Proposal “dash-retail-dev--10-launch---dao-owned-m“ (Completed)Back
| Title: | Dash Retail Development & 1.0 Launch - Comprehensive DAO Owned Merchant Platform |
| Owner: | AshFrancis |
| Monthly amount: | 101 DASH (3018 USD) |
| Completed payments: | 3 totaling in 303 DASH (0 month remaining) |
| Payment start/end: | 2019-10-16 / 2020-01-13 (added on 2019-10-14) |
| Votes: | 715 Yes / 134 No / 23 Abstain |
| External information: | app.dashnexus.org/proposals/dash-retail-dev--10-launch---dao-owned-merchant-platform/overview |
Proposal description
Dash Retail is a full, all-in-one solution for Dash merchant adoption efforts. It will be fully DAO owned and offers merchants the ability to accept Dash as well as buy and sell it from their customers.
Dash Retail offers a Dash ecosystem in a box, It’s a turn key solution designed to be deployed by local teams across the globe to rapidly and sustainably scale Dash adoption efforts all whilst offering full transparency and accountability via direct Dash Watch access.
Full Demonstration Video
In this video we demonstrate the full Dash Retail platform in its current release, we have loads more features in the coming months including integration of our local agent powered fiat off-ramp solution.
Basic Version Demo (Android + Hardware Device)
These videos demonstrate the basic version of Dash Retail, a lite version that gets merchants set up and accepting Dash in seconds with a mobile device or a dedicated, multi-screen and receipt printing hardware device:
Achievements to Date
What's Next
This proposal funds us up to our 1.0 LTS (Long Term Support) release. This version will include:
Team + Roles
Ash Francis &, Alex Cox. Alex is our technical lead with 10 years development experience and Ash provides design, front-end development and project management. As Dash investors we are working at a reduced salary to return the greatest benefit and ROI to Dash whilst also building a codebase that our other projects can benefit with alongside Dash (likewise, assets and work from these other projects is being brought into Dash Retail).
Alex, Ash interviewed by Mark Mason at Dash Convention Europe:
Budget
We have reduced our monthly ask by 20% and for the last few months have not requested funding, choosing instead to fund from our own finances. This cycle we are asking for $8000/mo based on the 30 day SMA from BitInfoCharts of $79. This purchasing power will stretch to cover our further reduced salaries, office rent, infrastructure and other costs. All Dash Retail financials will always be fully transparently reported to Dash Watch and happily subject to audit.
Get In Touch
We are happy to answer any questions either on this proposal or you can reach out directly on the details below.
Email: ash@dashretail.org
Telegram: @ashfrancis
Twitter: @ashtonfrancis
Discord: Ash#8776
Skype: ash.francis
Thank you for your support.
Dash Retail offers a Dash ecosystem in a box, It’s a turn key solution designed to be deployed by local teams across the globe to rapidly and sustainably scale Dash adoption efforts all whilst offering full transparency and accountability via direct Dash Watch access.
Full Demonstration Video
In this video we demonstrate the full Dash Retail platform in its current release, we have loads more features in the coming months including integration of our local agent powered fiat off-ramp solution.
Basic Version Demo (Android + Hardware Device)
These videos demonstrate the basic version of Dash Retail, a lite version that gets merchants set up and accepting Dash in seconds with a mobile device or a dedicated, multi-screen and receipt printing hardware device:
Achievements to Date
- Dash Retail pre-alpha launched and already in use across Latin America with documented 100% uptime.
- Public, at-a-glance Dashboard launched featuring full live transaction and merchant activity reports.
- Comprehensive, real-time Dash Rates system set-up, in use in the Dash Core Group wallets (including your Android or iOS wallet!) providing the real time price data that your wallets use from 12 different data-sources with API access open to other DAO projects. (https://rates2.dashretail.org/)
- Crypto:Crypto exchange pilot launched (Switchly.com) that will be used to power the volatility offset aspect of Dash Retail with over $50,000 transacted so far.
- Dash Retail full demos at Dash Convention Europe and hundreds of plays on our Dash Racer game.
- Full-backend access and transparency to Dash Watch including all transaction data and financial audits.
- Full vending machine integration both directly via MDB and in partnership with Qibixx AG
What's Next
This proposal funds us up to our 1.0 LTS (Long Term Support) release. This version will include:
- Agent hierarchy system (allows adoption teams to sign up merchants & report transparently on their transaction count / volume).
