Proposal “dash-marketing-hub“ (Completed)Back
| Title: | Dash Marketing Hub: Official Dash Incubator Fork for Marketing and Promotion |
| Owner: | the_desert_lynx |
| Monthly amount: | 100 DASH (3613 USD) |
| Completed payments: | 2 totaling in 200 DASH (0 month remaining) |
| Payment start/end: | 2021-08-12 / 2021-10-11 (added on 2021-08-02) |
| Votes: | 698 Yes / 110 No / 38 Abstain |
Proposal description
Dash Proposal: Dash Marketing Hub 2021-Q3
1. Summary
This proposal is to launch the Dash Marketing Hub, an official fork of the Dash Incubator, focused on grassroots marketing and promotion of Dash, and on community energizing/engagement.
At the request of key community members I am launching an official fork of Dash Incubator dedicated to another critical area of focus for Dash: marketing and promotion. This is done as an official Incubator fork through the DFO Kickstarter bounty. This means that the Dash Incubator has reviewed the rules, structure, and this proposal text to ensure that it meets the Incubator’s standards for structure, efficiency, and transparency. Our mission statement, as found in section 1.1 of the Rules document, is as follows:
“Our mission is to raise Dash’s awareness, presence, reputation, and adoption through incentivizing grassroots community-driven action. The Dash Marketing Hub’s objective is to create the necessary gamified incentive structure to energize community leaders into effective action in promoting Dash and to create a culture of activism in the broader Dash community. This is done through quantifiable, measurable, and transparent bounty-based tasks performed in a creative, collaborative, and decentralized environment.”
The potential of such an initiative on its own is substantial. But we will also be working closely with other DFOs, including Dash Core Group Marketing and the Dash Newsroom, to both amplify their respective marketing efforts and fill in the gaps between them through a fast, responsive, collaborative, and grassroots approach.
A major reason why we’re launching this initiative is that we believe that the example and structure set forth by the Dash Incubator represents a major evolution and turning point for DFOs as a whole. Under this model, a complete history of every piece of work done by the Hub, including funding criteria and rationale for each task, who designed the task, who performed it, who approved it, and so on, is all public and easily-accessible information. The organization is effectively always under full and public financial audit due to its very structure, so no discrete audits are ever necessary. And finally, participation in the Hub will be open to the entire Dash community, leveraging our whole talent pool. Thisopen collaboration and radical transparency will cause Dash to flourish and grow exponentially.
Initial admins will be myself (TheDesertLynx), Rion Gull, Solarguy, Doeke, and Kanuuker. However, additional admins will be sought and recruited as the project’s scope and scale grows. Contributors will include the initial admins plus potentially any member of the Dash community, of course pending admin approval and subjected to publicly-auditable quality control measures.
2. Roadmap
Here we give our current priorities to the areas of funding in Hub, to enable better management and allocation of resources between Bounties. These priorities will be updated at least in each Quarterly proposal, and are referenced in our Rules.
3. Ask
This quarter (last two months) the monthly funding ask is 100 DASH. This represents roughly 2% of the total Dash treasury. We feel that this amount is appropriate for a proof-of-concept that the Bounty model can be successfully applied to areas outside of development.
In Q4 we will explore modifying the ask depending on performance metrics and the demands of the network.
4. Terms
All operations of the Hub funded by this proposal are subject to the latest Rules published here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zOIbEkviJDuBLVLDrccHnyzLI5qGFsVZYXEWR6kxLmk/edit?usp=sharing
All major changes/departures from the Dash Incubator Rules document have been highlighted. Specific details of the Network Contract that this proposal forms a part of can be found in section 1.6 of the rules.
5. Resources
Links needed to access all Hub information, including past proposals, can be found in the Resources section of our Rules.
Thank you very much. Please feel free to ask any relevant questions, and please let me know if you want to join as either an admin or a contributor.
-Joël Valenzuela
1. Summary
This proposal is to launch the Dash Marketing Hub, an official fork of the Dash Incubator, focused on grassroots marketing and promotion of Dash, and on community energizing/engagement.
