006991021dbba27a548e391e747027f17e4770e760e54a96ecc3f3c no)
Thank you.

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
0 points,8 years ago
so just to be clear... Tungfa, you are cool with this and yes is the vote, correct.
2 points,8 years ago
An Update About Youtube

We'd like to update the community about our youtube account issues. We've found it was caused by a communication issue between various parties within the core-team and outside the core team. To fix communication issues in the future such as this one, we will be adding a best practice to disagreements between community members.

Here are the correct steps to follow when seeking an agreement between parties:

1.) The parties in question should seek each other out directly and attempt to find common ground and resolve the issue.
2.) If no solution can be found to the issue, an arbitration request should be opened internally to allow the issue to be talked with those from the core-team.
3.) If 1 and 2 fail, the issue should be raised to the masternode network as a governance proposal. After the vote, parties should communicate directly, until the issue is resolved.

In the case of the youtube channel, we have come to an agreement that meets the needs of everyone:

- Move youtube subscribers from the old channel to the new channel over the next few months
- Place a banner at the top of the youtube channel showing this is not the official DASH youtube
- Place a video as the primary video that tells users this channel is shutting down
- Finally retire the channel Jan 1st, 2017

Here's a marked up image of the expected results:
2 points,8 years ago
Perfect and all sorted , all yes ; )
1 point,8 years ago
How mature....I love this network more every day!
1 point,8 years ago
Sounds like a good compromis, we get a confirmed and official retirement date for the YouTube Darkcointv channel
and some time for tungfa to move things over. Meanwhile Amanda can fully focus on her YouTube channel "Dash : Detailed".
1 point,8 years ago
So if we take no action, does that mean that the YouTube channel will eventually be taken down anyway due to copyright violations? Or has the violating video already been removed?

Also, I feel it doesn't matter really what the channel name is called as long as the content is current and promoting the Dash brand. Removing the channel doesn't gain anything and only cause a bunch of broken links. I will be voting to leave the channel up. My thinking is most people search for the Dash name in titles and not the channel name.
0 points,8 years ago
you can find that channel via
same same !
so the link does not matter as the channel itself does not show any Darkcoin links or naming at all.
1 point,8 years ago
I've read a good argument here that have not been addressed to with a solution that is: the Darkcoin TV channel has a lot of videos linked all over the internet on guides, etc. that can't all be relinked. I think it would be best to leave the old channel open while working on the new channel. For now my vote is no.
-2 points,8 years ago
While I understand your point, that logic would mean we never move forward. I bet there are a lot of sites that still reference, but that doesn't mean they think "How to Smell Like a Lumbersexual" is relevant. They hit Google and find This is the dynamic nature of the web, and it is far more important we keep moving forward.
2 points,8 years ago
I don't see your point, why keeping the old channel prevents us from moving forward? keep working only in the new channel while keeping all the links. Think about the video on DarkcoinTV Dash: "What is Dash? = P15E10", it gets 600 views everyday. Make clear there that we moved to a new channel and people will redirect to that.
8 points,8 years ago
This is a cross post from Dash Forum in response to a community member's opinion that budget proposals are purely for funding.

Strictly speaking, you are correct that the "mnbudget" commands are just that... they are for budgets. That said, we have used the budgeting system on at least a couple of occasions to resolve non-budget decisions, which has proven valuable. But these should be reserved for really strategic, large decisions, in my opinion... not execution level tasks. The most recent example was the block size increase proposal. We also have used it to agree on reallocating the Public Awareness budget to fiat gateways development (but this was still a budget-related decision).

I do think that the mnbudget provides a valuable tool to the core team to obtain input from the community, but that does not absolve a core team member from their responsibility to make hard decisions that might be right, but ultimately unpopular. At the end of the day, this is a democracy, but it's actually more like shareholders than voters. Also, it is more like a representative democracy than a direct one.
Democracy = 1 vote per person
Shareholders = 1 vote per Masternode
Direct democracy = Voters pass laws directly
Representative democracy = Voters elect representatives which work to pass laws

I also believe that the technology itself will enable our shareholders to move down the spectrum from purely representative democracy to some yet-undefined mix of direct vs. representative (which I think we will figure out in time, based on what works). In a traditional corporation, board elections are only once a year and that's pretty much the input you get. However, we can collect input at any point in the year, vote out the core team at any point, get more granular on controlling the strategy and/or budget, etc. It is the technology itself that enables this to happen. But at the end of the day, the core team remains as "representatives" in the sense that many decisions are made by the core team on behalf of the network every day. People will be handed responsibility to execute certain roles, collect input (from the community / experts / etc), become more informed than the masternode owners ever could on it, make a decision, and act.

