Welcome!

voting YES...but noting valid concerns that these proposals come arguably late.

"Another huge sum proposal from Core without any advanced notice. If this was a business the CEO would be fired." - DeepBlue

Another huge sum proposal from Core without any advanced notice. If this was a business the CEO would be fired. Since we're not a business however it seems OK to ask for large sums of money with no notice to the DASH community. We had Fernando last month asking for 2X large sums, now this and also the core conference. This a lot of money going out to core with little or no notice and it is damaging our work as MNO's assessing these projects.

Last month we had several important community projects receive enough votes but excluded because core's huge "marketing" budget requests for funds where dropped in - with no notice that I was aware of. No planning. No consideration for the other projects. No notice.

In my opinion those other projects should not have been excluded on the last superblock. They passed with enough votes. I don't believe that core needs all the funds up front in advance and knowingly exclude valid community projects that got enough votes. One of those projects I had invested dozens of hours supporting - DASH Academy. This project got enough votes and was blown out by Core's marketing budget. Why couldn't core reduce it's request by 41 DASH so that project, which can be used on dozens of other projects could have gone through? It seems to me unreasonable. Maybe I don't know all of what is going on from the core side. All I can see is from this side my efforts have been wasted.

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DASH-Academy-Interactive-Courses

The above project should have gone through last month because it got enough votes.

I don't believe that core would need the full 1000+ DASH all in one go at the destruction of the hard work that other MNO like myself have undertaken.

We also keep hearing the same message from Fernando and Ryan that "We are looking into this and we are going to do something." but as yet nothing has been done. Not even a compromise situation. Nothing.

I run a full time business and work on average 10 t o 12 hours per day. Then after work I put in an hour or tow per day to assess DASH proposals especially on the Venezuela and education type projects. Then the weekend I have put in up to 8 hours of work on DASH proposals assessing.

No I see that one of the proposals I've been supporting and giving feedback on has been blown out by Core huge budget I can say I am not feeling motivated to continue to do this.

You need to sort this out now. If you can't sort this out now then you can at the very least come up with some compromise. MNO's are raising this as an issue over and over each month yet nothing is yet been done.

Until something is actually done I am withdrawing my contributions to these proposals because I feel totally demotivated by a core team that are not considering the work we are doing and not considering the damage you're causing to other projects.

I have always supported core projects every time without thinking twice because I trust and respect your guys.

But if I keep voting "yes" nothing is going to happen until it becomes a situation where core actually *has* to do something because MNO's voted NO.

Therefore in the interests of all the MNO's that I know have had their work blown out by core for the first time I'm going to vote "NO" to all core projects until such time you consider MNO's work and our community projects that we are supporting. I'm voting NO not because I do not support core but because I do not feel our voice is being heard and we need something in place now to address these issues that keep coming up.

I encourage all other MNO's also to consider voting NO as a voice or protest to this. If core then implements a comprise so our small community projects we've been working so hard on can go through if they get enough votes then I will reconsider my vote but for now I'm voting NO on this and all other core projects.

DeepBlue

Several of us asked after the huge proposals last month that Core would warn us long in advance when you've got large proposals coming up...and then you go ahead and do the same thing again the next month? I realize that market fluctuations do impact your budget and need for funding--I get it, it impacts us too, we all feel the drops--but even a few weeks "heads-up" or tentative warnings or projections about how market trends will impact your budget and need for further proposals would go so far in helping us do our job.

I've spent I don't know how many hours this month painstakingly helping proposal owners with their pre-proposals and proposals, and now several of them are probably going to be pushed out and we don't know how many will be able to muster enough courage and interest--let alone Dash--to resubmit their proposals in future cycles. How many times can potential partners and participants in the Dash Ecosystem get burned like that before giving up entirely?

I realize you are all just trying to do your job, but without advanced warning, this kind of stuff makes *our* job--or at least the job of those of us who are actually doing it--so much harder and does real harm to our ecosystem. The budget was already too tight to fit many very good and useful and beneficial proposals in, and you just took out another huge chunk. I hope you can appreciate how much this beleagures us and that you will seriously consider being more forthcoming about your proposals. I believe rion's suggestion about standing proposals would help obviate this issue moving forward, but make no mistake, this needs to be dealt with. We can't do our job if you guys unexpectedly take big bites out of the budget late in the cycle.

