Proposal “dash-marketing-hub“ (Active)Back

Title:Dash Marketing Hub: Official Dash Incubator Fork for Marketing and Promotion
Owner:the_desert_lynx
Monthly amount: 100 DASH (20261 USD)
Completed payments: 1 totaling in 100 DASH (1 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2021-08-12 / 2021-10-11 (added on 2021-08-02)
Votes: 688 Yes / 106 No / 8 Abstain
Will be funded: Yes
Manually vote on this proposal (DashCore - Tools - Debugconsole):
gobject vote-many c32f178a69a99bfbd9949571a2c68134cef66d18143913c2564f9997a2e49ba2 funding yes

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

Proposal description

Dash Proposal: Dash Marketing Hub 2021-Q3

1. Summary

This proposal is to launch the Dash Marketing Hub, an official fork of the Dash Incubator, focused on grassroots marketing and promotion of Dash, and on community energizing/engagement.

At the request of key community members I am launching an official fork of Dash Incubator dedicated to another critical area of focus for Dash: marketing and promotion. This is done as an official Incubator fork through the DFO Kickstarter bounty. This means that the Dash Incubator has reviewed the rules, structure, and this proposal text to ensure that it meets the Incubator’s standards for structure, efficiency, and transparency. Our mission statement, as found in section 1.1 of the Rules document, is as follows:

“Our mission is to raise Dash’s awareness, presence, reputation, and adoption through incentivizing grassroots community-driven action. The Dash Marketing Hub’s objective is to create the necessary gamified incentive structure to energize community leaders into effective action in promoting Dash and to create a culture of activism in the broader Dash community. This is done through quantifiable, measurable, and transparent bounty-based tasks performed in a creative, collaborative, and decentralized environment.”

The potential of such an initiative on its own is substantial. But we will also be working closely with other DFOs, including Dash Core Group Marketing and the Dash Newsroom, to both amplify their respective marketing efforts and fill in the gaps between them through a fast, responsive, collaborative, and grassroots approach.

A major reason why we’re launching this initiative is that we believe that the example and structure set forth by the Dash Incubator represents a major evolution and turning point for DFOs as a whole. Under this model, a complete history of every piece of work done by the Hub, including funding criteria and rationale for each task, who designed the task, who performed it, who approved it, and so on, is all public and easily-accessible information. The organization is effectively always under full and public financial audit due to its very structure, so no discrete audits are ever necessary. And finally, participation in the Hub will be open to the entire Dash community, leveraging our whole talent pool. Thisopen collaboration and radical transparency will cause Dash to flourish and grow exponentially.

Initial admins will be myself (TheDesertLynx), Rion Gull, Solarguy, Doeke, and Kanuuker. However, additional admins will be sought and recruited as the project’s scope and scale grows. Contributors will include the initial admins plus potentially any member of the Dash community, of course pending admin approval and subjected to publicly-auditable quality control measures.

2. Roadmap

Here we give our current priorities to the areas of funding in Hub, to enable better management and allocation of resources between Bounties. These priorities will be updated at least in each Quarterly proposal, and are referenced in our Rules.

  1. Top Priority (DashDirect)
    1. Promotion of the DashDirect app’s release to media and news outlets
    2. Creation of videos and other content showcasing real usage of DashDirect for real purchases among a wide variety of merchants and locations
    3. Promotion of the DashDirect app directly to potential consumers to secure new users and sign-ups
    4. Promotion of the ability to travel through the US essentially fiat-free by using DashDirect and travel services such as Travala
  2. High Priority
    1. Increasing Dash’s public visibility through securing media appearances and article placements
    2. Securing interviews for key DCG members, developers, and other key ecosystem players
    3. Creating and disseminating content showing Dash being actively used in ways unrelated to the DashDirect top priority bounties
    4. Building awareness and relationships with key industry influencers
  3. Medium Priority
    1. Amplifying the social media presence and reach of official Dash accounts and key Dash personnel
    2. Increasing Dash’s presence and reputation in all relevant social platforms and forums
    3. Energizing and growing engagement of the Dash community at large
  4. Low Priority
    1. Any bounties not focused on or a dependency of the above 

3. Ask

This quarter (last two months) the monthly funding ask is 100 DASH. This represents roughly 2% of the total Dash treasury. We feel that this amount is appropriate for a proof-of-concept that the Bounty model can be successfully applied to areas outside of development.


In Q4 we will explore modifying the ask depending on performance metrics and the demands of the network.

