I could understand moves to enable automated or semi-automated cross-posting of content to enable users to earn rewards and build up a stake on each platform.
Leveraging the combined strength of all three platforms could benefit all of them, provided it was done in a way which attracted inward investment and new/returning users rather than just redistributing existing reward pools.
However, this proposal appears over-complex in terms of what it plans to do, with 12 different pieces of functionality listed. I'd like to see details of the coding team and management who would be doing all the work involved across three different platforms, as well as roadmaps, detailed plans for how the funds would be spent, etc!
There are also a lot of other points to consider - many of which echo what others have said;
- How is Hive (and by extension, Steem and Blurt) protected if it doesn't go to plan ? What is the plan to unwind the project if it encounters errors or issues ?
- Does this require changes to the core code of all three sites, or is it standalone code which can be switched off without impacting core code ?
- Have you got agreement to this from key stakeholders/owners/witnesses of all three platforms ? What has Justin Sun said ? I have a feeling that most current users aren't too concerned about past history, but those who were there at the time of the fork likely have long and bitter memories - how are they now going to work together ?
- I couldn't see a proposal on Blurt (although I'm not a member of either of the others, which might make a difference), and on Steem I only see one comment relating to the proposal. Is there much interest over there ?
- What happens if the proposal doesn't pass in all 3 platforms ?
- 90K is a lot of HBD, but also sounds like not enough to pay for the volume of coding needed. Are you committing any funds of your own in addition to this ? Are the other two platforms committing to match the funds provided by the Hive DHF ?
- How do we measure success (I don't consider price volatility alone to be a good metric), and is there a plan to repay the funds back to the DHF in due course ? Who does this create ongoing revenue streams for in terms of fees etc ?
Thank you for your response and I will try to answer as many questions as possible and will likely end up doing a video response to answer various questions as well.
Thanks for that - it helps to start filling in the gaps, although I think we still need detailed plans. It's an ambitious project; maybe co-ordinating with the Leo team might help with it, they've done quite a bit of cross-chain work recently.
But I still would like to see a tangible, objective metric for what success looks like and how it adds at least 90K of value to Hive. Progress updates are an essential part of the process, but in themselves don't add anything to Hive's market cap or user base.
I'm supportive of what the Leo team is doing and have a small position but they are taking a slightly different approach. Also their proposal didn't get funded despite having some heavy hitters vote on it so they are in a similar boat from that respect.
I get what you are saying about wanting to see further breakdowns and objectives and it isn't against you or anyone else but I could do endless work in the "maybe" stage of all this to still not get funded.
I think one of the failure points of a DAO is that enough people look at the amount and say. "No fair..... why don't I get the 90,000 HBD?"
So then it ends up being projects that are very close to the shrinking inner circle.
The votes are very heavily guarded for content and for proposals even for people who have been here through all this for 9 years like myself.
The risk of people voting is pretty low. If I wasn't producing updates and progress in the first couple of weeks it would be easy for someone to just remove their vote.