To be clear, I don't want to sound ungrateful for your work, you've done a bang-up job with meeting our recent demands for communication and updates, but we need to be able to do our job(s) too if this is going to work, especially during market downturns.

Arthyron you've got valid points. Don't back down. Vote NO with me now as a protest against this type of action. I want to see core give money to the projects that got enough votes but were excluded. Then core can always put in another request in next month to make up for the amount they funded. We also need more advanced planning to see where the proposed funds are. How much is left and what is proposed to be requested IN ADVANCE.

If MNO's vote NO now we can send a strong message to core to implement changes now. If we keep voting yes then we keep hearing "it will be sorted soon" How long have we been hearing this?

Vote NO then if you really want the core project to go through change you vote on the very last day of the superblock. Give the other small community projects a time to go through. If they don't have enough votes on the last day fair enough.

Vote NO if you respect MNO's work and the Proposal owners faith and trust in DASH. We owe it to them. We owe it to ourselves. We owe it do the community and to the improvement of DASH.

Vote NO

DeepBlue

No worries at all. I understand the concern and we are taking steps to address it. Please see my post below on the challenges I've been facing to submit with more advance notice. The addition of Glenn Austin in the role of CFO (announced today) will certainly help us to submit our funding needs further in advance, as well as provide better guidance on our funding needs going forward. This is precisely the reason we added the role... I am no longer able to keep up on my own. I am committed to resolving it which is why we started that search months ago.

I have seen concerns raised over last month's large request and there seems to be a perception that Dash Core Group caused a large number of proposals to not receive funding in March. This is simply not the case. At the time the large proposals were submitted, there was sufficient funding to cover all proposals with even a positive ratio of "yes" votes. Even though many proposals were submitted after ours, by the time the final votes were in, there was only one proposal with the minimum 10% net votes that was excluded from the superblock due to capacity of the budget being exceeded. Luckily, it was a multi-month proposal and likely just one of their payments was missed.

This month, we are only requesting about 11% of the budget for core team compensation, which is simply based on our normal run-rate expense. We will also have one decision proposal (information coming soon, but no payment associated other than proposal cost), and one proposal for some additional conferences. In total, we will be requesting far less than 20% of the budget, which is quite typical and we believe non-intrusive to a healthy ecosystem. There should still be enough funding available for all decently supported proposals to pass. The budget is currently ~30% allocated and there are many proposals that currently appear unlikely to pass regardless of whether core submits proposals or not.

All that is to say that while I share your concern and would like to advance our proposals earlier in the monthly cycle, it appears that our proposals coming in the later half of the cycle has had little impact on the proposal outcomes thus far and I would anticipate the same outcome this month. Regardless, we should have this issue resolved starting next month.

Little impact? Really? What about this project https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DASH-Academy-Interactive-Courses that got enough votes last month but was pushed out because of core's. Just 41 DASH but did not go through due to core's huge budget proposals last month. So when you say "little impact" for whom are you referring to exactly?

There was also a small Africa community project that also got excluded last month that also had enough votes. And if you notice has not gone through this month presumably because he does not have another 5 DASH to pay.

I've been working with Steve on the Academy project. I too my time to record video showing feedback on his proposal. I fully assessed his proposal not only checking out his team and his offer but also the impact it would have on other projects. I've been giving suggestions and working with him through email on his proposal. Making suggestions and Ideas to improve. I've assessed every part of that proposal. I've contributed, contributed contributed on that project, but you class that as "little impact" ? In addition the projects that are pushed out by core's large proposal need to find another 5 DASH to resubmit. I notice the Africa project did not resubmit.

So when you say "little impact" who specifically are you stating it has little impact on. Because as far as I'm concerned it has had major impact on my contribution and on Steve's contribution.

