Dash Treasury
4536 Masternodes | 309.35 USD | 0.0755 BTC | 1.59% market share | Create Account


License and Registration: No Thanks

June 7, 2017
There's a pretty clear sentiment taking form among masternode owners (MNOs) these days concerning the quality of service we've been getting from our treasury system contractors. To put it simply, we're all tired of getting burned by over priced jobs that either come up short or fail to deliver entirely. We've already highlighted a few of these Dash Delinquents, and there are several others that may soon earn their own place on this offender's list if we don't see some results soon. That's disappointing, but the real issue we should focus on is how to better prevent against this going forward.

So far, MNOs have been extending a great deal of trust to treasury board contractors. Large sums of money are being paid in advance with no ways to guarantee performance, no enforcement of deadlines, no legal recourse, no escrow system, and sometimes not even a contact e-mail. The question is, How do we use the tools and technology that are available to us to remedy this problem?

Let's first consider the idea of demanding proof of real-world identities from our treasury board contractors. If we went this route, what documents might we require? We could start with the basics, such as a government issued photo ID, a government issued business license, and a government issued tax ID number. Ignoring for the moment whether our decentralized, anti-fiat, privacy focused coin should be relying on centralized government documentation, and ignoring for the moment which of the world's 196+ countries we would consider valid, would this even be an effective measure of the characteristics we're looking for in a contractor, such as trustworthiness, competence, and reliability?

There are some good examples from Bitcoin history to learn from. Although there are in fact more than I can list, the two that immediately come to mind are Mark Karpeles from Mt.Gox and Danny Brewster from Neo & Bee. Both of these characters pulled off tremendous scams, and both of them were extremely well known public figures. The world knew everything there was to know about Mark Karpeles, including his home and office locations, his employment history, even the name of his cat and the type of coffee he liked. Did knowing any of these details about him make him more trustworthy, more competent, or more reliable? Did we benefit in any way by knowing what kind of car Danny Brewster drove or by having photos of his home?

Relying on this type of information to assess a treasury candidate's credibility is worse than ineffective because it's actually misleading. It offers a convincing distraction with no real substance into the intentions and capabilities of the contractor. It's the sleight of hand a magician uses to keep your eye away from where you should really be looking. Sure, government documentation is plenty useful if we want to know where someone lives, but knowing where someone lives just doesn't tell us much about how that person will perform.

Instead, we need to be evaluating proposals based on a set of more meaningful characteristics. There are certain things we should be looking for in all proposals, and there are ways we can use the treasury system's built-in multi-month payments more effectively. In tomorrow's article, I will discuss these measures in more detail, but I can assure you that they are simple, objective, and will immediately begin to improve the effectiveness of the treasury system.

Budget Stats
Voting Deadline: 11 days
Payment date: Sep 2, 2017
Superblock: #731104
Approved: 4 of 14
Available: $2,057,749