Proposal “protocol-developer-incentives-fund“ (Completed)Back

Title:Protocol Developer Incentives Fund
Owner:andyfreer2020
Monthly amount: 247 DASH (35195 USD)
Completed payments: 3 totaling in 741 DASH (0 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2021-05-14 / 2021-08-11 (added on 2021-05-16)
Votes: 858 Yes / 211 No / 6 Abstain

Proposal description

Dash Proposal: Protocol Developer Incentives Fund

Ask: 247 Dash * 3 months

1 Introduction

This proposal is being raised to provide a solution to an issue that has existed for a while in Dash. Many of the developers who maintain our protocol are not being incentivized highly enough compared to other opportunities in the market. This in turn has/is causing them to leave and seek other opportunities.

Protocol development is the work that determines which underlying features Dash has to offer in downstream products such as wallets, integrations, or dApps on Dash Platform. 

Protocol work is also the hardest and most niche work in the crypto industry, heavily reliant on experience in cryptography, security analysis and consensus algorithms. The pool of software engineers that possess these skills is small and at the same time such engineers are highly sought after which creates a very strong imbalance between supply and demand.

In traditional tech startups, it is normal for the key developers to receive equity in the company they are working for. In crypto, this can be implemented easily by rewarding the devs with enough coins in the project they’re working on so that they have the opportunity to make large ROIs on the value they are putting in with the work they are doing. However, in Dash, many of our protocol developers that joined after 2016 have not had the opportunity to accumulate amounts beyond a basic industry salary that would provide meaningful returns on the value they’re adding, and especially in an industry where many devs are being given this opportunity.

The goal of this proposal is to resolve this issue for our protocol developers. It will allow us to attract the best talent within the industry to Dash and retain the existing talent we have. It will allow those who are most important to the long-term success of Dash to have the opportunity to earn a real stake in Dash. This proposal will allow us to offer these awards at a network level to any and all protocol contributors to Dash, without any affiliation to a particular Dash funded organization. 

This fund is designed to give all contributors to our protocol, regardless of whether they are a member of Dash Core Group or not, the opportunity to receive awards from this fund. We want to continuously incentivize all Dash protocol developers, regardless of whether they work for an entity in the DAO or as an individual. We believe that the retention of our protocol developers is of such importance to our network’s future success and the delivery of Platform, that it should be an ongoing network-wide activity. 

Currently some of our best developers, who are key to our protocol in terms of expertise, knowledge and skills to improve it, can be headhunted by other projects in the space to earn much higher salaries with very large bonuses for doing so.  In addition to the financial incentives, they will also have a clear path to earn a voting share in our network (a Masternode) over a period of time, which is something unattainable to many of our protocol developers on their salary alone. 

Whilst we won’t mention specific names or details in order to not encroach on personal privacy, this proposal is being raised to address an immediate need to retain one of our protocol devs who is critical to the success of the DCG roadmap for 2021.

Nobody involved in this proposal’s creation will be eligible for awards from the fund if it passes.

2 Concept

We are proposing the creation of a fund that requests 5% of the Dash governance system’s budget, to be held as an incentive for long term, high activity contributors to the Dash protocol.

Contributor awards will be based upon their merged commits to the Dash protocol source repositories that are live on mainnet. These contributions would be graded by a set of long term trusted Developer/Architect Masternode Owners and early adopters to then decide awards. These people would not be entitled to receiving any awards from the fund.

It should be made clear that entitlement is not determined by role or team, but rather awarded to people who contribute excellence and push our project heavily forward.

The system for granting awards is detailed below and is designed to ensure that developers need to continuously contribute to the protocol to maintain eligibility for the awards they have already earnt. The awards are vested over the course of a year on a rolling cycle, allowing the contributor to claim in tranches. For example, a contributor would claim the award for their Q1 2022 contributions at the start of Q2 2023. 

3 Detail

  1. Priced in Dash - The incentives are purely in Dash, we want our devs to believe in Dash as money, and add as much value as possible to grow the value of their vested Dash in the fund.  If the price goes up a lot, that is the whole point of the fund - Dash itself is a protocol, and we are dependent on devs to improve that protocol and therefore improve Dash.  
  2. Proposals - Funding would be structured via quarterly proposals, and these proposals would cover all rules governing the awarding and management of the fund.
  3. Open donations - The Fund is on a public Dash address so anyone can donate or raise additional proposals.
  4. Opt-out Clause - As a rolling monthly proposal, the Dash Network can vote down the fund on any given month to prioritize other proposals or for any other reason. 
  5. Delegation - Devs can decline or delegate shares in the fund - for example if some devs feel their rewards are more needed by other devs.