What I want to see is that these small community projects that got enough votes go through. If necessary could give them the money then put in the next month an additional request to cover the amount that went to supporting the projects that got enough votes. This is showing some respect for the MNO work and the proposal owners work for jobs that got enough votes but were pushed out by core.

I encourage all MNO's to vote NO. If you really want core to go through Vote NO and then wait until the very last day and then change your vote to YES. This will give the small community projects enough time to go through.

However I am voting NO until concrete written steps are put forward to protect MNO's work and the Proposal owners work.

Vote NO. So that we can Vote YES when core sort this out. Let us see how quick Core sort this long standing problem if the source of funds slow down until we get what we need and have our time properly respected.

DeepBlue

I'm not certain that we can rule out the Core proposals pushing other proposals out just because others weren't passing at the time, as votes frequently ebb and flow, especially as it comes closer to the end of the cycle. A lot of MNOs routinely wait until the last minute to make up their minds and many have expressed they just vote in line with the majority by that point. It's tough--without solid analytics, which conveniently makes up the premise of several pre-proposals and one live proposal currently--to make any definitive statement about what is or isn't likely about the factors that influence proposal passage. Suffice it to say, at the very least, large, unexpected proposals added toward the end of the cycle tend to really mess with a lot of the work *I* do as a MNO who is very active in the pre-proposal stage, and that's frustrating and probably avoidable. I'm glad you're taking some steps to reduce the likelihood of that occurring in the future.

Thank you for your continued work! Just a clarification: is any of the requested compensation here for Wacshman PR?

Nope, only for Dash Core Group contractors.

Excellent, thank you!

I would like to see a regular, standing multi-month proposal from Core, so that other contractors can plan accordingly. Same request to all contractors seeking regular employment from the Dash DAO.

I have considered a standing multi-month proposal in the past. There are pros and cons with this approach, both for the Dash Core Team, and the other proposal owners.

The main benefit would be greater visibility over the funding that Dash Core Group will be consuming over a longer period. However, in a period of rapidly changing prices, issues would result. If prices were rising over the period, the network would allocate excess resources to Dash Core Group (beyond what we actually needed), which would add to our balance sheet reserves while depriving the budget of funding that could go toward productive initiatives. If prices fall during the period, Dash Core Group would need to deplete savings to cover the shortfall, or could even exhaust its reserves attempting to do so. The longer the period of the multi-month proposals, the greater the price risks we would introduce.

Rather than relying on multi-month proposals, I believe that the benefits of advancing notice to the network of our anticipated funding needs could be accomplished with a published long-term budget plan of proposals we know will be needed. As the price of Dash and budget projections change, we can update the published plan. In this way we can reduce price risks by requesting funding one month at a time, while providing the community with transparency over our likely future requests.

Thanks for your reply, Ryan. I'm hopeful that scheduling will improve with your new hire(s) taking some of the burden. Thank you for your tireless efforts up until now.

Why should we expect from DC to plan ahead in order to accommodate all the rest of the proposals? If you are coming to Dash for funding you need to be ready to be pitted against the biggest and the best proposals.

This is a valid point. However, I do think there is merit to the argument that DCG should be held to a higher standard to communicate our planned requests, if nothing else because we usually consume the greatest share of the budget. Regardless of what other teams or entities communicate, if we begin providing this information it would likely benefit the network, so I see no reason to withhold the information if we shift to longer-term and more rigorous budgeting and planning processes.

Agreed with the budget as tight as it is it's important to know early about such large proposals.

Everybody wants the proposal/Treasury system to work well, and smoothly, and not bump worthy projects. This cycle will be problematic for a few reasons. The biggest of course is that the value of Dash has dropped dramatically. In the short term, there is not much that Core, or the Masternodes, or the larger community can do about that.

Based on this thread, and other conversations, Core is making significant strides in the areas of communications and the logistics of getting the team paid, well and properly. This is to be applauded and encouraged.

