This Post Will be Followed by a DAO Proposal
Proposal link: https://peakd.com/me/proposals/83
@steem.dao now holds 83,370,275 million HIVE tokens, these tokens were not airdropped to Steemit Inc. and the supporters of Justin Sun's witnesses in accordance with founding principals of HIVE. The plan is to slowly drip these tokens into the Hive Proposal System found here. The community is left with the ability to decide what to do with them, I propose we burn 50%.
Some people believe that since Steemit Inc. intended to use these funds for community development, they should all be used for community development. Some thought they were all burnt/should be burnt or never copied to HIVE. I think an agreement should be made as soon as possible, this will avoid speculation.
DAO already receives 10% of inflation and is well funded with 443,412 HBD and a daily budget of 4,434 HBD -some 1700 of it comes from that 83 million HIVE slowly dripping into the HBD for Dao proposals, it will likely take 10-40 years depending on the price of HIVE for this process to be completed.
Does HIVE really need $4434 in development funds per day? Steemit Inc. was spending $500,000 per month, but they were wasting money and didn't do so well for the blockchain. I believe capitalists and programmers have the ability to make money with HIVE without having to ask for charity. While the community needs some funding, it doesn't need $4434 per day, witnesses get 10% of inflation for their service, posters and curators inflation for their work, holders are rewarded with some inflation too. There is enough Steem for everyone and this inflation is taxing us all.
Let's Burn DAO Funds that Were Seized
Only 1/4 of the DAO budget is currently being used and if the proposals build long-term value, the DAO won't need a larger budget because we will all do just fine. Let's burn some of it, the proposal can be voted in and out based on need and there are plenty of funds in the Dao,443,378 HBD and growing! At the current rate of usage, if we burnt 100% of the daily budget there would be funding for over a year! We could burn at half of the inflation and continue to grow the DAO reserve.
What about the sock-puppet supporters? They may want their "airdrop". Let's face it, we don't want the majority of these users to get a free stake in HIVE, while some of them may successfully campaign to get the tokens, most will inevitably fail. We can always turn off the burn proposal if the funds are running low.
Let me know what you think, I was talking with some of the witnesses in the Hive discord, notably @themarkymark, @ats-david, and @crimsonclad about this. A few bystanders and some of the witnesses agreed with me, I don't think it's fair to take 100% of Steemit Inc's stake and 100% of the sock puppet supporters stake and use it to fund future development, it should have been burnt (or not copied) at day one but democratic ideals prevailed. So let's slowly burn it!
I propose 50% of DAO should be burnt! That leaves adequate funds.
As soon as I get 10 HBD, I will start this proposal and campaign for it, let me know what you think. This post rewards 25% @null, 25% @steem.dao, 5% to @peakd beneficiaries.
Put 10 proposals, 10% each.
Lets ee how much we want to burn.
This was my thought too, but thats 100hbd, can't expect him to fund that all at once. Maybe in sequence as they get funded.
This sounds like a reasonable approach to me.
https://peakd.com/me/proposals/83
Yes, I was thinking a series of little ones, 10% or 400 each is a little small, why not have increments, like 250, 500, 1000, and 2000, it can accomplish a similar effect through combinations. Start with a more agreeable number like 1000.
Maybe it should be used to Airdrop Hive to some of the people who got unfairly cut off from the Airdrop... and, whatever remains in the end, I say we burn it all.
This community needs to find a way to create cashflow, thus turning a blogging faucet into a credible business model. Or else we'll end up exactly in the same spot we were, with a token slowly but steadily heading towards zero.
Who is your opinion was unfairly cut from the airdrop? After looking at the list, it doesn't seem like we are talking about a lot of HIVE, most people had less than 50k in their wallet.
To create cash flow, practice blogging, and curation. This is a restart for most people as we all have to earn our rewards back. I think HIVE is coming along just fine.
I'm sure there were some mistakes...
Unfortunately, blogging and curation don't create cashflow. They only create cash out. 🙄
I looked at some of the actors in the airdrop, changing your witnesses to sock puppets during a controversial time was not a mistake, it takes considerable effort.