4 Vested Dash System 


The dev fund will be awarded as locked (vested) Dash, with awards decided at the end of each quarter by the fund managers (detailed below). The managers will discuss the awards at the end of each quarter, auditing the activity of protocol developers for that period. Managers do not have to award the whole fund each quarter.

The locked Dash will be eligible to be claimed after 1 year from the end of that quarter, with the requirement that the developer has been active (awarded Dash by the managers) for 3 of the last 4 quarters. This will result in the developers being incentivized ongoing to continue contributing to the Dash protocol.

- Fund managers are not eligible to receive awards from the fund.
- Fund managers must have some understanding of protocol development
- Funding will not be decided by lines of code or commit count, but rather contribution in line with value to Dash as decided by the managers.

4.1 Reference example with protocol developer ‘DevA’

Quarter          
DevA Awards      
DevA Claims      
Note      
Q3 20211700
Q4 20212300
Q1 20221400
Q2 20222200
Q3 2022900
Q4 2022110170Claiming Q3 2021
Q1 2023120230Claiming Q4 2021
Q2 202370140Claiming Q1 2022


Should a developer reach 1000 Dash in earnt but not yet claimable rewards, a locked masternode will be optionally set up for them, earning them rewards and giving them voting rights within the network. Once the developer is eligible to make the claim for those funds, they will be sent to them and in turn they will be able to set up their own masternode.

5 Fund Setup and Management

Funds received if this Proposal is passed by the Network will be received and held by Dash Incubator for the following quarter in the Incubator’s Wallet, and Protocol contributions from that date will be eligible to awards from the Fund. 

During the quarter, the Incubator will then incentivize (from its own funds) the setup of the Fund in terms of a Rules document detailing how Fund managers will be appointed / removed and modelled on the same principles by which the Incubator Rules are structured in terms of full transparency and full incentivization.

Following the creation of the Rules document and the completion of the next funding proposal all funds will be held custodially by the Dash Trust Protectors, as elected representatives of the DAO. They will monitor, approve and administer any transfer or payment of these assets. With the use of a multisig wallet, any movement of funds would require at least 3 of 6 trust protectors + 1 of 2 nominated protocol developers (QuantumExplorer + one further nominated protocol developer)

6 Resources

Incubator Rules: https://github.com/DashIncubator/dash-incubator-rules/blob/master/rules.md
Incubator Fund-Setup Bounty:  https://trello.com/c/h5z9GPFP/163-dash-protocol-dev-incentives-fund
Incubator Wallet: https://insight.dash.org/insight/address/XbFb9b1qaoLykngDbUwBVBFwSHuwQRhSqc

Thanks

Andy Freer
Dash Developer

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
3 points,6 months ago
I'm new here so i hope you guys dont take it the wrong way.
First i'm all for paying devs their fair share and all that. With that said where do we see how much exactly they are payed today? Tried to search but did not find it.
I'm in so many projects and man the devs are dedicated and work and deliver with very little funds. I mean there are good times and bad times. So its great there is a treasury for the bad times. At the same time i know some projects pay way way to much. Not saying that is the case here but before i vote i like to know the
existing salary and what salary levels we are talking about for different competence level. Like junior, mid, senior developer.

