What's new

How does the DAO work?

Borris

Pivian
Opening this for discussions as what I have been told on discord is completely different to my view of how it works.

My view is.

1, someone puts a proposal up outlining there proposal and what they will do and bring to pivx

2, the masternode owners then vote to yes or no for that proposal to pass.

3, if it passes that proposal then gets incorporated into the already existing pivx structure. No questions asked. No vetos. Full support from all pivx departments to merge that into pivx.

4, at the end of the proposal they provide a report of what they get up to.

5, next cycle if MN owners are not happy with the outcome they vote no.

Volunteers:

This is the grey area and is causing problems now. What info should they have? Who has chosen them to have this info? Why do these people also assume they have a vote on things?

The only vote that should be happening is the MN owners vote. Anything else is shady to say the least.

I have seen a proposal to solve this from kyeno to address this in the new pivx central allowing discussions in each proposal but still end of the day the MN owners vote should be the one that is counted. The forum is there for discussions but for some reason I have to ask for updates then when I do get attacked!

Everyone needs to remember the MN owners are the ones in control of the funds. Just because there is a group with 400ish MNs that assume they can pass things through without accountability is irrelevant. When questions get asked they go all defensive.
 

LeacyMcK

Pivian
Staff member
Dearest @Borris,

First off, please don't make this so personal as you are more likely to get great feedback if you didn't. eg. "... but for some reason, I have to ask for updates then when I do get attacked!" Not to mention we are all doing updates now so I find no need for this to be a debate, again.
Your 5 views above are what does happen :) as far as I am concerned, but please note that the authors of their proposals also need to reach out to different areas in PIVX for what they need.
For example, when wanting something promoted via PIVX official social media accounts, they need to go into the #marketing channel and ask if their content can be promoted. It isn't a given that this should be done as we do have others check material on everything that goes out on social media platforms and only fair that new authors of new proposals do the same.

Secondly, in regards to your Volunteer thoughts.
"This is the grey area and is causing problems now. What info should they have? Who has chosen them to have this info? Why do these people also assume they have a vote on things?"

I really don't understand this sentence or your other thoughts on this as only MN holders have the right to vote, so where are you getting that they have a vote? We are a DAO so of course, they have an opinion they can share with all of us, and thankfully they do as that is what keeps PIVX going, ideas and implementation of these ideas.

Lastly, “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.” Steve R Covey.
The delivery of any question will always be met with distrust and ambivalence if the one questioning is in attack mode.
 

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
Staff member
Re: "The only vote that should be happening is the MN owners vote. Anything else is shady to say the least."

Only MN owners can vote on Governance Proposals and as such, direct how Treasury Funds are spent. This is the only way it has ever been. (In the future we plan to expand this voting power to Stakers - but the resources have not been available to do that for years, and it may be quite some time before they are.)

I believe you are conflating 'decisions', with MN votes.

Aside from the fact that there are hundreds of decisions made every day by the various PIVX teams, and waiting for a Superblock to make those decisions each month would immediately cripple PIVX causing it to fail, a MN vote can not dictate what a person should do or how to think. That's not how it works. Never has and never will.

Once you figure this all out - you will understand that things are operating well, and that Volunteers are absolutely NOT 'causing a problem now'. In fact, Volunteers are the most valuable asset of PIVX. They are AWESOME and we can always need more!
 

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
Staff member
Re: "No questions asked. No vetos. Full support from all pivx departments to merge that into pivx."

Nope. Doesn't work that way. MNs indirectly give the Proposal Owner permission to do what he/she said she would do by sending funds to them. But, the vote is to send funds to be spent as defined in the proposal. Nothing else. If he/she runs into roadblocks, then a work-around needs to be figured out. If it is a major issue - then they should have seen that and resolved it first. This is what the Pre-Proposal stage is for.

Here is an example. We voted for PIVXcentral to be integrated into the PIVX.org site. There is likely a change we want to see in PIVX Core to make things a lot easier and more accurate (with respect to vote counts at proposal freeze). We can ASK for the PIVX Core Devs to support us, but they are not forced to drop what they are doing and find time to help us. In fact, even if they had the time, perhaps there is a security/privacy/logic issue with what we are asking for. So, the devs can simply say 'Sorry - not happening.' Same response can come from any other department for any request.

To follow any other policy would not just invite micro-management, from people who know nothing about what they are talking about, it would empower it. PIVX would then fail.
 
Last edited:

Eric_Stanek

Administrator
Staff member
Actually, I am going to edit the above.

Going to change this:

MNs give the Proposal Owner permission to do what he/she said she would do.

To this:

MNs indirectly give the Proposal Owner permission to do what he/she said she would do by sending funds to them. But, the vote is to send funds to be spent as defined in the proposal. Nothing else.
 
Top