While some bloggers do cashout, they are advertising the platform for free and a growing user base will be much more profitable than any DAO funds.
The point of the DAO fund is to attract devs, though.
Otherwise, we would continue the silly practice of relying on the reward pool to fund projects.
Blogging really should be but one aspect of the chain.
There is 400k HBD in the Dao and that is growing by Over 2.5k per day of unspent funds. Why do we need such a large cushion? My idea is to slow the growth rate of these reserves until it is necessary to increase it again.
Sounds like a good plan 👍
I appreciate this discussion, but I disagree on the 50% burning idea.
In my opinion, yes.
Let me explain why:
1) It's true that not all of the dao's current wallet is being utilizing, however let's not forget that we are literally less than 2 days old. It's going to take time to have proposals come flooding in, and we need to be prepared.
2) Having a "warchest" ready for when we ( hopefully ) start onboarding lots of new people is very important to have. We can use these funds for marketing, development, game support, and so much more.
3) Don't forget that Hive has promised to allow users to make proposals stating why they believe them being placed on the "blacklist" was wrong, and they could potentially receive their airdrop supply back. We need to take that into account.
Rather than burn some of these funds, I'd be more in favor of something I've been hoping to discuss: A Hive-Hackathon To Help Kickstart Our Dapp Ecosystem.
I'm planing to write-up a proper post discussing this more in depth, but I feel like waiting until things have settled a bit more here. Basically, we should be using these funds to pump up our development resources, encourage outside developers to build on our platform, and market our strengths to the rest of the crypto community.
Having these tokens get fairly & evenly spread amongst builders does far more benefit to us as a whole rather than simply "burning because boo inflation".
I don’t agree. Good devs aren’t cheap.
That would cover only 3/4 contractors a day in NY or 8/10 in the UK.
Anyway yes, I think we should burn part of it (maybe 25%?) and then periodically adjust.
I agree that people working not for profit for the good of everyone or most here deserve funding, that's why I'm not proposing for the elimination of the Dao. Good Devs cost money. That's why the Apple store pays them to post Apps... Oh wait, they don't 😸
Happy to drop the dao when Hive reaches the size of the user base that Apple has. =}
Thank you for your detailed response.
1 @Steem.Dao is not 2 days old it has been around for over half a year and was never fully utilized. There is a 400k hbd warchest.
2 Why can't games be for profit and the person who owns the game use the profits to support and market it? Luckily we don't need to pay for marketing, we have hundreds of posters marketing as it is. Why do new users need Dao funds? Steem didn't have Dao when most of us joined and it wasn't half as good as HIVE is now.
3 Most of those accounts will not ask or get their stake back. They declared war on the witnesses and strongly supported Justin Sun, at least the major ones did. They have to submit a proposal and beat the return proposal, it's not going to happen for most accounts.
A hackathon is a great idea. How much hbd are you suggesting? I am just suggesting to burn some of this inflation, seizing control of an arbitrary amount of tokens and using it for future unplanned development is ridiculous, we are talking about 20% of all tokens on a chain that is well developed.
Best of luck with your proposal!
1) Sure, the DAO started on Steem and has been around for a while being unused, but I'm focused on Hive, not Steem, and I'm hoping to help spur more engagement into the DAO protocol to help fund more development. Therefore, I still believe we will need these funds for when that time comes.
2) Games can be for profit, but isn't it cool that they don't have to be now? That's the magic of the DAO system, some projects will be able to replace micro-payments, ads, and in-app purchases by offering the services for free while running off of DAO funding. This is a huge innovation when it comes to open source work. Remember @utopian-io? A system like that could start up again if they get funding through DAO! That's very exciting :^)
3) Yeah, sure, that could happen. But we still need to be prepared just in case.
As for the hackathon, I'm not sure yet about prizes. I'm waiting for things to settle down to get a better feel for our user-base & dapp-ecosystem:
Depending on which setup I feel is needed, that would influence the prize required.
Hackathons are a great way to get people into the ecosystem & walk away benefiting the platform as a whole!
( And thanks! 👍 )
Why does hive Dao need additional funding from repurposed funds? Especially the 500 or so HBD taken from people who supported witnesses?