I dont know if i understand the example above. Like Q32021 170 dash. Is that 170 dash for 3 month? Even now with say 200$ a dash it would mean 170x200$=34000$ , or 11333$ a month. That is really allot! Like atleast double the amount of what i would say is a high salary (i'm in Sweden so my numbers are based on salary here, i have expert devs with less then half of that). Yes i know crypto is different but still.
And now consider 2 weeks back when Dash was 400$+ :D
Reply
4 points,6 months ago
This proposal is not a salary, nor is it something that we will offer to devs in advance of tasks. This is solely a reward mechanism for excellence. If someone comes up with something that brings 1 Billion $ extra in value to our market cap, and they are getting paid 10kUSD/month, but are then offered 200k $ to go to a different project, well at that point they might leave. This proposal is to have a mechanism to stop that from happening.
Reply
2 points,6 months ago
Ok i got it. Makes sense. We do need some pot of money for the situation you mention.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
Why should we trust you? MooCowMoo was a painful lesson that we cannot trust people here simply because they're familiar. And despite all the lofty sentiment in this proposal about rewarding excellence, let's face it -- you're asking for a slush fund.
Reply
0 points,6 months ago
I dont know this MooCowMoo afair but how would it work if we need to compensate talents if we do not have this fund?
I mean we could ask for the fund for the next super block but the waiting and uncertainty would be a risk no?
What is the options? Just curious if you have better proposal for such things?
Reply
-4 points,6 months ago
The salaries of DCG employees should not be public information. Virtually all companies keep this type of information private for good reason. It's RT's job to insure that employees are properly incentivized, but also that funds are not wasted. The overwhelming majority of DCG's expenses are related to employee compensation BTW.
Reply
2 points,6 months ago
As a decentralized project i dont agree with this. Sure a company is one thing but i thought Dash was suppose to be decentralized as the name suggests = DAO = Decentralized autonomous organization
So comparing a DAO with traditional company is not right in my opinion. We do need to know how much everyone is making otherwise its not very open nor decentralized.
Who/what is RT? (i know there are trusted people voted in but.....)
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
An individual's privacy trumps decentralized transparency in my opinion.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
Using, "Because we are decentralized." as an argument is a fallacy that AFAIK is unique to this project. Along with masternodes, InstantSend and chainlocks, Dash invented a fallacy!
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
Sorry dont get your point. Are you saying we are not decentralized?

Just for reference i'm in many other projects (pivx as one example) and there i know how many coins different core devs get.
What is the point of having a DAO if its just for show. Sorry dont want to offend anyone but i thought Dash was more transparent with these things, being the "first" DAO as i hear.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
"We are decentralized so we should [insert your agenda here]."

A lot of people here use the above fallacy. Of course the servers that host the Dash software MUST be decentralized (and open sourced). That is what makes a cryptocurrency a cryptocurrency. Elements of the Dash project are also decentralized, but only because it makes the project harder for regulators to attack. Decentralization is not a virtue or a goal of the project. It is a defense mechanism.
Reply
0 points,6 months ago
Agree, but the financial aspect of it is also important. Unless we know who gets what and why we are not improving the existing corrupt traditional system.
If Dash is truly a DAO we need transparency on every level and not cherry pick what should be public or not.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
"...existing corrupt traditional system."

SMH. I'm going to call it. It looks like Dash is on its way to a fork. One fork of Dash will be led by DCG using hired developers under CTO Bob Carroll, and the other fork of Dash will be led by the "decentralized" Incubator admins where in actuality Andy Freer has veto power and rules as an autocrat.
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
Only one person is advocating for a fork, and that person is you : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-lite-fork.51578/
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
Seriously hope we are not forking and creating a huge drama. Remember BTC/BCH&BSV....
Thats a bad thing to be honest. Hope this can be worked out.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
My point is that Andy's attempt to take control of core dev WILL INEVITABLY RESULT in a fork. I am not advocating that that happen. I would rather Andy stand down and leave core dev to DCG.

The thread you referenced is an alternate fork idea that would be more appropriate if let's say RT were to resign and DCG is dissolved.
Reply
0 points,6 months ago
https://imgur.com/gallery/VKDXi
Reply
5 points,6 months ago
Funding our developers is a great use of the DAO, in fact it is the primary reason for its existence. The crypto space is highly competitive and talented developers are in high demand, retaining our existing devs and hopefully attracting new ones is a no brainer. Recall that during the bear market some devs took pay cuts and continued to work on the project, now is the time to give something back.

This proposal has my support.
Reply
-9 points,6 months ago
This is not about paying the developers. This is about WHO is paying the developers. We cannot let Andy Freer pay DCG developers. It will mean the end of DCG and IMHO the end of Dash. Without DCG, Dash is indistinguishable from PIVX.
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
WTF? I'm sorry, but Andy Freer is only trying to keep the development team from being lured away from Dash. He knows what's going on and wants to have a mechanism to offer a better deal if the developer is valuable so they won't be fished away from Dash. Andy's other project, another DAO only strengthens Dash. The last thing we want is a single person making every decision for Dash, we want many DAOs working together and independently pursuing different areas with crossover. And that's what we've got. I don't know where you're getting this paranoia @Geert ?
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
First of all, I have no idea who Andy Freer is. I have never seen a picture of him. I have never read his CV if one exists. Can anyone point me to any information about this person?