The third issue is that, just by coincidence, we have a bumper crop of proposals this month. It is a mathematical certainty that some of them will not get paid, even if they get sufficient yes votes. This is a bad thing to be sure. But there are a number of efforts to minimize this problem in future. Strophy has added some information to the stickied post about "8 steps to a successful proposal" that encourages potential proposers to look at the size of the budget and the size/number/total of the proposals. This is an expected symptom of growing pains in a successful crypto like Dash. While there is no formal protocol for dealing with props that got enough yes votes, but did not get funded, my feeling is that they will get some extra love and attention in the following budget cycle.

Once the value of Dash goes up substantially, this largely overcomes the problem and we can go back to the default attitude of, " Yeah, Dash can afford that too."

Carry on, have fun, win!
solarguy

Very good news from the work of the coreteam, profesionnal, accurated and smart way of doing thing for Dash. Yes

Hiring top talent is both incredibly difficult and critically important. Dash Core makes it look easy.

You guys are on fire & clearly firing on all cylinders.

Can't wait to read about the executive next hire.

This is the tightest budget we have seen yet, I think. And then.... this one arrives on the 20th. Nine months ago, that would have been early!

Now that we have added a CFO, we should be able to submit our proposals by about mid-month going forward. My capacity, especially lately, has been extremely challenged as we've grown over the last few quarters. I barely complete distribution of vendor and contractor payments from the previous monthly cycle by the time I need to start planning the next. With my other responsibilities interfering, recently it has not been feasible to submit proposals much earlier than this time of the month. I have been aiming to get proposals up to the network no later than a week before the voting deadline (which is about 9 days before the payment date). The addition of the CFO function has been underway for some time to address this issue and we should be able to provide much more advance notice to the community of our funding needs, which will help proposal owners better plan their own requests.

Voting yes

Why not add benefits and bonuses? I would much rather see 2400 Dash spent in bonuses and benefits to Dash Core employees than spent on Ben Swann.

I am very hapy with dash spent on Ben Swann.

Good for you. It has nothing to do with what I said though.

Core team member here: We are working on adding that in the near future because we are all paying for our own benefits ourselves. However, it is a very complex project that has been going on for a few months because we are in many countries and each one has its own regulation. Very soon we'll be doing a proposal to cover that part of compensation as we establish it.

Thanks for the reply fernando. We want to see you guys being well taken care of, with high salaries and plenty of benefits.

Thanks! one step at a time, but we're moving in the right direction :)

How could we ask for your opinion in other proposals? As CMO, I feel like we should be able to ask what your thoughts are before we vote to give thousands of dollars to marketing initiatives.

@fernando doesn't seem to work.

this is a decentralized project. we dont need anyones permission to do our own research on what we as MNO feel is of benefit to the network.

You can do your own research, and I'm not asking or advocating for anyone's permission.

I feel I should be able to ask Dash Core's CMO what is his opinion on a $1 million dollar marketing campaign.

I agree, that's MNOs job. I'm already in contact with some proposal owners and we collaborate when posible, but I can't keep up with everything that is going and I think I should focus first on the stuff on my plate.

Fernando, what are your plans on deploying that marketing budget from last month? Is there any reason why it hasn't already started being used? I've watched as your Facebook and Google advertising proposals have gone nowhere. I believe the lesson here is to act faster.

The Facebook turned Google campaign went live yesterday. Some info here: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/ad-campaign-live.32734/

I'm working on a new plan for the budget from last month. Recent bans and the market correction have completely changed the situation and I want to be extra careful.

I don't think the lesson is to act faster if that means making mistakes with the network's money. When in doubt I prefer to stop and analyze. Marketing is not about spending, that is easy. The real challenge is to maximize impact by optimizing what we spend.

Don't you feel you need to align your own marketing initiatives with million dollar ones being approved by Dash independently?

I hope I don't need to give any examples because I can't think of any one that is not obvious and I don't want to sound rude.

I would love to align initiatives and yes, there are proposals that I don't like.

But I also have huge respect for everyone that is working for the benefit of Dash. I believe almost all of them do what they believe is best for the project. Criticising from the outside is easy, doing is not. Unless I see real harm I prefer to leave others do what they think is best and not openly attack anyone.

With time I think we will all learn what works and what doesn't. I hope I can contribute to that learning by measuring, explaining and sharing data.