At the request of key community members I am launching an official fork of Dash Incubator dedicated to another critical area of focus for Dash: marketing and promotion. This is done as an official Incubator fork through the DFO Kickstarter bounty. This means that the Dash Incubator has reviewed the rules, structure, and this proposal text to ensure that it meets the Incubator’s standards for structure, efficiency, and transparency. Our mission statement, as found in section 1.1 of the Rules document, is as follows:
“Our mission is to raise Dash’s awareness, presence, reputation, and adoption through incentivizing grassroots community-driven action. The Dash Marketing Hub’s objective is to create the necessary gamified incentive structure to energize community leaders into effective action in promoting Dash and to create a culture of activism in the broader Dash community. This is done through quantifiable, measurable, and transparent bounty-based tasks performed in a creative, collaborative, and decentralized environment.”
The potential of such an initiative on its own is substantial. But we will also be working closely with other DFOs, including Dash Core Group Marketing and the Dash Newsroom, to both amplify their respective marketing efforts and fill in the gaps between them through a fast, responsive, collaborative, and grassroots approach.
A major reason why we’re launching this initiative is that we believe that the example and structure set forth by the Dash Incubator represents a major evolution and turning point for DFOs as a whole. Under this model, a complete history of every piece of work done by the Hub, including funding criteria and rationale for each task, who designed the task, who performed it, who approved it, and so on, is all public and easily-accessible information. The organization is effectively always under full and public financial audit due to its very structure, so no discrete audits are ever necessary. And finally, participation in the Hub will be open to the entire Dash community, leveraging our whole talent pool. Thisopen collaboration and radical transparency will cause Dash to flourish and grow exponentially.
Initial admins will be myself (TheDesertLynx), Rion Gull, Solarguy, Doeke, and Kanuuker. However, additional admins will be sought and recruited as the project’s scope and scale grows. Contributors will include the initial admins plus potentially any member of the Dash community, of course pending admin approval and subjected to publicly-auditable quality control measures.
2. Roadmap
Here we give our current priorities to the areas of funding in Hub, to enable better management and allocation of resources between Bounties. These priorities will be updated at least in each Quarterly proposal, and are referenced in our Rules.
- Top Priority (DashDirect)
- Promotion of the DashDirect app’s release to media and news outlets
- Creation of videos and other content showcasing real usage of DashDirect for real purchases among a wide variety of merchants and locations
- Promotion of the DashDirect app directly to potential consumers to secure new users and sign-ups
- Promotion of the ability to travel through the US essentially fiat-free by using DashDirect and travel services such as Travala
- High Priority
- Increasing Dash’s public visibility through securing media appearances and article placements
- Securing interviews for key DCG members, developers, and other key ecosystem players
- Creating and disseminating content showing Dash being actively used in ways unrelated to the DashDirect top priority bounties
- Building awareness and relationships with key industry influencers
- Medium Priority
- Amplifying the social media presence and reach of official Dash accounts and key Dash personnel
- Increasing Dash’s presence and reputation in all relevant social platforms and forums
- Energizing and growing engagement of the Dash community at large
- Low Priority
- Any bounties not focused on or a dependency of the above
3. Ask
This quarter (last two months) the monthly funding ask is 100 DASH. This represents roughly 2% of the total Dash treasury. We feel that this amount is appropriate for a proof-of-concept that the Bounty model can be successfully applied to areas outside of development.
In Q4 we will explore modifying the ask depending on performance metrics and the demands of the network.
4. Terms
All operations of the Hub funded by this proposal are subject to the latest Rules published here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zOIbEkviJDuBLVLDrccHnyzLI5qGFsVZYXEWR6kxLmk/edit?usp=sharing
All major changes/departures from the Dash Incubator Rules document have been highlighted. Specific details of the Network Contract that this proposal forms a part of can be found in section 1.6 of the rules.
5. Resources
Links needed to access all Hub information, including past proposals, can be found in the Resources section of our Rules.
Thank you very much. Please feel free to ask any relevant questions, and please let me know if you want to join as either an admin or a contributor.
-Joël Valenzuela
Show full description ...
Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?
Submit comment
|
No comments so far?