What I don't want to see happen is that every time a decision doesn't go a community member's way immediately and exactly as they wanted, they resort to "decision proposals" on minor non-strategic decisions. My opinion is that in this case, it didn't warrant a proposal. I strongly believe setting this precedent would be detrimental to the success of the project. I suspect this one could potentially pass, I don't know... we will see. But even if it does, I suspect many others will follow and the masternode owners will quickly grow weary of resolving these minor spats and will vote them down. We need to learn to work together and compromise rather than have a "my-way-or-the-highway" attitude and run home to cry to the MN owners every time a two-day-old dispute isn't yet resolved.

EDIT: In fact, the more I contemplate this, the more inappropriate I believe it is for @amanda_b_johnson to involve 1,000+ people (masternode owners) in a two-day old disagreement that she has clearly made little effort to understand or resolve through debate and compromise. Surely she can find a way to resolve this without asking 1,000+ people to resolve it for her... People that are probably generally ill-equipped with the necessary information - like myself - to make these decisions. Or who don't want to consume a bunch of time educating themselves on the issue to make said decision. This probably results in poor decisions being reached and/or consumes an unbelievable amount of time of 1,000 people to educate themselves when a few people could have worked independently to resolve it.

Please, don't take this as criticism of you or your involvement here (I think your work is great and I'm very glad to see you involved) personally. You are far from the only person that desires more "granular" use of the budgeting system than I do. For all I know, I am the outlier with unpopular views. We all will have different views that we express as we define how the system is to be appropriately used for all our benefit. I only mean to criticize the ideas. Either people will agree with me or they won't, a precedent will be established that we try for a while, and it will continue to evolve as the project grows and learns from past experiences. I just strongly believe in a different optimal use of the budgeting system and the role input from the community should play, and in what forms that input is best provided.
1 point,8 years ago
We really ought to be thankful we have passionate people like Amanda who want to improve things. The problem with forums, as well as cultural/language barrier AND the fact we're all communicating via writing (no facial expressions or voice lilts to judge by) this has quickly become awfully aggressive.

Words like "Setting a precedent" has, imo, really been used too much. It's an argument used for all kinds of things in past proposals. There are no precedent that create a rule that says we have to do the same thing next time. This isn't the Supreme court. We may pay for a product to include Dash today, but not in the future simply because we want to help offset the cost/risk of, say, adding Dash functionality to the Trezor, etc... today, because it quickens the pace for Dash to be usable, but 5 years from now, there will be a need for a company to include Dash due to popularity, in that case, we may not want to help take on the risk. So I really wish people would stop it with the "wrong Precedent" we're a company, not a government looking for what's fair, but what we feel WE need at any point in time.

Having said that, I think Amanda bringing this to everyone's attention via this vote, and it can't be a bad thing. I think you guys came up with some very good solutions, ones that Amanda probably hadn't thought of, and she got us there via this tool. So I applaud her tenacity and her passion, and ask that we stay more respectful to each other in the process. There is an easy way to do that. Start out your arguments with "I feels" instead of "you are wrong" ex: " I feel this might be a bad idea because..... " Not "this is a bad idea because" or "you don't know ...." etc...

I'm not accusing anyone of this, but I've seen too many stupid arguments that have caused people to leave (or almost leave) this community and have left scars and hurt feelings here already, and I don't want to lose any more! And they're really caused by one party trying to help, but getting jumped on (unintentionally or not) by others. So we really have to learn to reread our comments and if we can't tell, preference what we say with "I don't want this to come across wrong, so please bare with me" or something like that. :) Thanks for reading :)
4 points,8 years ago
I will be voting no on this, after much consideration the erasing of an old channel should have nothing to do with the original concept of a new YT channel. Amanda must aim higher than a few subscribers otherwise what is the point. Once her show is up and we see the results, THEN, we should consider the options of deleting the other account.
2 points,8 years ago
After all is said and done, it is Dash now, not DarkCoin. Time to move on. We need the new Channel regardless if Amanda can prove herself or not. So, I don't see any logic in keeping the old channel live or making things more difficult for Amanda. I voted 'Yes'.
0 points,8 years ago
there is a new channel since 3-4 month already, Amanda will produce a Show for us + will help in SEO and details on that new channel
4 points,8 years ago
As discuss in the other thread
there are many more (better) solutions to deal with than just erasing it !

The new channel ( was created due to copyright strikes we received.(not our fought, but YT is super paranoid anything copyright related so you pretty much have no chance is proving your right doing)
we had 2 copyright strikes already , 1 more and they will have shut us down (without warning)
Safety first, we created a second YT channel. (DashOrg)

The old channel has DarkTV as a name, as i remember you can only change a Channel name once, so that was stuck with that name, so the new Channel DashOrg is updated in naming and corporate identity (+we used that move to update all video graphics)

in my believe , erasing it would be a big mistake as the links associated with that channel have been shared far far around on the internet (english, but specially in Russian and multiple other languages). We are still having a ton of new comments and views on the old "Dash: What is Dash? = P15E10 " + other videos
Erasing the old YT channel will kill all links (obviously) with it, we worked very hard to share these links all over the internet, they are used in 'old' publications and articles, OP's of threads, webpages, forums and all over the shop. We have no idea where (obviously) so we will not be able to change them. The idea always was to keep the old YT open (or even better hidden) that the links stay live, even though we migrated to another channel.
Why kill them, if we can just simply hide the channel and keep the links alive ?
(alex-ru pointed the hiding option out here )
Shouldn't we use that old YT to "migrate" people to the New Channel ? (that is what we are trying now with the migrate video)
Killing it and starting new is definitely easier, but would be a huge loss, as we have 950 subscribers already (i know in the YT world that is not much/ but for us it is).