- Fiat off-ramp functionality powered by Switchly.com and with local agents (subject to local partners).
- Continued QA and testing to ensure system is absolutely bulletproof.
- Settlement options to allow merchant to choose how much Dash is converted versus how much they keep.
- Other small but important features like tipping.
- Stable hardware device options for physical POS based merchant adoption.
- On-going support of our Dash Rates infrastructure that powers the fiat pricing in your mobile wallet
- Full code and license given either to Dash Trust or the DIF (or to the DAO via another mechanism decided by vote)
Team + Roles
Ash Francis &, Alex Cox. Alex is our technical lead with 10 years development experience and Ash provides design, front-end development and project management. As Dash investors we are working at a reduced salary to return the greatest benefit and ROI to Dash whilst also building a codebase that our other projects can benefit with alongside Dash (likewise, assets and work from these other projects is being brought into Dash Retail).
Alex, Ash interviewed by Mark Mason at Dash Convention Europe:
Budget
We have reduced our monthly ask by 20% and for the last few months have not requested funding, choosing instead to fund from our own finances. This cycle we are asking for $8000/mo based on the 30 day SMA from BitInfoCharts of $79. This purchasing power will stretch to cover our further reduced salaries, office rent, infrastructure and other costs. All Dash Retail financials will always be fully transparently reported to Dash Watch and happily subject to audit.
Get In Touch
We are happy to answer any questions either on this proposal or you can reach out directly on the details below.
Email: ash@dashretail.org
Telegram: @ashfrancis
Twitter: @ashtonfrancis
Discord: Ash#8776
Skype: ash.francis
Thank you for your support.
Show full description ...
Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?
Submit comment
|
No comments so far?
Be the first to start the discussion! |
Ash speaks of "copies" of the software, but having a copy of software conveys no right to use it. Ash speaks of "full license," but we need a legal document to explicitly define that.
And then there is the question of ownership -- who exactly is the copyright holder? Are there two separate copyrights? Does the DAO's copy contain all the necessary code or is it crippled in some way?
- Pretending to support it whilst constantly attacking it ✔
- Loaded questions based on nothing ✔
You're boring and transparent Geert, you're either a troll or someone whose ego I bruised and you're throwing your toys out the pram. Unfortunately I can't let your comments just stand, seriously though, get something better to do or realize that Dash Retail is very good for Dash, as are we.
Let's start a new thread with this statement. Would you please explain which parts of the IP you will retain to ensure that the DAO continues to fund you?
"I'm happy for a poll or governance proposal afterwards, also I suggested both lol. If I wanted to run away with it and keep it all to myself I wouldn't be going to this much length to hand it over! Instead I'd do what the vast majority of POs and retain intellectual property the dao has paid for to ensure I keep getting funding. You're barking up the wrong tree."
But we still have only your promise to do something "afterwards." Can you explain why we have to wait for this ownership/licensing uncertainty to be resolved?
You have to wait as I am having conversations with Core/DIF team members, once that is resolved (either in giving them ownership or not) then you can do your vote and we will honor it, but I will respect the DAO and put the authority of an approved proposal before that of a less participated in DW vote or the confusion that may be caused by simultaneous proposals promising different things.
I am trying my best to do right by the DAO, as I have always done, you obstruct that more than you help it - you make any ownership less appealing as they may have to deal with you.
https://www.ipeg.com/avoid-jointly-owned-intellectual-property/
https://www.technologyslegaledge.com/2014/10/joint-ownership-of-intellectual-property-complexity-that-only-a-lawyer-could-love/
This isn't a jointly owned project, it's a fork where both parties own their own distinct copy they are free to use as they choose. We're writing up the license now, perhaps that will make things more clear.
This is also not uncommon practice - we're just being absolutely transparent about it. The majority of software development companies will re-use code.
Dash Retail Development & 1.0 Launch by AshFrancis
https://beta.dashwatch.org/r/NOV19/dash-retail-dev--10-launch---dao-owned-merchant-platform
v---------v----------v
Should version 1.0 of Dash Retail be:
- open sourced (MIT)
- proprietary (license TBD) and co-owned by the DAO (entity TBD) and Astound Group LTD*.
* Astound Group LTD owns Switchly.com, and is in turn owned by Ash and Alex, who are the proposal owners.
