What's new

Archived Website Development (PIVX.ORG 2.0) Final Sprint & Ongoing Support

Snappy

Administrator
Staff member
Title: Website Development (PIVX.ORG 2.0) Final Sprint & Ongoing Support

Name: WebDevSprint1

Term: 1

Cycle Amnt: 4,400 PIV

Total Amnt: 4,400 PIV

Author: Snappy

Receiver: Snappy

Address: DTAgUBVH9mYikPUqJcBFKmYUczfgYxNwj3


Created: 2020-06-27



This proposal is to help fund the current website developers with the final aspects of the PIVX website reboot. They've (Kyeno and Meerkat) have been the code & development arm, starting the process about a month before @Chris came on board to project manage both the website design redo and "creative" design. Till now, they've worked and been funded outside the PIVX budget (in order to maximize the budget available for other essential work/elements). However - like all things universal, with the awesome work/lead by Chris (And feedback from the various community members about features they'd want to have IN the site), the time/runway has been longer than expected, and there is a current gap in their funding for work in order to get the site completed. I know they're committed and it'll get done, however - we would want to have them appropriately compensated for their time / work (As well as keep them onboard to continue to build).

I will be encouraging them to submit proposals moving forward but for now/time crunch with un-used budget available, I'm submitting this on their behalf.

I realize it is also hard to ascertain what's been completed up to this point, as a lot of the "visual" elements (UX/UI) are just now being finalized with Chris's input and a massive push from the community to finalize copy/wordsmithing.

It's going to be awesome.

Ok. I'll share a teaser. And this isn't even set in stone so don't get your hopes up :p
312




PROGRAM CONTEXT BACKGROUND

The current PIVX website is in need of a complete overhaul. Wordpress plugins are breaking/failing, there are a few security compromised sectors of the website, and overall the site has bloated, rendering it difficult to navigate, non-user friendly, and now 2 years old in terms of design aesthetics as well.

PIVX overall has come a long way in terms of development, core team, codebase, and the timing to redo the website (along with massive overhaul to the make the content current) aligned.


PIVX WEBSITE 2.0

Drawing on the professional experience of a website duo from Poland who managed several global company web development projects, and who have been inside crypto for nearly 5 years now (actively for 2 years), the initial plan was to “refresh” the PIVX website.

After careful consideration, it was determined that the opportunity to massively upshift the PIVX website (from tech stack, a brand refresh, copy streamlining, etc) was more valuable than a simple website overhaul.

While Current Dev team is already underway, time was used coordinating with Chris Folta (http://chrisfolta.com/) about integrating/interfacing as a Design/Creative/Project Manager for PIVX (and with that, jumping in as a first step with the website redo/rebuild - proving a holistic and cohesive transition into a new web, brand, tone, vision for PIVX - based off the sentiment and feel of the community.


SCOPE OF WORK
Tech Stack Improvements & Features
    1. Symfony Flex 4.4.X LTS (supported till 2023 and above)
    2. Node.js “Dubinum” 10 LTS (supported till April 2021); potential switch to “Erbinum” 12 LTS
    3. Nginx webserver with multiple config customizations, zopfli+brotli asset compression, etc.
    4. Probably MariaDB and MongoDB as main database layers, though trying to remain db agnostic via Doctrine ORM and ODM
    5. Webpack driven asset delivery; support for *any* modern standard frontend
    6. Redis cache server
    7. SEO-friendly HTML markup and Document Outline
      1. Painfully missing from the current site. VERY LITTLE to NO SEO WORK.
    8. Linked data (most likely in microdata format) for even better SEO
    9. Site Crawling/Sitemap/Indexing (absent on current site) - for google to use for proper indexing.
    10. ...to be continued ;)
  1. Design/Branding Enhancements
    1. New Brand Refresh (done in conjunction with YurrinBee)
    2. New Color Pallets (done in conjunction with YurrinBee)
    3. New Brand Book and Assets (done in conjunction with YurrinBee & Chris)

  1. UX/UI Improvements & Feature
    1. New User experience and epics (Completed)
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kyli3I58OBUwMx1G-Jf2w70LEsu-_46k/view?usp=sharing
    2. 2020 Design Standards