The old channel now has "We migrated / Please follow us to..." video posted all over (Tx to alex ru), we had the idea of changing all descriptions of videos to "We migrated / Please follow us to...", i am answering since weeks to all comments with "We migrated / Please follow us to..."
(i would suggest to set all videos to private except the "Please Migrate' one- that still watched people from old links but tells them in channel and description where to find us now)

+ GG made some great suggestions how to proceed in other ways

Please do NOT erase it
lets use the old channel to migrate the 950 subscribers and promote the New channel and keep all old links alive !
2 points,8 years ago
i think it is unfortunate that we could not just have a conversation about this "issue", in my mind we could come up easily with a solution together, for all of us without involving the Network and a vote.
but so be it
3 points,8 years ago
> If you vote NO, you express a desire to leave visible and searchable, knowing that at any point in the future, potential Dash customers may land upon it and wonder what the hell they're looking at – maybe they should try Ethereum, instead? They have just one channel, and it's not confusing.

I believe there is a logical fallacy with this argument, in that anyone at all can start a YouTube channel and upload the exact same videos. There can be thousands of multiple Dash channels and the Masternode network has no control or influence over those -- so why is this *one* channel such a concern?

Also, I believe that using the MN voting system to try and compel (versus incentivise) people to do anything will set a scary precedent.
0 points,8 years ago
Tell you what, I'll vote yes, just to say we need to do something about this :)
0 points,8 years ago
Yes, but tungfa below, says there are many issues to this. Plus we have Grey Ghost working on our search engine rankings etc... So although this may need to be hidden or something, there seems to be issues on how to go about doing it. Although I suspect it's been left to float as nobody has made a decision or taken responsibility to deal with this, so it's great to bring this up to the general attention. I have not yet read the links below, though, so I need to do that...
-2 points,8 years ago
Indeed. It's already been established that the budget system can't compel this kind of thing unless your name is Duffield
2 points,8 years ago
Wow, this is a hard one, and kind of out of the blue. I'm assuming Pete saw issues and wanted to help? Or maybe this is the result of a disagreement? I'm not well versed in the way rankings work, etc... so this sounds like it needs a good debate. Did you start a thread yet on the Dash forum? (I don't see a link) Anyway, lets discuss it and vote on it after a good discussion, or else please link where this discussion is taking place please :) It's really awesome that you're feeling motivated to become more involved! Thanks :) !!!
1 point,8 years ago
Interesting polling of the network. I do feel it is time to leave the old YouTube DarkcoinTV behind us and focus solely on YouTube DashOrg and possibly other Dash YT channels to complete and unify our rebranding to Dash. I understand we may loose the links, views and comments associated with letting go of YT DarkcoinTV but thats bound to happen anyways .. its just a matter of time.
0 points,8 years ago
"I do feel it is time to leave the old YouTube DarkcoinTV behind us and focus solely on YouTube DashOrg and possibly other Dash YT channels to complete and unify our rebranding to Dash," statement raises two interesting questions somehow hidden beneath the noise this perceived confrontation (Amanda vs. Tungfa) has created:

Now ponder this, these two channels, as Amanda wrote:
B) Split view counts (making less for each)
C) Split subscribership (making less for each)
That's correct. I proposed two possible solutions offering to keep both channels (Tungfa linked to it). DarkcoinTV can be renamed and be one of "other Dash YT channels..." but aren't those going to, again, "split view counts"?

So the conceptual question ensues. Where's the focus? At the same time as this discussion is raging, our official website (a focal point for all branding & marketing efforts that should also host, embed, all our videos) and its development is being delayed for months and months and months...

But a notion of that ... nation... is being pushed, a new website design is being developed in a hurry and it would be up and running shortly while the official website development will have kept on lagging. Don't you think that "nation" website would not also:
-- split visitors counts (making less for each)
-- split subscribership (making less for each) and at the same time
-- cause confusion for new visitors who might be searching for us.

It is MHO that we should use the same criteria for judging different efforts if the aim is to complete and unify our re-branding to Dash.
1 point,8 years ago
"* Yes votes will be submitted to the network".

What a great compromise for this. Deactivation saves files, takes it out of the public eye, and we retain it for the future. Everyone wins.