Because I have no idea who Andy Freer is, I have to go by his statements. His statements have led me to conclude that he's obsessed with this project to an unhealthy degree, that he feels this is HIS project, and it's his right to control the core software roadmap and the developers working on it.

The Incubator is a trojan horse IMHO. It's constructed to appear "decentralized," but Andy has veto power over everything. The purpose of the Incubator is to ultimately take control of the all Dash core development. Of course Andy will need money for this initiative that is what this proposal is for. It's for building a war chest.
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
lol
Reply
-7 points,6 months ago
If Andy and his co-conspirators get their way and DCG loses control of the core protocol roadmap, I am moving everything into coins that have NO DEVELOPERS like Litecoin and Doge. Why risk having ego-driven, overconfident developers screw things up?

When BTC was released, it was supposed to be complete. Except for maybe increasing the block size and minor tweaks, it was not supposed to be messed with. I see now why Doge is not a joke after all.
Reply
5 points,6 months ago
I think it's sad that you are spamming this page with you're unhinged / off-base theories making it almost impossible to have any kind of intelligent discourse about this topic.

If there were actual legit concerns or questions here, you're making it very difficult because no one is going to want to chat with you spamming everything and you're theory that there is some kind of take over of Dash going on with Incubator and this proposal, which is absolutely ridiculous.

I don't need to "control" DCG devs because we're all working to the same vision, which I played a big part if forging, and if we weren't and I wanted to change our roadmap (which I don't), I would not be going about it like this.

And the obvious factor is if I wanted to control DCG devs, I wouldn't have left the CTO position, interviewed / gave my seal of approval to Bob (which I still give), and spent most of 2018 handing over to him including many long haul flights with him and developers at my house where I was really carefuland spent a lot of effort to handover my design / prototyping work to the current team we have today (and all from my own pockets, because you're probably sad to learn I was never one of your "employees").

Bob has been key to delivering Platform now to Testnet and i'm in regular contact with him and Ryan and the devs and we all want the same thing... I am not "paying" any DCG devs, nor with this proposal would I be in any position to pay them, it's a retoractive awards fund where awards would be assigned based on the DCG roadmap and what has been delivered... and my only involvement is helping to setup the fund, it would be managed by elected individuals and not myself.

And btw I've always been against MN shares - I think it's a waste of time / focused on the wrong end of our project - we want new usecases to attract end-users. The only reason Incubator is funding it is because I don't control it and Admins can fund what they want and i'm not someone who ever wants to control things because I believe strongly in decentralization as a means to efficiency and removal of trust / bus factor. And i've written about this publicly several times, please bother to do some basic research.

Either you haven't read actual text or you're trolling, either way this proposal is really important and if you are really an MNO and want to help Dash, wether you agree or disagree, please have some self awareness and stop destroying the conversation on this topic.

Thanks
Andy
Reply
3 points,6 months ago
I doubt he is even a MNO Andy, he was bashing this proposal when there were 0 No votes.
Reply
-4 points,6 months ago
Fail. Everyone can see the little green "MNO" tag next to my handle here.
Reply
1 point,6 months ago
Good lord, you're really just a troll living under a bridge then, so sad.
Reply
3 points,6 months ago
I'm pretty sure you keep this handle even if your Masternode is down because you spent the collateral. Let me ask Rango.
Reply
-4 points,6 months ago
After I've sold my last masternode I won't be here.
Reply
2 points,6 months ago
You are being a bit dramatic here.
Reply
-6 points,6 months ago
https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/in-order-to-preserve-the-considerable-investment-the-dao-has-in-dcg.51574/

BTW I'm publicly calling for DCG to delay the release of Evo while we hire new developers to replace the ones here who are not interested in working for DCG anymore.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/DashAdvisoryBoard

You publicly stated in your comments in the above proposal that your goal is to dismantle DCG. You don't like it because, among other things, the core devs have to "seek permission for everything." Aw, is DCG ruining all the fun for the devs?

Yes. In the real world, where billions of dollars are at stake, you don't just let the core devs work on whatever the f**k they feel like. The vast majority of MNOs are VERY HAPPY with the current setup. Your efforts to undermine DCG will ultimately fail for that reason IMHO.
Reply
10 points,6 months ago
This proposal is coming from a collective of trust protectors and myself. Andy is an incoming trust protector and has agreed to having the incubator bear the burden of holding the funds.

