| 4 Sep 2018 |
 Haon | "every month the master node operators (MNOs) vote" | 14:34:57 |
| Haon |
Dash Central — I described it in my previous post so won’t go into any detail here. It facilitates creating Proposals, and displays all existing Proposals along with their meta-data, a description field, and a space for comments
maybe a link to the previous post as well?
| 14:36:43 |
| Haon | we need something like this for Decred as well: https://www.dashwatch.org/ | 14:39:08 |
| Haon | richardred: fair points of critique as well, great job | 14:42:24 |
| Haon |
Taken from latest iteration of www.test-proposals.decred.org
| 14:44:45 |
| Haon | dead link there, should be https://test-proposals.decred.org/ | 14:45:03 |
| Haon | maybe good to mention you need to click the read more in the side banner to get to that tutorial screen? | 14:47:31 |
| Haon |
When Politeia launches for real, there will be a mechanism for formalizing, refining, extending and amending the definition of what constitutes valued work.
combine this sentence with the previous paragraph into one bigger paragraph, that reads easier imo
| 14:51:26 |
| Haon |
Doing treasury governance off-chain allows Decred to take a more iterative and agile approach to figuring out how it should work. The plan is for significant parts of it to move on-chain over time as they mature.
wondering where you got this statement from?
| 15:10:27 |
| Haon | I wasn't aware of this, but it makes a whole lot of sense | 15:10:52 |
| Haon |
Resistance to being ripped off
I don't really understand this subtitle, can you explain?
| 15:15:01 |
 richardred | In reply to @Haon:decred.org
There are however quite a few projects which are transitioning from A to B — Decred, Cardano, Horizen (...)
should be A to C
I disagree, the present funding is not ad hoc, there is a pool that's being administered by a centralized organization (DHG) | 15:15:36 |
| richardred | @bee | 15:16:01 |
| richardred | @bee picked up on that bit about moving stuff on-chain too... I thought it was assumed that the DAE would have more on-chain components, but I actually removed it from the latest version | 15:16:56 |
| Haon | a = ad hoc; b = centralized; c = DAO | 15:17:19 |
| Haon | in the version that you sent me | 15:17:24 |
| Haon | so in that case it should be B to C | 15:17:59 |
| Haon | when you say "transitioning" it implies that you are talking about the current change of the proposal process to Pi | 15:19:07 |
| Haon | https://medium.com/@richardred/decentralized-autonomous-funding-of-blockchain-projects-3c0c233ae4ad (reviewing this version) | 15:20:03 |
| Haon | ah, I refreshed the page and now it's good | 15:20:52 |
| Haon | after some thinking I agree that we are B right now | 15:21:50 |
| richardred | thanks, I have been making most of the changes you suggested, in both the medium and github versions... looks like I moved too soon to make the github version, or should have written it in markdown and moved it to medium | 15:30:14 |
| Haon | my bad, I should have given feedback a bit earlier | 15:35:59 |
|  lukebp joined the room. | 15:36:51 |
| Haon |
Setting a strategy
the text below this subheader is mainly a criticism of Dash's system, it doesn't necessarily reflect "a strategy"
| 15:44:00 |
| Haon | might want to change this title, for example "High proposal fees" | 15:44:48 |
| Haon | the obvious solution here (the chapter is titles challenges and solutions) is to let the proposal system use fiat as the base | 15:45:23 |
| Haon | rather than the volatile cc | 15:45:41 |
| Haon | I think it makes sense to have the "problems and solutions" chapter in three parts, but those parts should be a bit reorganized | 15:48:35 |
| Haon |
- Payments up-front or in arrears?
- Fees to submit proposals?
- Proposals and/or people?
| 15:51:22 |
