What's new

Budget Proposals Reports



Someone has come in and said there going to create this super product.

They pull out of the budget each month a set amount saying they are going to do this but never do. 4 months or however down the line the budget is out of x amount of piv.


A report each month stating progress and show what they have been up to. No report no funding.

This would mean if someone doesn't create a report and show their work they would instantly get no voted and PIVX can cut its losses and create more budget available for other projects instead of waiting for one to complete with nothing to show.

This has to be the standard for every proposal.

The accepted proposals are being voted through by the masternode owners, so all masternode owners should know whats going on.

These working groups and private channels which no one can see bar the "clique" are not the way to go if this is to work as a dao. The people in these channels are not the deciding vote, they just happen to have 500+ masternodes between them.

Maybe if people could see what was going on these dormant masternode owners would start to vote.
Last edited:
Transparency is great.
Monthly reports would be great, ESPECIALLY in a "dashboard" type of manner because put here, they get lost.
If it's organized into a "governance/budget" dashboard, then
IF you have a proposal, you must make an account on that dashboard system
You must provide reports and updates.

Why Dashboard system? Because then MN (and community) can get a one spot to see updates.
ALSO, this then makes for EASY marketing material.

Now, deeper phases (NO idea about the tech/issues with this re codebase) could be where unless reports are filed each month (in multi month proposal), the funds are NOT dispersed to the payout address.
Snappy i think youve just described PIVXstarter well. https://forum.pivx.org/index.php?th...ransparent-crypto-crowdfunding.785/#post-1693

The addition of that into the current budget system is to much of a task i would say. Someone with more knowledge would have to comment on that.

I wasn't even thinking of going that far into it. There is no coding time available for the devs currently so i would just leave those ideas for the new governance model. Best just to work on ways to improve the current one with what we have available.

I wast thinking anything major. With the dev proposals you see the GitHub commits so you can see whats going on in the background so there is no need to report on tasks like that. Same with social media managers. You can see what they are or not doing as was the case with the previous Spanish proposal. With something like building a service for PIVX it may be going on over months pulling out say over 3 cycles. Within that proposal targets are set which they can report on what they have been doing, any problems they had and if they have hit the target. I'm not talking essays. Then that report gets tagged onto the proposal on the forum. If then the masternode owners are not happy with the report that's given, questions can be asked so decisions and plans forward can be made.

If the masternode owners then decide not enough progress is being made, poor quality, not providing what there paid for they can vote no and stop funding. I understand that MN can vote no at any time now but someone is more likely to engage in something where they can see whats going on and feel like their vote does count. Myself looking at this I really cba to argue and think it be easier to let everyone just get on with it but I want PIVX to be as transparent as possible so others can see what were doing and hopefully join in.

All reports will be worded in different formats as there is not 1 template we could do that's universal for every proposal. If someone's not happy with the report this gets discussed between everyone with everyone having a list of what the proposal has been doing that cycle in front of them. The private chats obviously will still be there. I do understand the importance of them but there's no reason someone cant write down a rough summary.
Borris, the title is wrong. You were kicked. Not banned. Also, the kick was not for discussing governance. You know all this. Please stop with the lies. So, your post suggests what? That you vote No if there is no report? You can't force that on anyone and you are free to follow that approach if you like. Again, you know this because that is exactly what you did. Everyone was invited to participate in the website project. Those that did were up to date with everything. Didn't guarantee things stay on schedule. So, while I would like to see reports, they are not the solution to everything. So. Sorry. Not following.
That was wrote before I found out it was only a kick. Your words were something like see you in 7 days. Did that kick get put to a vote or are you in charge to decide what's said and what isn't?

So your telling me someone who is working for pivx is unable to give a report of what they are doing to the people who decide if it passes?

We all know your part of the "clique" and one if not the only decision maker. So for you to be objecting to what I'm proposing is no surprise.

Everyone was invited back in march? What if I have joined pivx, own a masternode but didn't see that? How can you expect someone to vote on something they know nothing about and can see no progress? You can't.
Here is another scenario.

Trust keeps getting thrown around alot with the money pot/marketing.

I have just joined PIVX. I have not spoke to any of the team, people involved but i liked the idea so picked a couple of masternodes up to join in the voting.

I see the marketing pot proposal has no details of what its going to be used on but I am being told to trust the people incharge of it. Would you trust someone you dont know? IF there was reports from previous tasks, current proposals. This then creates an image of the person. Could even go further with this and create it as a portfolio for further proposals. This would give a more trustworthy vibe of the person so more likely to vote yes. Although i dont believe that there should be pots and it should be all listed individually and pulled out of the budget through a proposal.

I then look around on the proposals again can see that one has been going on for 3 months, with limited updates, no proof of work and then asks for more funds to complete the work. Do you then decide enough is enough and cut the losses or do you just leave them to it in the hope something materialises knowing full well you could be out more money?

If reports were forced which they should be so masternode owners are kept in the loop and they can vote accordingly based off the information provided to them. Currently no information is easily avaialble for any masternode owner to decide, they are probably just thinking exactly what i am, just leave them to it as its not worth the "discussions"
So, if you correct it, it was a mistake. Leave it, and it is a lie. You got back into Discord because it wasn't a BAN. That is proof right there the 'BAN' statement is not true. Also, it was for 'borderline doxing'. That was due to your incorrect use of the word 'click' instead of 'clique' causing the context to be wrong. Glad to see you fixed that. But this was discussed with you as well. So, you now know that mistake to. Why has the title not been corrected?

The reason you are not part of the large group pushing things forward, is because you are not being productive at all. Changing that is completely out of our power and 100% up to you.