4. Terms

All operations of the Hub funded by this proposal are subject to the latest Rules published here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zOIbEkviJDuBLVLDrccHnyzLI5qGFsVZYXEWR6kxLmk/edit?usp=sharing

All major changes/departures from the Dash Incubator Rules document have been highlighted. Specific details of the Network Contract that this proposal forms a part of can be found in section 1.6 of the rules.

5. Resources

Links needed to access all Hub information, including past proposals, can be found in the Resources section of our Rules.

Thank you very much. Please feel free to ask any relevant questions, and please let me know if you want to join as either an admin or a contributor.

-Joël Valenzuela

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
6 points,1 month ago
Announcement: We are starting early operations to promote the recent DashDirect launch.

Years ago, I received funding from the now-defunct DashBoost for a project whose mission is the same as this one, which funded several adoption initiatives such as the initial How to Live on Crypto video series. About 7.7 Dash remains left over from this project, and I have donated them to the funding address for this proposal. We will use them to get a head start in a reduced capacity limited to the promotion of DashDirect and waiving the reward for creating new concepts and specifications to facilitate this goal (provisions for this can be found in section 3.4 of the Rules), reserving the funds for purely rewarding task completion and QA. I feel that promotion of the DashDirect release is both critical and time-sensitive and that it would be a disservice to wait weeks longer before getting started.

THIS IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME OF THE PROPOSAL

If it passes, we will open up to full-scope regular operations when the superblock hits. If it does not, we will complete all possible tasks until our funding runs out. Either way, feel free to observe via both Trello boards linked in Section 6.2 of the Rules.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Congratulations Joël on what appears to be a successful funding of a proposal to our network.

I do have one concern that I would like to express. I would like any paid marketing effort to not speculate on the future price of the dash. Certainly, as a proponent of free speech, community members can say whatever they want. However, paid efforts that speculate on the price make me uneasy.

I'm happy to read that your top priority is promoting Dash as a form of payment. I do think there is some need for people to learn about the advantages and opportunities that Dash offers for payments.
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Thanks for the kind words. I don't think you have any reason to worry. Nowhere in our mission statement, vision, or funding criteria is there any emphasis on market speculation. All work funded by the Hub must go through approval of the Admins, who are approved by myself for the first two months and later by Directors who come from this same pool of Admins. Nowhere there is there room to approve speculative content.

As you mentioned, community members can say/do whatever they want, however they can't be specifically rewarded for whatever they say, and certainly not by this proposal. If anything, rewarding (placing economic incentives on) producing quality content regarding Dash's usefulness as a form of payment will encourage more of this behavior and less price speculation.

Still, this is a community effort with radical transparency at every level, so I really hope you'll help to monitor the content and let the Admins know if you see something untoward brewing.
Reply
6 points,1 month ago
Due to health issues in my family, I have been unable to participate much at all in the Dash community for the last year. That's all squared away now. This looked like an excellent place to plug in again and help get things rolling for Dash and the community. I enthusiastically endorse this proposal, and I am also on the team to help get it up and running.

It feels awesome to be back. Solarguy
Reply
4 points,1 month ago
Really great having you on board!
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
It is a necessary and fantastic entrepreneurial, an instrument funded by the DAO similar to the Dash Incubator is necessary, but focused on marketing.
I would love to participate actively in this project since I have been doing it for several years, in the 'lone wolf' style.

Yes for this.
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Thanks very much! We hope to create the conditions for many more like you to continue this.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Yes from me, good luck with this budget proposal.
Reply
1 point,1 month ago
Thanks for your support!
Reply
1 point,1 month ago
Big "yes" from me as well.
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Thanks buddy!
Reply
5 points,1 month ago
Good luck guys. You have my votes.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Thanks very much!
Reply
9 points,1 month ago
Yes!
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Cheers!
Reply
7 points,1 month ago
Dash incubator has been such an amazing boon for development, I'm sure this type of system will be a great fit for marketing as well. Going to vote yes as well :)
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Thanks Tante!
Reply
-3 points,1 month ago
Thank you for adding the MNO tag to your username!
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
I wish DC would update so I could add my voting delegate tag, have been harrassed in the past because I don't have a tag.
Reply
11 points,1 month ago
Voting yes, best of luck to you guys!
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Thanks very much, your support means a lot.
Reply
8 points,1 month ago
Definite yes, we've always fallen short on marketing, Arden has hit the ground running but getting the wider community involved through a structure like this is really important to our long term health. The admin board is very strong too and I'm excited to see what you guys can do over the coming months!
Reply
5 points,1 month ago
Thanks for the confidence, we'll do our best to not disappoint, and thanks for pushing me to do this!
Reply
9 points,1 month ago
A point of clarification on the Rules in case it was missed: The Rules doc is very similar to that of the Dash Incubator (from which it was forked). Major changes are highlighted, so that MNOs familiar with the Incubator can simply go to highlighted sections to see where major changes have occurred.
Reply
8 points,1 month ago
I am a yes on this one. I really like the idea of using bounties for funding in general.
We could probably replace all state governments with bounty platforms.)
Reply
5 points,1 month ago
Thanks for your support!
Reply
9 points,1 month ago
Exciting to see the first proposal to create a fully open-source DFO since Incubator.