^---------^----------^
Ash has subsequently instructed DW NOT to move forward with this poll.
You're so confident in the DAO's support that you would blatantly lie to us about this?
If you donate the 5 Dash to run a main treasury proposal I shall consider that sufficient to OSS it and we can agree on wording to do so. Otherwise you can wait until we transfer it to DCG/DIF and if we do not manage to do that you can do your vote then.
A: OSS DashRetail 1.0?
B: Create a treasury proposal to ask the DAO whether or not to OSS Dash Retail 1.0?
- Having two proposals running, one which says 'OSS' and another which says 'License to DCG' would likely cause some confusion.
- If ownership is given to DCG during the decision proposal cycle, then the circumstances which MNOs made their votes based on have changed.
I have no problem with DR going open source - but I want to ensure this is done right as once it is done, it cannot be easily undone. With regards to writing up something based on this, do you want me to write reasons for / against or leave that up to the MNs to research?
I feel there is no other decision that can be made at this point. We don't have a draft agreement or even the DAO entity figured out yet.
https://www.cryptonewsz.com/now-merchants-can-accept-bch-through-bch-merchant-application/17819/
Unlike your solution, there is no centralized authority for the merchant to register with who monitors transactions and who can presumably charge a fee at some point, and there is no ponzi-like "agent hierarchy."
Core features of the actual system:
#1 - Allowing merchants to accept Dash
#2 - Allow them to sell their Dash to their customers
#3 - Allow them to buy Dash from their customers
#4 - Join #2 and #3 across multiple merchants for remittance channels
All of this is backed up by:
- Providing the merchants with a full suite of tools for accounting and management purposes.
- Transparent reporting to Dash Watch on how our merchant adoption is going (per adoption team KPIs).
- Empowering the merchants to act on their own attitude to risk when it comes to volatility by allowing them to hold Dash, receive fiat payouts or otherwise hedge their risk.
I would request if you could if a specific license agreement has been drafted for this purpose? The reason I'm asking about this is we do not want the work to be used by any other crypto currency. Dash is paying for its development and therefore DASH should receive the benefit for this investment.
My concern is that you stated that George Donnelly is a "partner" in your project. However, Donnelly has not received funding for his merchant program and from his twitter posts it is clear he has not taken this well. As a consequence he has been posting negative comments about DASH's on his twitter feed. In one feed he has responded to one of Roger Ver's posts as follows:
This tweet was posted on Donnelly's twitter feed on 4th November:
Roger Ver posted: "Bitcoin cash has more physical adoption than any other crypto currency"
Donnelly tweet in reply to this comment: "Starting to look that way, Especially if we decide to teach our 1,150 active merchants across Latam about #BitcoinCash
Still debating it internally"
This sounds like an intention for Donnelly to training the merchants we funded him to sign up to accept Bitcoin cash.
Can you therefore confirm that you would be willing to sign an IP transfer agreement to the DAO with the specific wording that the IP can only be used for DASH network projects and for the promotion of DASH and cannot be used to be adapted, changed or used as a basis for any other cryptocurrency. If this was to occur it would be an infringement of IP rights and the DIF would have a legal basis to go after and claim damages against any individuals or organisations that are using DASH DAO owned IP that is outside of the terms of the IP agreement.
When it comes to formalizing the legal side to this, currently we are in discussions about how best to approach this with DCG and the DIF, it's a nuanced thing and is again more new ground. I think whichever way it is owned/controlled via the DAO means that 'Dash' would get to dictate its own terms on who it awards sub-licenses to and the clauses that cover those licenses.
It's worth noting (and I have said this quite a few times so I apologize for sounding like a stuck record!) that Alex and I will retain a full license too to use/modify/commercialize the DR codebase in our other projects (like Switchly.com).
Dash Retail by AshFrancis
https://beta.dashwatch.org/r/OCT19/dash-retail-2
Why? Because you don't develop custom, commercial software like this. This type of thing is VERY EXPENSIVE to develop and support. You need a committed team and lots of money. The story here is that Ash and Alex are going to get us to "LTS" (Long Term Stable) and then "let's see what happens."