Games don't have to be for profits. Funds in the Dao have not yet went to gave developers, not everyone wants to pay someone to make a game. Why remove advertising and replace it with decentralized fundsing? In both cases it upsets some people. At least I am not impacted by ads on a game I don't play.
We are prepared to give back funds for anyone who asks. There is 400,000 HBD in the Dao and growing. The odds of this being exhausted from airdropping sock puppet voters is slim to none. I won't support an airdrop to anyone who supported Justin Sun's sock puppets and am not alone.
I propose to burn everything - have you seen Bitcoin printed separately and everyone says let 1 million bitcoins be stored? "he is useful to us" - nonsense. Burn everything and forget
ZHGI! I was going to make that point. Imagine if 5 million bitcoins were set aside for whatever consensus wants, cause we are talking about, 20% of the supply. This much inflation is not cool and will scare investors. We aren't a start up.
I fully support you - if the witnesses disagree, then you need to cancel the vote for them, so this witness aims only at gaining
https://peakd.com/me/proposals/83
50% is an excellent start, but burning it from the dao day by day seems to be painfully boring.
I think we should burn 50% of the Steemit stuff on the next hard fork and the other 50% in a year or so (dao should have lots of stuff done by then). It's a scar on our otherwise lovely reputation. I know it will take hard work to program, so someone can make a proposal offering to do the technical stuff.
We can keep the stuff we confiscated from enemies of decentralization to give dao more money, but we should warn them that if they don't write their name as 'interested' in a post explaining how to make a proposal to get it back (give them a week to comment), we can assume they aren't interested.
If the dao still needs more money we can reduce rewards % and increase dao %, I don't think funding it with steemit steem or confiscated steem is really fair or nice...some times you just gotta ask yourself, what would satoshi do?
I'm not sure when that hard fork is going to happen and many of us wish/are surprised HIVE kept it for the community. While seizing funds for everyone sounds rather altruistic, it does give Justin Sun more credit, it is arguably theft. Large investors in the future can always worry, "WHAT IF THESE HIVE PEOPLE FORK ME OUT?" This is why I think it should be burnt, like killing a dictator, using this HIVE weakens everyone's position who doesn't directly benefit from it.
Santoshi would send the funds to @null
Burning 50-100% of these tokens will surely create a buzz to the entire crypto space. Imagine being mentioned by coindesk/cointelegraph/bloomberg that Hive burned all of the airdropped tokens supposedly given to central accounts owned by Justin Sun. Whooops
We will slowly be burning unspent funds meant for development that isn't happening as only 25% are being used. This isn't a rapid burn, it's a slow controlled burn to prevent a forest fire.
That's a better option, definitely. As long as there's something done for the unspent funds, that'll be better.
Unspent funds form a cushion for future funding, it is adequately large enough.
There's already enough amount of funds coming in per day via SPS. I think there's not much reason to hold all of the unspent airdropped Hive from Steemit's central accounts.
Stands better in court as well..
Can it be sued?
Crazy Justin could pull something against the witnesses?
I disagree with this notion that anything was "taken" from anyone. The entire purpose of creating a new chain was so that "taking" any tokens could/would not occur. These tokens belonged to nobody. They are a new creation. They were not previously owned by anyone so nobody has a rightful claim to them.
I also do think that it is certainly "fair" to use all of these tokens for the future development, marketing, and onboarding to the Hive blockchain and its ecosystem, especially when that is left to community decision-making.
However, my personal view is that burning 50% of the tokens is acceptable. It is a rather large number of the total supply that, in my opinion, is not necessarily needed, since the DAO is also funded via inflation. Having ~40 million tokens reserved in the fund is a good bank roll to get us started and to maintain development and marketing for many years into the future, so I think I would support such a proposal to burn half of the current total.
I would be in favor of a one-time burn of those tokens though, not an incremental one.
A One time burn is only achievable with a hard fork.
The HIVE DAO has 4450 HBD per day of funding and the STEEM DAO has 2808 SBD of funding, the difference is 1642. The idea has evolved to burn half of that, 821 per day as it is simple to send it to @null. No Hardfork required. If a future hard fork comes and the desire is to burn or if the needs of the DAO change, it can be easily adapted and accounted for. The number can be easy to increase or decrease, it's easy to turn off.