I worked with JV on the setup here and approved the Rules in terms of meeting Incubator's standards for transparency, decentralization, incentivization and using Dash as the money not fiat...so I was happy to sign it off as an official Incubator fork and wish him and the other Admins best of luck :)
Reply
6 points,1 month ago
Thanks for the support Andy, and for pushing me to take this on. I'll do my best to not only deliver on the Incubator model, but to evolve and improve on it.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Thanks for working on this proposal, I love the incubator model and I think you're the right guy for the job. Best of luck to you!
Reply
4 points,1 month ago
Thanks very much Strophy!
Reply
7 points,1 month ago
We need to bring marketing out to the community with the right incentives and most importantly, to make sure it's 100% transparent. Definitely a yes because of this.
Reply
5 points,1 month ago
Agreed, and thanks!
Reply
5 points,1 month ago
I like this, it's a YES from me !
Reply
-4 points,1 month ago
Wow, what a coincidence!! The only proposal that you will support. Wonder why that would be? COI.
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
I have every reason to dislike TDL, but I appreciate the work he does for DASH and I believe he is the right man for this job, he has my support, no COI, stop being so paranoid.
Reply
-4 points,1 month ago
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you. The 'work' he did for Dash included grifting 320 Dash a month (roughly $50,000 USD) for a simple website, as well as preventing third world proposals (our bread and butter) from getting funds with DashBoost. Not to mention spearheading the discord split with lies and troll tactics. Why do you believe that qualifies him for more money from the DAO? COI, that's likely why.
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
Absolute nonsense, especially the bread 'n' butter nonsense, you were an avid supporter of the DASH.Nigeria nonsense and in the end it turned out to not bear fruit. I question your judgement.
Reply
-3 points,1 month ago
>Absolute nonsense, especially the bread 'n' butter nonsense,

Not nonsense at all. According to beta.dashwatch.org, Venezuela has over 100,000 active android wallets. Jamaica also has 6000 active android wallets, which is more than the US, so it definitely is our "bread and butter". The only absolute nonsense is your take because as I proved earlier, you are dishonest.

>you were an avid supporter of the DASH.Nigeria nonsense and in the end it turned out to not bear fruit.

Dash.Nigeria provided a lot for the network including a telegram group with over 1000 members, as well as exchange support for Haiti. I mean you're literally ignoring all of Dash nigeria's newsworthy accomplishments in order to pretend it "didn't work out" just because you attacked it. You deliberately ignore proposals you don't like because you have selfish motivations.

You question my judgment because you're a liar and a dishonest person. You pretend to hide behind 'being elderly' while making stupid, specious arguments to defund proposals in the third world, again because you're a dishonest person and a liar.
Reply
-5 points,1 month ago
I mean to say, look at how you just ignore everything I'm saying and focus on 'our bread and butter' to distract the discussion away from Joel's corrupt behavior. You are evil and a snake.
Reply
-5 points,1 month ago
>I mean you're literally ignoring all of Dash nigeria's newsworthy accomplishments in order to pretend it "didn't work out" just because you attacked it. You deliberately ignore proposals you don't like because you have selfish motivations.

This is irrational and delusional behavior. Even gaslighting. You attacked DashNigeria and pretended that it didn't work, because 'it didn't work'. That's circular reasoning and indicates that you are compromised.
Reply
-4 points,1 month ago
>Why do you believe that qualifies him for more money from the DAO?

This question is not rhetorical and I would like an answer. Either from you or Joel himself.
Reply
-4 points,1 month ago
Paging @the_desert_lynx
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Thanks very much!
Reply
4 points,1 month ago
How much of the funds go to Admins?

Can Admins also be proposal owners for the incubator? How does that potential conflict of interest get resolved?
Reply
4 points,1 month ago
As Kanuuker pointed out, 10-15% of the money for the task goes to admin. This is to ensure proper quality control, as all work will need to be thoroughly reviewed before being approved.