What is going to happen is that there are going to be requests for more funds to build George's vision, about which he just had an epiphany...
http://dash.ist/2019/10/15/the-future-of-mass-adoption-is-an-app/
And so here we are: George is expecting the DAO to build this for him. What he wants looks an awful lot like Kuvacash, except the kUSD is now a Dash stablecoin. Which leads me to...
http://dash.ist/2019/03/11/we-need-a-dash-stablecoin/
Creating a stablecoin does not help the end user who want to hold USD or their local currency. This stablecoin is only a proxy for what they want. They still can't do anything with it. And it gets us into all kinds of regulatory scrutiny...
https://cointelegraph.com/news/report-g7-says-global-stablecoins-pose-threat-to-financial-stability/amp
Now do you see that I am not a troll? Now do you see why I want this voted down?
- DR Infrastructure costs are around $6000/year, if this is paid by the DAO either by our prop or by the teams that use DR then DR (and Dash Rates) will run indefinitely.
- Once we hit 1.0 the only on-going upgrades needed are small as the protocol changes and to update our node, this will not cost much, if anything.
- If the DAO wants us to develop more features or wishes us to pause development and stick with 1.0 until a later stage, then we will do so.
- DR is not developing its own stable coin or a wallet solution.
- The DAO can always award DR development / hosting / support / etc to another team as it will have a full license to the code.
George is a partner in DR but also has his own opinions that he shares on his blog, don't speculate by conflating the two. You're still railroading this proposal and posting speculation as fact and attempting to spread FUD with a barrage of top-level comments that are completely inaccurate and show you for the troll you are and continue to be.
- Doesn't scale to businesses where owner isn't in store
- If owner leaves store has to entrust device to clerk
- Funds are kept on-device which could be stolen
- One device per store doesn't work with multiple currencies
- Accounting is far more complex
- No dedicated hardware device with receipt printing and customer screens
- No retail specific functions like tipping, invoices, receipts, etc.
- Not measurable by the DAO through transparent metrics
- No direct line of support to adoption team
- Doesn't work as a web checkout or for vending machines, for transit, etc. (not extensible)
- Offers no automatic off-ramp / volatility offset functionality
- No remittance system outside of something very manual and insecure
- No option to facilitate sale of Dash to customer or purchase of Dash from customer with commission (outside of something very manual and insecure)
This project typifies the OLD WAY the Dash treasury did business -- toxic personalities, inept "entrepreneurs," misrepresentations to the DAO, and the basic funding idea that can be summed up using the following pseudocode:
do {
create proposal
code
demo
} while (DAO not fed up)
Unless we hear from the DIF or DCG about how important this codebase is, we should let it die.
We are already funding MyDashWallet, DashElectrum, DashWatch, DashNexus and we should be funding DashCentral. I don't think the DAO is in the position to take on another software project that has no intention of producing revenue.
It allows the entrepreneurs amongst us to build exciting business around, and support dash and the dao in some fashion
This all would be impossible without developers such as Ash & Alex who are openly sharing there IP with the participants of the dao.
What did KuvaCash or Benn Swann give you in return? Took millions and nothing to show and no material benefit to dash
Think about this parting thought for a minute if KuvaCash tech was accessible by other participants of the dao, perhaps someone would have risen to the challenge to complete the task that they had started.
Therefore allowing the project to come to fruitation in some fashion and ultimately benefitting the DASH.
I hope this encourages you to do some research before making baseless accusations tantamount to slander,
I have used personal funds and time, and travel costs inter alia, to meet and talk to vast majority of the dao participants and to get an accurate sense of there ambitions goals and ideals, in order to make informed decisions around my votes
I HIGHLY urge every MNO to actively search and research every DFO, and make educated and informed decisions to the best of your abilities ( VC's do not make money on passive investments, they MUST have some degree of involvement) we need to be thinking along the same lines to ensure similar outcomes of our investments as MNO
Thank you
You even create a proposal that promises a "launch" if funded. Taking a page out of Drako's playbook are we?
- We take a third of what we could get elsewhere and many months we take no salary and I cover our costs from my own personal finances.
- We donate our spare time to countless other Dash projects.
- Our Rates API is in use in core infrastructure and open to other projects and is fully launched: https://rates2.dashretail.org
- Our alpha is already launched and has done over $30,000 in Dash transactions.
- We launched the first local adoption tracker in partnership with Dash Latam.
- We are giving our entire project to the DAO as an act of good faith, not building a business out of this and instead offering the most return to the network where multiple businesses and entities could benefit from our work.