I agree with @stuffbyspencer and @gaottantacinque.
If there's no war chest, then continue to depend on devs who volunteer their time or get third rate bullshiters who make retarded dapps designed to farm the reward pool.
Do you think the amount currently going into SPS is currently appropriate? Perhaps it could use a couple HBD more or less a day, or is it just right?
This proposal can be turned off and one depending on people's mood which I think os a key feature. It does need more discussion though.
https://www.daxx.com/blog/development-trends/it-salaries-software-developer-trends-2019
It is my personal opinion that if the DAO cannot support a dozen or so quality devs, the proposal system itself is a failure.
The median seem to be around 50k which is ~150$ a day (137 actually).
So 3000$ a day could get us 20 average devs working full time (they dont need to show up to an office).
Or 20 high quality devs working a few hours a day.
The fund is growing around 3000 a day (lets assume current proposals are always vital, some like servers are) so 25~33% can safely be burned now. Which would still mean 12~15 more devs can benefit from sps on top of currentnsps use.
Some corrections:
50 k is quite low in the US: “Software Developers earned an average salary of $108,080 in 2018. Comparable jobs earned the following average salary in 2018: IT Managers made $152,860, Computer Network Architects made $111,130, Computer Systems Analysts made $93,610, and Computer Programmers made $89,580”. And they only went up in the past couple years.
you don’t only need Devs. You also need testers (manual and automation), product analysts, business owners, project managers, marketing, legal, etc etc
cc: @enforcer48
Salaries in the US are a lot higher than global average, especially anywhere near silicon valley. I estimate the global average to be about 50k a year for programmers.
Although it would be nice to hire full develipment teams, the idea is to save cost. Full time legal team, marketing and artists doesn't really make sense. If the money is burned on development instead of null, the price will continually go down since 75 million steem is a lot.
It's possible to reach a happy medium of development, the extra beefy dao pool may make this possible, but it is also a looming risk legally and a warning to serious investors.
Steemit was legally registered in the US and developing from there may become difficult if legals are persued which is very possible. We may be wasting am awful lot of money on legal defense. It's easily framed as greyzone stuff. To nocoiners it could possibly be seen like theft or plunder. Who is to say development didn't end at smt and justin didn't legally by it? Did he suffer damages from the fork? His lawyers could harass us for years and years.
It will be interesting to find out what happens, it is definitely too early to be trickling it into the dao.
That should be the number we strive to keep it around then.
But of course, I would imagine @blocktrades has a better grasp about the size of dev teams, etc. working on projects.
I mean, different projects would have teams of variable sizes.
I like the idea of having proposals that burn around 400~500 each per day for now. As they pass the return more can be made. The whales can decide when to stop supporting more of them.
You're math implies that we have small dev teams. We want properly sized dev teams, and lots of them.
So, lets say average teams size of 4 ( ceo / marketing, frontend dev, backend dev, artist ). That means we can get ~5 "average" teams, or like... 2-3 "high-quality" teams?
That's not good for a new platform. I'd like to see dozens of teams working on multiple different projects that cross a variety of sectors. We want mass-adoption, we need mass-dapps.
Also, ignore the line of "high quality devs working a few hours a day", as that's not always possible. If you're working a full-time job you often don't have time to dwindle at a side-project, even if it's paid ( especially if you have a family ). Ideally we're aiming for people to be able to take full days off / leave their job entirely because the DAO is funding full time high-quality work.
I do see your point. The more the merrier. It's a real shame we didn't take even more when thinking of it that way.
Well, I mean we could only take what was available ;^P
I think the 80 million is good for long-term funding of projects, events, marketing, and contests. #LongLiveHive
Also, in those average salaries usually there’s more: health insurance, benefits, 401k, annual leave, sick days, etc etc.
And taxes for crypto are much higher than a “regular salary”.
cc: @enforcer48
Hey!!!
Account preservation dapp!
War chests often negatively impact those not in the army. Best to observe until the funds are spent, in this case it can take years. We are spending 25% of the money, it's piling up and not everyone agrees with most of the witnesses. Because some of the votes carried over, maybe proposing a reset is a great idea, at least with the return proposal.