Be the first to start the discussion! |
Years ago, I received funding from the now-defunct DashBoost for a project whose mission is the same as this one, which funded several adoption initiatives such as the initial How to Live on Crypto video series. About 7.7 Dash remains left over from this project, and I have donated them to the funding address for this proposal. We will use them to get a head start in a reduced capacity limited to the promotion of DashDirect and waiving the reward for creating new concepts and specifications to facilitate this goal (provisions for this can be found in section 3.4 of the Rules), reserving the funds for purely rewarding task completion and QA. I feel that promotion of the DashDirect release is both critical and time-sensitive and that it would be a disservice to wait weeks longer before getting started.
THIS IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME OF THE PROPOSAL
If it passes, we will open up to full-scope regular operations when the superblock hits. If it does not, we will complete all possible tasks until our funding runs out. Either way, feel free to observe via both Trello boards linked in Section 6.2 of the Rules.
I do have one concern that I would like to express. I would like any paid marketing effort to not speculate on the future price of the dash. Certainly, as a proponent of free speech, community members can say whatever they want. However, paid efforts that speculate on the price make me uneasy.
I'm happy to read that your top priority is promoting Dash as a form of payment. I do think there is some need for people to learn about the advantages and opportunities that Dash offers for payments.
As you mentioned, community members can say/do whatever they want, however they can't be specifically rewarded for whatever they say, and certainly not by this proposal. If anything, rewarding (placing economic incentives on) producing quality content regarding Dash's usefulness as a form of payment will encourage more of this behavior and less price speculation.
Still, this is a community effort with radical transparency at every level, so I really hope you'll help to monitor the content and let the Admins know if you see something untoward brewing.
It feels awesome to be back. Solarguy
I would love to participate actively in this project since I have been doing it for several years, in the 'lone wolf' style.
Yes for this.
We could probably replace all state governments with bounty platforms.)
I worked with JV on the setup here and approved the Rules in terms of meeting Incubator's standards for transparency, decentralization, incentivization and using Dash as the money not fiat...so I was happy to sign it off as an official Incubator fork and wish him and the other Admins best of luck :)
Not nonsense at all. According to beta.dashwatch.org, Venezuela has over 100,000 active android wallets. Jamaica also has 6000 active android wallets, which is more than the US, so it definitely is our "bread and butter". The only absolute nonsense is your take because as I proved earlier, you are dishonest.
>you were an avid supporter of the DASH.Nigeria nonsense and in the end it turned out to not bear fruit.
Dash.Nigeria provided a lot for the network including a telegram group with over 1000 members, as well as exchange support for Haiti. I mean you're literally ignoring all of Dash nigeria's newsworthy accomplishments in order to pretend it "didn't work out" just because you attacked it. You deliberately ignore proposals you don't like because you have selfish motivations.
You question my judgment because you're a liar and a dishonest person. You pretend to hide behind 'being elderly' while making stupid, specious arguments to defund proposals in the third world, again because you're a dishonest person and a liar.
This is irrational and delusional behavior. Even gaslighting. You attacked DashNigeria and pretended that it didn't work, because 'it didn't work'. That's circular reasoning and indicates that you are compromised.
This question is not rhetorical and I would like an answer. Either from you or Joel himself.
Can Admins also be proposal owners for the incubator? How does that potential conflict of interest get resolved?
The proposal owner (and later Director role) can definitely admin tasks and claim work (one of the tasks is the PO role). This isn't a conflict of interest, quite the opposite in fact. The goal of the Hub is to get quality work done, and the PO asks for funding from the network to accomplish this goal. No matter who does the actual work, the PO is on the hook to get it done. A PO actively engaging in doing some of the work themselves, rather than simply sitting back and claiming the proposal task cycle after cycle, is actually a sign of someone committed to ensure that work is done by the Hub.
Now, in the case where a PO ends up doing too large a portion of the work by themselves, while this still isn't a sign of a conflict of interest, it is a sign of a failure in the model (or PO/Director leadership) to get more contributors involved in the project.
Yes, admins may participate in the various processes but we are not allowed to approve our own tasks or bounty claims. All work it publicly visible though so any cronyism will be readily apparent.
Furthermore, the more bounties admins approve the greater their percentage of the payout, which cascades into an even greater incentive to payout work that isn't necessarily up to whatever standard is originally set.