- Everything we have done has been fully transparently reported to Dash Watch and we have a full financial audit trail and have given them full back-end access to our data.
The license to Dash Retail is most definitely intellectual property and makes much more sense to belong to the trust or the trust via DCG than it does the DIF. When I attempted to explain this to you, rather than accept your lack of knowledge, you doubled-down, even ignoring the fact that I have had many conversations with DIF supervisors. You can try and derail this proposal because you're upset I called you out, that is your right to comment as an MNO, but the truth is there is no merit to a thing you say and now you've resorted to attacking me with baseless accusations.
It is not our software as I have made it very clear that this proposal would mean FULL ownership belonging to the DAO via the trust. This would mean an irrevocable license to distribute, use, reuse, modify, sub-license, commercialize alongside all code with the only proviso that we would also have a license too.
Have you drawn up a legal agreement regarding what rights the DAO has to your software and support for that software, or you have been too busy coding to get to that yet?
In terms of the actual mechanism for ownership the most logical process is to either give the ownership (or irrevocable license + sub-license as mentioned above) to the Dash Trust or alternatively directly to DCG and thus by extension the trust. As part of this cycle we'll make that a reality subject to our costs being covered but just to be clear on this - that is our full intention and always has been. Should there be issues in the logistics of this we'll search for an alternative path potentially giving to the DIF or a trusted Dash entity like Dash Watch. The final option would be to open-source it but that would be for the DAO to decide and not us.
The one proviso is that due to us working at less than half our rate if we were doing this purely as a software house is that we too should have a license to use/reuse/modify etc part of the code in our other projects.
Hope that clarifies but let me know any further questions, I'm happy to dive deeper into this / sign an MOU or even give the code now as it is to DCG / the trust - though in my mind this makes more sense at 1.0 stage.
- Transaction Fees
- Off-ramp Fees
- Hardware Revenue
- Add-ons
- Fiat / Credit Card Support
But our belief is that the base software should be free for anyone and everyone that wishes to serve Dash subject to DAO approval, and should always act towards the benefit of the network. If a business seeks to build off Dash Retail (or if we choose to do so), that business should award equity to the DIF (and the DAO can give the source code as a condition of that partnership). However it makes sense for Dash Retail itself, as an infrastructure tool (and our rates platform, powering the fiat prices in the mobile wallets and elsewhere) to be owned by the network and always act for the benefit of the network. This doesn't rule out a commercial aspect but instead opens that commercial aspect open to more than just us and protects the networks interests.
As an example; I would argue there are or could be a lot of commercial applications to the Dash mobile wallets - embedded exchange, retail directory adverts, username premiums, links and other affiliate programs but it makes sense for the base 'reference architecture' to be owned by the network.
Happy to expand on this and hear your viewpoint - I'm very supportive of the DIF and its role in the space. Our crypto exchange (Switchly.com) will be seeking involvement from the DIF and that will hopefully come before the DAO too in due course.
I think you have it backwards. I cannot support this unless and until the DIF is satisfied with what you are doing.
However, i urge you to make an informed decision.
I too like you was skeptical initially of ash & alex, having said this we have moved on beyond this.
As they have time and time again demonstrated they have the networks best interest at heart.
Without a doubt, I will be voting YES.
Cheers,
1. Own the shares of DCG
2. As shareholders, reassign the DCG board if the masternodes instruct it to do so
3. Assign or hire the trustee of the Trust
4. Hold other passive assets that ultimately belong to the network such as patents or trademarks assigned to it by DCG or other legal entities, and enforce any associated licensing requirements.
***
I don't see anything here that would indicate what you have in mind is appropriate.
If the trust owns it then it is akin to number 4 on your list, an asset which can be licensed.
If either of these end up as not suitable, then we will give it to an alternate DAO appointed representative.
This is about as far as I am willing to entertain you, we put a lot of work into this, there are many months where I fund our costs myself and we work incredibly hard for the DAO as I mentioned above. You have not given me a modicum of the respect I've given you and this isn't the first time you've harangued a proposal owner based, quite frankly on ignorance. You did the same with the DIF, ultimately changing your mind but not before posting 26 derailing comments.
I respect the DAO as a whole and really appreciate the fantastic support we're getting but if you as an individual wish to argue semantics over ownership despite everything else and disrespect us despite all we do then you can leave your no votes and that is that.