Proposal “DCG-Operations-May-Aug-25“ (Active)Back

Title:Dash Core Group Operations May - August
Owner:quantumexplorer
Monthly amount: 5147 DASH (107625 USD)
Completed payments: no payments occurred yet (4 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2025-04-08 / 2025-08-05 (added on 2025-04-06)
Final voting deadline: in 1 month
Votes: 124 Yes / 11 No / 4 Abstain
Will be funded: No. This proposal needs additional 214 Yes votes to become funded.
Manually vote on this proposal (DashCore - Tools - Debugconsole):
gobject vote-many 9574a083469e419ecee06279e080ed8595b800962ad383a03f1deaa599c78c54 funding yes

Please login or create a new DashCentral account for comfortable one button voting!

Proposal description

Dash Core Group April 21st Funding Proposals

DCG is submitting 2 funding proposals for the budget cycle that pays out April 21st:
1) DCG Operations: 5,147 Dash per month (currently in month 1/4)
2) DCG Supplemental proposal: TBD on amount.

What does this specific proposal fund?


This proposal funds Dash Core Group's ongoing operating costs - this includes compensation, legal and infrastructure costs.  This is a single month proposal that will cover operating costs for May 2025 to August 2025.

What is the proposal funding?

As of Mid April, 2025, DCG has 19 paid staff at full time/close to full time associated with the project and 3 part time contributors. In addition, we have 2 volunteers who have decided to work for no compensation and 2 people who have decided to work at minimal compensation. The amount of developers we currently have is given below.

In November we offered some long time contributors a Dash denominated compensation instead of the fiat based compensation. Many took this when the price of Dash was around 25$ even when taking at the same time a 10% reduction in the total compensation. The offer that we gave people was for a 6 month period.

We estimate that our projected run-rate for April for compensation will be around 2800 Dash for Dash denominated compensation and $50000 for Fiat based compensation. In addition I'm happy to report that we have seen a slightly lower infrastructure cost at around $3,000 for March.

With this current proposal, we are asking for total funding of the equivalent of $108,079 per month. This is pretty close to our run rate. However we are hoping to be able to hire a replacement in the Platform team as we have had many recent departures.

What does DCG's current structure look like?

DCG has evolved to primarily be a tech focused organization that can be grouped into 2 main parts, technology and technology support.

Technology:

  • CTO Samuel Westrich - quantumexplorer (making this proposal)

Core:
  • Lead C++ Software Engineer
  • Lead C++ Software Engineer
  • Senior C++ Software Engineer
  • C++ Software Engineer (Making his own proposal)
Mobile (no change):
  • Lead Android Software Engineer and Principal Developer
  • Sr. Android Software Engineer
  • Android Software Engineer (Part time)
  • Sr. iOS Software Engineer
Platform Team:
  • Lead Rust/JS Software Engineer
  • Senior Rust Software Engineer
  • Rust/JS Software Engineer
  • Rust Software Engineer
  • Senior Rust Software Engineer (GroveDB)
Technology Support:

Communication / Business Development / Marketing:
  • Business Development Manager (very part time (1h/week) )
Documentation:
  • Lead Technical Content Developer
Human Resources:
  • HR Specialist
Infrastructure (no change):
  • Lead Infrastructure Engineer
  • Infrastructure Engineer
  • Web Developer
Project Management (no change):
  • Lead SM / Project Manager
  • SM / Project Manager (part time)
Product (no change):
  • Head of Product
Quality Assurance (no change):
  • QA Engineer
Tech Support (no change):
  • Lead Support Engineer
  • Support Engineer

If you have any questions, please direct them to @quantumexplorer at dashcentral to ensure we are notified of your request.
Requested funding is as follows for the April budget cycles:
  • 5,146.66 Dash for core team compensation per month ($108,079 USD @ $21.00 per Dash)
  • 0.33/Month Dash proposal reimbursement 
Total: Dash per month

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
2 points,5 days ago
We currently have 307 Enabled Evonodes of which 14 are not getting rewarded from Platform. So effectively we have 293 Enabled Evonodes. Due to Gaussian distribution some Evonodes currently operate near the mean (proposed up to 14 blocks this epoch due to getting a lot more Platform quorum duty) and some Evonodes currently operate far from the mean (proposed only 3-5 blocks this epoch, due to getting a lot less Platform quorum duty). Annually we have 40 epochs per year.

How many epochs does it take for Evonodes operating far from the mean to start moving closer to the mean and therefore start proposing more blocks ? I understand this type of distribution should even out for all Evonodes on year basis, but it would be helpfull to get a bit more information about the rotation process that occurs in that Gaussian distribution on L2. Also are there any plans to move to a distribution model that is deterministic in nature ? (AKA reward distribution on L1)
Reply
1 point,2 days ago
I have yet to see one very "unlucky" Evonode over a long enough time span. More often than not, people perceive their Evonode as unlucky when other factors are at play. What we really need is a way to see on mnowatch the amount of blocks an Evonode failed to propose and their luck coefficient. Getting these probably would instill more faith in the system.

As for the rotation code. It is here: https://github.com/dashpay/platform/tree/v2.0-dev/packages/rs-drive-abci/src/execution/platform_events/block_end/validator_set_update

Version 2 is the current version that is active. You can run that through an AI to try to understand the code if you need help. Maybe the AI can make the gaussian distribution if you give it the other parameters as well.
Reply
1 point,5 days ago
Also i wonder if this rotation of Evonodes operating far from the mean to operating much closer to the mean is influenced by Platform usage.

Example 1 : faster block production (every few seconds) due to Platform activity --> faster Evonode rotation within the Gaussian distribution model ?
Example 2 : slower block production (every two minutes) due to low Platform usage --> slower Evonode rotation within the Gaussian distribution model ?
Reply
1 point,5 days ago
Just to clarify, the number of proposed blocks directly affect how much Platform credits Evonodes receive at the end of an epoch.
Reply