A while back, I also pushed hard for proposals to have reports. This can't be done with code. It can only be done with human eyes. However, killing proposals because there is no report, is a sure fire way to damage PIVX. Most people volunteer a great deal, even if the proposal pays them for some of their efforts. They are extremely active in the Community and feel the trust they have earned should be enough. For those MNOs that don't know them or what they achieved, a simple request in the forum should suffice.

Thing is, if the person asking for the updates is always in attack mode, throws insults, and is generally always being a dick, why on earth would the proposal owner then give that person more information that they can twist and rant about?

What needs to happen is that we have MORE PROPOSALS. Over time, the competition will create pressure for proposal owners to report out in detail to gain an advantage over those that have similar or overlapping proposals.

My ideas for 'Phase 2' of PIVXcentral.org were to incorporate lots of functionality to see past reports from a given person, and to make sure they were in Markdown, accessible via an API, so that they could easily be accessed and published in many locations on the web. That would increase transparency. I just got too busy in life, and never got to that 'Phase 2'.
IF it was the norm for every proposal and it was setup as the STANDARD then there would be no disagreements. If someone currently cba to create a report to update ALL of the masternode owners though a simple document that gets attached onto the proposal im not sure there the people needed anyway.

This is a DAO. The masternode owners are the ones in control of the budget so it is only right they are provided with information for each cycle so they can decided how to cast their votes. Some people dont sit on discord. A simple document attached onto the forum is not asking much. Its a chance for the person writing it to show their worth and toot their own horn.

Is the current guidelines.

"This is where you explain in painfully blunt or explicit detail exactly how you look to achieve your goals should your proposal pass and get funded. This is the place to give a full accounting of where requested funds will be going, as well as give justification for such funds."

It's not going to require much of an addition as it already states you should be listing what your doing. So any updates/reports should be mentioning each task you have set out, whether you have achieved, maybe show an example, reach it has create etc. Will be different for every proposal.
Ye understand that but the governance currently is working that the masternodes have the vote so control the budget. This is not the best and alternatives are being looked at. Join in on the discussions https://github.com/PIVX-Project/CDG

I like this in the proposal: "Stakers with at least 1,000 PIV staked can vote with 0.8 vote weight per PIV."

But I won't be discussing this for the next few months. This has been done several times in the last years. The DEV's don't have time to change that NOW. Privacy protocol has priority. PIVX has strong competition with Monero (CSLAG Hard Fork) and Zcoin (Lelantus). Discussions about governance only bring trouble right now. The McAffee bastards are just waiting to cause trouble in PIVX Community.

In addition, I don't have time for Discord and discussions at the moment. And then first of all there is a simple Tor Guide in the forum that I want to create.
Ye a new governance model is way far off and privacy should be focus for Devs. No point discussing something if we haven't got the Devs insight if it can be done.

There has been ALOT of discussions in discord #Governance and I feel we are getting somewhere in finding a way forward.

Thanks for sharing you don't have time for discord. I have just been on about this, that not everyone does or wants to use it. That's why I am trying to push for updates about proposals on the forum, atleast for the time being until another solution is available. That way it's clear what the topic is, updates are easily accessible and people can ask questions without it being lost in discord.
I hope to address the desires of all of us - where exactly we ultimately see PIVX.

Ultimate goals:
1. Confidential currency used worldwide
2. A currency whose price does not change depending on the price of Bitcoin or political games.
3. Currency with real use cases
4. A currency with a true DAO without flaws, where anyone can participate and can easily figure out where to start and how things work.
I just wrote the main end goals that I hope everyone shares.

So, for these goals to be realized, in any case, we need to work as a single team, a single mechanism. Moreover, if we want to follow the path of DAO, we must coordinate our actions and activities, since this will not only help us effectively achieve our goals, but also provide a basis for further ideas and development.
I propose to systematize our common work as follows:

Department of Analysts. Tasks:
1. analysis of user behavior
2. analysis of other projects of their experience
3. analysis of problems existing in the cryptocurrency market and in the financial sector
4. analysis requested by the creative business department
5. another analysis

Department of Creative Business. Tasks:
1. using analysis to create business ideas that will help solve problems
2. build creative ideas to attract and win an audience

PIVX Brand Development Department:
1.business building and cooperation with companies, exchanges, etc.
2.marketing of already existing use cases
3. marketing of future use cases
4. marketing work requested by other departments (this includes the administration of social networks)

PIVX Development Department
1.working on the heart of PIVX - its code
2. development work requested by the creative business department

Department of web developers
Development requested by creative business and brand development departments

Support department
1.technical support for users
2.writing guidelines
4. work requested by creative business and brand development departments
5. help for users who are just starting their journey with PIVX

This is not a call! This is a proposal. If you have no desire to participate, your right. Those who are happy to take part in this and have the time - welcome aboard. Please read carefully and let's discuss. If we find that common ground, then we can send the agreed option for voting.
Last edited:
you then give reports of what everyone is doing? what would be included in that?

how i see it, this is how it should be for every proposal. It fits in with fuzzbawls guidelines of setting tasks and how much each task costs.

1. Write a proposal with lists of what you plan to do that cycle and how the funds are spent.
2. Get on with it for the month, whether you want to talk to people in discord or not.
3. Provide a report or live running updates on the forum of how you went about that cycle, did you hit the targets, how's it progressing etc.
4. The masternode owners then decide if that work gets continued or not with a yes or no vote.
Reports from each department are sent to Project Manager who write montlhy report summarizing of what was done by each department. Simple
So I think the details need nailing down.

What information the proposals are required/guidelines to provide for these reports.

What happens if you haven't provided enough information, who is accountable for discussing this.

I think a combination of the 1-4 steps I have said plus the project manager from each department giving an update/expanding on the information provided would be best. But this is still a discussion.