The proposal owner (and later Director role) can definitely admin tasks and claim work (one of the tasks is the PO role). This isn't a conflict of interest, quite the opposite in fact. The goal of the Hub is to get quality work done, and the PO asks for funding from the network to accomplish this goal. No matter who does the actual work, the PO is on the hook to get it done. A PO actively engaging in doing some of the work themselves, rather than simply sitting back and claiming the proposal task cycle after cycle, is actually a sign of someone committed to ensure that work is done by the Hub.

Now, in the case where a PO ends up doing too large a portion of the work by themselves, while this still isn't a sign of a conflict of interest, it is a sign of a failure in the model (or PO/Director leadership) to get more contributors involved in the project.
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
10-15% of each bounty awarded, depending on volume of work. See the Rules (link in OP) for details.

Yes, admins may participate in the various processes but we are not allowed to approve our own tasks or bounty claims. All work it publicly visible though so any cronyism will be readily apparent.
Reply
4 points,1 month ago
Hold up, so admins get rewarded every time they approve a bounty? Doesn't that create the incentive for them to approve claims that don't meet standards of work, simply because they will receive a payout?

Furthermore, the more bounties admins approve the greater their percentage of the payout, which cascades into an even greater incentive to payout work that isn't necessarily up to whatever standard is originally set.

On top of that if Admins are the ones creating bounties its in their interest to make them as easy as possible and have the largest payout possible, so those standards are incentivized to be low to begin with.

Is there something I am missing here? It seems like the incentive structure of this isn't thought through at all
Reply
-4 points,1 month ago
Welcome to corruption and conflict of interest...
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
The system works extremely similar to the way the Incubator works (which it appears you have enthusiastically supported), with a couple minor tweaks to improve accountability for admins requiring two (not one) admins in order to approve a concept, while other admins may attempt to veto a concept. This can be found in section 4.1 of the rules.

Essentially, the three main levels of users and their incentives are as follows: Contributors have the incentive to put out quality work and get paid. Admins have the incentive to approve said quality work. The PO (and later directors) have the incentive to ensure that resources are maximized and effective and quality work is approved. The PO polices the admins and can remove them, because if they approve shoddy work (which due to the radically transparent nature of this initiative will soon become painfully apparent), then that can jeopardize the entire proposal. An admin seeking to maximize their revenue therefore has the incentive to approve work, but only quality work so as to avoid cutting short their ability to continue to admin tasks.

This is one of the reasons why I've proposed moving away from a lone PO (which is also the Incubator's model) and to a group Director role after this cycle: as the project grows, it becomes more difficult for a lone PO to successfully oversee a large team of admins. Having more eyes specifically tasked to watch over the work admins approve makes this oversight more feasible. This isn't a problem for a small/nascent project like this one, but it will be if we grow, which is why I planned for decentralizing the PO role into several members.

All that being said, we will continue to brainstorm ways of making the checks on admin quality tighter. This may include requiring at least two admins on each task, but we have to find a way to avoid too much bureaucracy and associated cost/delays. Do you have any suggestions on efficiently tightening controls? If so I'd personally love to hear them, this entire Incubator-based model is still in its infancy (barely over a year old), and we still have a lot of evolving to do before we get it right.
Reply
1 point,1 month ago
Admins get paid for the work we do. This is exactly how the development incubator works. Have your concerns come to fruition there? And again, all work and payments are publicly visible. Do you not think the network would vote down any future proposals if we abused this system? Do you think we want to ruin our reputation and get ourselves run out of the community over a few Dash?

Secondly, concepts can be submitted by anyone, not just admins. The role of the admins to guide the community driven work to completion so the concept can be implemented and so the people who do the actual work get rewarded.
Reply
-4 points,1 month ago
Once again downvotes without argumentation, ie brigading, is explicitly not how this is supposed to work. If I'm wrong please explain how. Taking advantage of flaws in DC to push your agenda is clearly bad acting.

If I'm correct and you were paid for being part of DFN then how can you avoid the charge that you're just going to continue grifting from the network?

Being a bad actor should not be rewarded and if you really cared about Dash you would agree with me. I have no personal grudge against you. I only want to prevent people who don't want to do work but still want to get paid for nothing from succeeding.

Corruption corrupts those who engage in it. And it never gets better on its own. It just grows and grows like a cancer until the host is dead. Of course the corrupt are insulated from this as they have already got their 'exit plans'.

I don't dislike DFN because it was ran by Joel. I dislike it because Joel and Mark didn't do anything nearly worth the 320 dash a month they were being paid.

That was a waste of resources that could've been better and more efficiently applied towards adoption efforts.

Also attacking the network by ignoring MNOs like myself who are just trying to prevent waste passive aggressively because you were defunded is both childish behavior and completely inappropriate.