In a one liner this proposal is there to incentivize some key protocol developers that have come to us later in the game to stay with Dash (or even return) when they are being offered or have been offered much more financially rewarding opportunities elsewhere.

These devs come up with features that add insane value to our project. While we should value all people who contribute to Dash, other projects do not see everyone the same and will constantly try to snipe our best.
Reply
-5 points,6 months ago
Andy graciously agreed to "bear the burden" of receiving a big pile of the DAO's money and the power that goes with it. SMH.

- Who are the key protocol developers?
- Who will be directing them?
- What features will add "insane value?"

The lack of transparency here is troubling. IMHO it's because your actual goal is to wrest control of protocol development from DCG, and you know that that is not what the network wants.
Reply
6 points,6 months ago
Since I'm one of DCGs oldest members I don't really see why I would want to wrestle control away from an organization I deeply care about. That's not what this proposal is about at all.

You can look at the main authors of our DIPs and that will mainly give you a pretty close list. Without Udjin and myself (I use my real name in the DIPs) then the list is quite narrow. I made myself ineligible to receive any funds as well.

There is no "directing" protocol devs. Codablock in the past was not told to come up with DKG or Chainlocks, he just did. Such amazing innovation needs to be rewarded more handsomely than just a salary to keep such people active. In the past we just had no way to do it and the outcome was not good. This proposal is there to make sure situations where we lose some of our most innovative minds never happens again.

We are not just going to be handing out Dash like Oprah once handed out cars. If no-one qualifies one quarter than the pot will grow. Hopefully this doesn't happen though and we get stronger innovation with such incentives. If only 1 or 2 people qualify but their contributions are not as breathtaking they will receive less.
Reply
3 points,6 months ago
So true. Chainlocks is gold, genius in fact.
Reply
-7 points,6 months ago
I am begging you to stop this attempt to elevate Andy Freer into a kind of Dash FluffyPony . It's not in our DNA to have a developer in charge. Also, Andy is not nearly as smart as Ricardo Spagni. He would screw this project up beyond all recognition if he was leading it. The fact that he wants to waste time on trustless masternode shares is proof that he's not in touch with reality.
Reply
-6 points,6 months ago
Codablock had some great ideas and they were approved by DCG management for inclusion in the roadmap. That is how things have to work.

If you succeed in screwing up Ryan and Bob's ability to direct DCG devs and if you succeed in screwing up their ability to control the core protocol roadmap I am out of here. I am not interested in this project if prima-donna developers are calling the shots.
Reply
7 points,6 months ago
"Codablock had some great ideas and they were approved by DCG management for inclusion in the roadmap."

This is NOT how the core dev team operates. We define our own roadmap with input from the value team, Bob, etc; Bob does NOT declare our roadmap from on high. Management never "approved" or disapproved of codablocks ideas, because that's not up to them, it's up to the developers, and then the community to adopt the software.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
What happens when there is a disagreement between the developers and DCG management? Let's say the developers want to implement trustless masternode shares and DCG management doesn't. What happens at that point?
Reply
5 points,6 months ago
Thankfully DCG devs and DCG management are all reasonable. And almost all the time everyone is on the same page. Rarely when that isn't the case meetings will be had to figure out a resolution, and one has always found in the past. We're a team, and we all want the best for our project.
Reply
-5 points,6 months ago
At some point in every crypto project there is a faction that demands control and then there is usually a fork. I feel we are fast approaching this point. Dash is not so easy to fork, so it's uncertain what the outcome of this conflict will be.
Reply
6 points,6 months ago
I think some kind of developer reward fund is vital for retaining Dash developers in the future. Either that or we allocate more budget in general to DCG, so they can raise the salary of those core developers whose salary have been voluntary shorted or set to very low level, ever since the bear market hit Dash.

With the included lock mechanisme, i prefer the developer reward fund program.
Reply
3 points,6 months ago
Hi - just to clarify the proposal text: Incubator is only involved in this first proposal, which Kickstarts the setup of the Fund and starts funding it with Dash via a Bounty: https://trello.com/c/h5z9GPFP/163-dash-protocol-dev-incentives-fund

The next proposal would be from the Fund itself, which is setup to be a Network level DFO without any afinity to any individual DFO or person within the Dash project. This is why the term Kickstarting is used in the Bounty which has a specific meaning:

"> The term Kickstarting is used in the Incubator to mean the funding of Bounties that initiate projects but include a plan to hand them off to 3rd parties to fund and monetize their longer-term development, including potentially raising individual Proposals to accomplish that."