Is anyone even being paid right now? It doesn't look like funds are flowing at the moment.
Edit: it is.
I'm just saying that the DAO should have funds to support a team of active devs at a competitive wage. Otherwise, why waste time hobby deving when you make more having a real job?
Exactly. We want less people relying so heavily on the reward pool to earn rev for their projects.
DAO is the best solution to that.
The Dao has over 400,000HBD and that number is growing daily. It could be a future liability for any investor. I'm arguing to to slow down the growth of the reserve fund not to eliminate it.
I'm trying to understand why Hive is expected to move slow when it should embrace the freedom from STINC gatekeepers and get a move on.
I think the inflation is overemphasized. Hive, as a social platform, should have lasting value, not a store of value.
That's just my opinion, anyhow.
If Hive is not a store of value, why is value being stored in the Dao?
Cause you need it to hire people to do things. Hence, it pays in HBD.
I feel that most of us are oversimplifying the budget, etc. needed to hire competent teams.
Let's not forget that Stellar decided to burn billions of tokens and it did nothing for their price, demand, and whatever. There was a temporary pump before sliding back to where they were...with less market cap.
I don't know. I don't have the expertise to make any further discussion.
Not only is this not true, but there's also no reason that people can't be included "in the army".
A warchest doesn't only have to benefit developers. It could be used to host writing contests, onboarding initiatives, charity events, and much more.
On Hive, everyone is in the bee-army ;^)
Seriously? Dao funds are used for what people vote for, primarily development that benefits the entire community. Charity is not charity if it enforced, even via democracy.
The proposals don't benefit everyone, for example two are related to building wallets, why do we need all more Dao funded wallets?
Yes, correct. Hence why I suggest having a large war-chest for it, to help provide funding for lots of different types of proposals. If we had small funding, I would not vote for any writing contests, as I would instead prioritize development costs. If, however, the funding was large enough, I would vote for other types of proposals, because they do in fact add value to our platform.
Options are never a bad thing. Hive is literally less than a week old, so obviously you're going to get lots of projects popping up in the same space. That's what happens in a new environment. Competition will result in one of these wallets being the best, or at the very least, the wallets catering to different niches ( ie one for newbies & one for power-users ). The more projects that get funded will result in a stronger ecosystem.
I'm honestly not even sure how to respond to this. Charity can in fact be charity if voted on through democracy. I'm confused as to your idea of "enforcement" when in context of the DAO, perhaps try to elaborate on this better?
The Dao is over-funded, continuing to over fund it will lead to projects with decreasing marginal utility. I'm gonna draw up some graphs to show this. Prudent care of a smaller pool will lead to more efficient projects, we don't need to encourage vanity here. Why not add more funds, billions of Hive? At some point you should be able to admit this would be ridiculous.
Hive is not a week old, it is a clone of Steem and is 4 years old. People can use the wallet they like, throwing more projects at the wall and hoping some sticks is not a good use of funds, capitalism and the free market enable funds are spent wisely, risk and reward. Dao funds should be used for basic infrastructure, not fancier wallets.
Charity is meant to give funds to those in need. Using Dao funds for charity is okay for the people who vote on it, I doubt it will be approved. If you want to give, consider upvoting or sending funds from your wallet to the charity of your choice.
I was hoping that all Steemit stake will get burned so that we can reduce the total number of coins. I agree that we don't need 83,370,275 million HIVE tokens for development purposes. The thing I always hated about STEEM is huge inflation and I didn't want to see it on HIVE blockchain.
That would require a hard fork, who is going to program it? Burning a certain % of the DAO is the easiest way to do this as the "programming" costs 10 HBD. I agree with you regarding the inflation, it scares away some investors who don't want to be active on the platform. A few% is fine, but activity can lead to 20% returns here in no time.
i would not burn anything . leave them to be used by the dao for development as they were originally intended
Because burning did so much in the past!
Burning is a way of controlling excess supply, while 10% of funds going to the Dao provided a valuable buffer in the past in case there was a sudden spark in creativity. 20% is excessive.