Just like Joel splitting the discord because Ben Swann was defunded all those years ago was completely inappropriate behavior.

That made him a bad actor who should've been removed from the network. Now instead we have to deal with this again.
Reply
-6 points,1 month ago
Refusing to answer this question is a definite sign of conflict of interest.

Thank you.
Reply
-3 points,1 month ago
Were you paid under the previous DashForceNews proposals?
Reply
0 points,1 month ago
No, it's not obvious to me how this won't be gamed, eventually handing out funds to all your chums and even quite possibly paying yourself, even if it's via someone else. You're not the right person for this because it creates too much conflict of interest opportunities. I've seen first hand how you work best when you're completely independent.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
More than any other proposal, this is radically transparent, with every bit of work publicly viewable, who gets paid what publicly viewable, etc. etc. And, beyond the original Incubator, the Hub is much easier for the average observer to verify the quality of its work because none of its work is code, which many average users may not be able to verify.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Every part of this process is transparent. If we devolve into cronyism, it will be clearly visible for everyone to see. One of the primary reasons for using an incubator type system is to avoid the opaqueness that comes with traditional DFO's. I respect your concern but I don't think it's something that we need to worry about.
Reply
3 points,1 month ago
Do you have the same criticisms of Andy's Incubator?
Reply
-1 point,1 month ago
I want to preface this by saying I like this idea, and I am not sure how I am going to vote on it.

BUT I am hesitant, specifically due to Joel's involvement at a leadership position. For all his genuine love of Dash, he was part of Dash Force News which carried on for years manipulating the data they presented to the MNOs to try and paint a picture that was simply untrue about the effectiveness of what they were doing.

I could see this going down a road not too dissimilar from what GrandMasterDash is worried about.

All of that said, I think this has the potential to be a great way to generate engagement if there is the proper incentive structure (and perhaps a moratorium on admins receiving funds).
Reply
5 points,1 month ago
For clarity, I never manipulated any data and have never done anything except attempt to present the most honest truth, and my actions over the years have reflected that. Specifically regarding a leadership position, it was specifically requested of me to start this initiative. I initially wanted to go straight to the Director model with multiple people involved in what is now the PO role, however Andy specifically objected to this at the beginning, and would not sign off and have official Incubator support for this unless I exclusively took over the PO role at the beginning. I wouldn't dream of starting an adversarial Incubator fork unless I had very good reason to do so.

The vision for such a project is to create a system that runs well no matter who's "at the helm" or any specific admin or contributor position, and that's why we have such radical transparency in every aspect of this. As I originally wanted to do in the beginning, the vision is to further decentralize as much as possible, and after this cycle a minimum of 5 (if I get my way) directors will run things by public vote, with new members stepping up and down over time. I personally can't wait for a time when individual cogs in the machine are relatively forgotten, and the machine runs without anyone noticing who's participating in it.
Reply
-3 points,1 month ago
Yes. Ideally this would be done at the protocol level. In the absence of a protocol implementation I see incubators as a reluctant second choice, somewhat lessoned now that the proposal fee has been lowered.

I very much feel that Joel is in a much better place now than when he was paid by the DAO. He has independence now and that carries a lot of weight with the wider public space. In this regard I wish him continued good luck.

However, the thought of sliding backwards to a Dash News era makes me cringe. Dash News et al started out very good but then became very insular and failed to break outside of it's tiny bubble.

Also, some of the people involved here are admins elsewhere and there is some unnecessary censorship and bias; forum, reddit etc.
Reply
4 points,1 month ago
To clarify, I will not be ceasing my independent work in either case as it is valuable. Additionally, while I'm proud of all my past work for Dash, I do agree that Dash News did not have the outside reach that I would have wished, which is why this proposal is a shift in focus not only away from insular content and towards outreach, but also away from a smaller circle of idea-makers and towards a more open-source and entrepreneurial approach. Three people brainstorming outreach ideas can only do so much, I'm much happier with this model where literally anyone can come up with a successful idea, and I really hope as much of the greater Dash community participates in this as possible.
Reply
-1 point,1 month ago
I'm wondering, you know how Dash Watch lets MNOs vote.. do you think you can do something like that to nominate / remove certain staff / admins?
Reply
2 points,1 month ago
We're still working out how specifically we'll craft the rules in a couple months, but we will have a voting mechanism for Directors so that they can vote in a secure and transparent way to nominate/remove other Directors as well as Admins. Ideally, when the actual Incubator app gets released and we move away from old-school legacy tools like Trello, we can get something like that integrated directly into the app.
Reply