On top of that if Admins are the ones creating bounties its in their interest to make them as easy as possible and have the largest payout possible, so those standards are incentivized to be low to begin with.
Is there something I am missing here? It seems like the incentive structure of this isn't thought through at all
Essentially, the three main levels of users and their incentives are as follows: Contributors have the incentive to put out quality work and get paid. Admins have the incentive to approve said quality work. The PO (and later directors) have the incentive to ensure that resources are maximized and effective and quality work is approved. The PO polices the admins and can remove them, because if they approve shoddy work (which due to the radically transparent nature of this initiative will soon become painfully apparent), then that can jeopardize the entire proposal. An admin seeking to maximize their revenue therefore has the incentive to approve work, but only quality work so as to avoid cutting short their ability to continue to admin tasks.
This is one of the reasons why I've proposed moving away from a lone PO (which is also the Incubator's model) and to a group Director role after this cycle: as the project grows, it becomes more difficult for a lone PO to successfully oversee a large team of admins. Having more eyes specifically tasked to watch over the work admins approve makes this oversight more feasible. This isn't a problem for a small/nascent project like this one, but it will be if we grow, which is why I planned for decentralizing the PO role into several members.
All that being said, we will continue to brainstorm ways of making the checks on admin quality tighter. This may include requiring at least two admins on each task, but we have to find a way to avoid too much bureaucracy and associated cost/delays. Do you have any suggestions on efficiently tightening controls? If so I'd personally love to hear them, this entire Incubator-based model is still in its infancy (barely over a year old), and we still have a lot of evolving to do before we get it right.
Secondly, concepts can be submitted by anyone, not just admins. The role of the admins to guide the community driven work to completion so the concept can be implemented and so the people who do the actual work get rewarded.
If I'm correct and you were paid for being part of DFN then how can you avoid the charge that you're just going to continue grifting from the network?
Being a bad actor should not be rewarded and if you really cared about Dash you would agree with me. I have no personal grudge against you. I only want to prevent people who don't want to do work but still want to get paid for nothing from succeeding.
Corruption corrupts those who engage in it. And it never gets better on its own. It just grows and grows like a cancer until the host is dead. Of course the corrupt are insulated from this as they have already got their 'exit plans'.
I don't dislike DFN because it was ran by Joel. I dislike it because Joel and Mark didn't do anything nearly worth the 320 dash a month they were being paid.
That was a waste of resources that could've been better and more efficiently applied towards adoption efforts.
Also attacking the network by ignoring MNOs like myself who are just trying to prevent waste passive aggressively because you were defunded is both childish behavior and completely inappropriate.
Just like Joel splitting the discord because Ben Swann was defunded all those years ago was completely inappropriate behavior.
That made him a bad actor who should've been removed from the network. Now instead we have to deal with this again.
Thank you.
BUT I am hesitant, specifically due to Joel's involvement at a leadership position. For all his genuine love of Dash, he was part of Dash Force News which carried on for years manipulating the data they presented to the MNOs to try and paint a picture that was simply untrue about the effectiveness of what they were doing.
I could see this going down a road not too dissimilar from what GrandMasterDash is worried about.
All of that said, I think this has the potential to be a great way to generate engagement if there is the proper incentive structure (and perhaps a moratorium on admins receiving funds).
The vision for such a project is to create a system that runs well no matter who's "at the helm" or any specific admin or contributor position, and that's why we have such radical transparency in every aspect of this. As I originally wanted to do in the beginning, the vision is to further decentralize as much as possible, and after this cycle a minimum of 5 (if I get my way) directors will run things by public vote, with new members stepping up and down over time. I personally can't wait for a time when individual cogs in the machine are relatively forgotten, and the machine runs without anyone noticing who's participating in it.
I very much feel that Joel is in a much better place now than when he was paid by the DAO. He has independence now and that carries a lot of weight with the wider public space. In this regard I wish him continued good luck.
However, the thought of sliding backwards to a Dash News era makes me cringe. Dash News et al started out very good but then became very insular and failed to break outside of it's tiny bubble.
Also, some of the people involved here are admins elsewhere and there is some unnecessary censorship and bias; forum, reddit etc.