Ref: https://github.com/andyfreer/dash-incubator-rules/blob/master/rules.md#131-funding-criteria

From my pesperctive, I was approached 2 days ago by key people to try to help solve an issue quickly. Incubator is only involved because it was the best available option to do that.

But i'd like to say that on a personal level I think this fund is a great idea and something we should have done a long time ago and we'd be further along if we did. It will help us bring in a ton of the best new talent and retain them and that's a no-brainer in restoring our place as the leading innovator with our leading tech who really values the people creating that value. I'm happy to give 100% of my support to the people behind this and credit to them for doing so.
Reply
4 points,6 months ago
...also in terms of DCG scope, I spoke with Ryan & Bob on this issue last week at length in the TP call and we're all on the same page. In terms of this proposal, I was told indirectly DCG management would love a solution here but it wasn't possible within time/constraints (i.e. under 2 days to get something in place), and also I think this needs to be put in place at Network level anyway. Hence this proposal. I'm all for synergy with DCG and working together with Incubator, if anyone is following the Incubator's proposals this should be obvious :)
Reply
4 points,6 months ago
...i.e. the Incubator is only holding the funds until the next proposal, when all the funds will be transferred to the Protocol Dev Incentives Fund itself. After that, Incubator or myself will have zero influence / control of that entity or it's funding. The Fund needs to be independent and at Network level and represented / controlled from people around the Network, it wouldn't really work if it wasn't.
Reply
4 points,6 months ago
Cryptographically verify the Proposal Description with the sig submitted within the proposal object:

https://pastebin.com/raw/yEN2AcEZ

(Instructions: Deserialize the txtsig qstring param in the GObject's URL field and use as the sig to verify the raw text against the receive address via DashCore)
Reply
-12 points,6 months ago
You're already requesting over $175,000 per month for your incubator and now you want another $78,000 per month for this nebulous "incentives fund?!"

"Whilst we won’t mention specific names or details in order to not encroach on personal privacy, this proposal is being raised to address an immediate need to retain one of our protocol devs who is critical to the success of the DCG roadmap for 2021."

Bullshit. Kindly tell us exactly what is this money is to be used for.
Reply
5 points,6 months ago
Bruh, its lunacy like this that makes me question myself when I end up on the same side as you in an argument.

Its all auditable, we can see what is happening. If what you are describing (DCG developers shirking their work to try for bigger rewards) starts to happen we can address it then.

Furthermore, It is likely that in many cases the rewards set up by this fund will overlap with DCG objectives, thereby supplementing developer income and pushing DCG objectives further, faster.
Reply
7 points,6 months ago
I can tell you that's exactly why this proposal was made. Is it so hard to fathom that someone who is doing an amazing job for us is actively being poached by another network? We need to keep such people. That's why we are doing this.
Reply
-3 points,6 months ago
What network is poaching what someone? This needs to be handled by RT and Bob Carroll if it's a DCG employee.
Reply
-11 points,6 months ago
I am concerned that you may be using funds we gave you for the INCUBATOR to bribe DCG employees, and now you want a special fund to bribe DCG employees? Is this your idea to help Dash?
Reply
8 points,6 months ago
I'm sorry but that's a ridiculous claim. DCG and Incubator have completely different objectives and are not in competition. These people are not so stupid as to break Dash via HR wars, but obviously want to retain the talent we have wherever we have it.
Reply
-8 points,6 months ago
We cannot have DCG devs, who are supposed to be working on Bob Carroll's roadmap, also paid by Andy. This creates a huge conflict of interest, and IMHO, it's a recipe for disaster. Let Andy find his own developers to work on his roadmap.
Reply
7 points,6 months ago
The funds that incubator uses are completely public. I do not believe DCG employees have ever received any amount from incubator, I know I haven't. Also there's no war between Incubator and DCG. We are working hand in hand. Andy has offered DCG any help we could use and we are using that help.
Reply
4 points,6 months ago
u can not be serious with that claim - come on
Reply
3 points,6 months ago
Thank god there are very few people here to read our resident troll-in-control. Great job Andy and DCG team....I wouldn't put much weight into the negativity from a couple of people...carry on.
Reply