  1. Site-Specific Contents
    1. Multi-level Admin and Security (WIP)
    2. Blog (with multi-level access)
    3. Native Translation / Multi-Lang Capabilities
    4. Auto Price Populator
    5. Email Forms/Native Newsletter signups
Experience & Past Work

Lead web developer (web development DAO)
– DeVault Cryptocurrency – USA (remote)
– building dedicated crypto users community portal (https://devault.online/) with unique coin-based voting mechanism using Symfony 3.4/PHP7.1, Vue.js, Three.js, Node.js 10 ES7, devaultd, coin explorer RPC/API calls – custom dedicated Linux server setup with multiple CLI tasks (Symfony) – cooperating with two lead C++ developers on building the coin itself – test compiling on multiple different platforms including macOS and Linux – bug testing and reporting on DeVault core

Senior software developer, consultant – GridHub GmbH – Berlin (remote) – building an interesting startup from scratch (Wordpress plugin/PHP 5.3, Google Chrome plugin/JS, Symfony 3/PHP 7.1)

Senior software developer, consultant – DBI Analytics GmbH – Munich (remote+them visiting) – architecture consulting – business consulting and providing vital business contacts – website and app auditing – significant speed optimization (Node.js + websockets/ECMA6, memcached, redis, MongoDB) – very small frontend finetunes (Angular.js, JavaScript)

Chief technical officer, Regional director – TopCheck UG – Berlin (remote+visits) – brainstorming, business consulting, business-to-technology estimations – building web app prototype from scratch (Symfony 2.5/PHP 5.3, HTML5, CSS3, Twitter Bootstrap, jQuery, MariaDB, MongoDB, Zend Opcache, Gearman, C++ and many, many more) – custom server build and security measures (Debian + a lot of source compiled/optimized libraries) – adapting and revisioning the prototype – hiring local team of backend+frontend developers, an accountant/office manager, getting an office space – managing and leading the technical development of the application (sprint-based, yet without classical Scrum)

Senior software developer, consultant – Xantera AG – Munich (remote+visits) – working closely with founders/CEOs providing ideas, feedback and consultancy – Thrives.us crawler engine development from scratch (PHP+pcntl, Gearman, MongoDB) – Haircenter24 optimizations like auto CSS sprites generator, auto image compressor, deployment scripts, Magento e-commerce profiling – Haircenter24 research&development (3D scanning products using Xbox360 Kinect and OpenNI libraries, rendering them on sites with Three.js/WebGL)

Support developer – Termine24 GmbH / Shore – Munich (remote) – Wordpress plugin development (PHP, Wordpress API) – Facebook apps development (PHP, JavaScript, Facebook API) – Unobtrusive JavaScript widget development – Ember.js admin panel development (JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3)

Fullstack developer – Tech Open Air – Berlin (remote+visits) – entire platform development including EventBrite user integration, tickets booking & purchases, satellite events creator, speakers configurator, etc. (XHTML 1.1, CSS2.1, Symfony 1.4/PHP 5.2, Prototype JavaScript, Less) – close cooperation with fellow designer Guillaume Mutschler, who also took parts in frontend development – hosting and optimization (nginx, php-fpm, opcache, front cache)



Voting

Vote yes:

mnbudgetvote many 43ecff4d6aa4a79d027c199dc9147ece44056544bd64627561b702b8d23cc83d yes

Vote no:

mnbudgetvote many 43ecff4d6aa4a79d027c199dc9147ece44056544bd64627561b702b8d23cc83d no
 
Last edited:

Snappy

Administrator
Staff member
Update on development:

The site is in the final testing/data entry mode. All functionality for the site (v1) has been coded, and all the design elements (That have been provided) have been implemented. Copy for the site is completed, built-in, and proofed once (there will be at least 2 more proofing sessions before releasing to subset of PIVIANS for review). If people have been paying attention, requests for data has gone out (team members, pictures, etc). Which is a reminder - if you were pinged, and don't provide data, you are not going to be displayed on the website.

As for folks who are complaining/mocking about "how long it's taking" or want to throw snarky jabs, that's not helpful to your DAO, your team, or project. If you want to deflate people's efforts, well, expect to have a dead/lifeless/unwilling to volunteer project real fast, because they are not going to want to exert any amount of energy.

To clarify: it's been 2.5 months.

Yes, discussions of the site/elements started back in March. But again, you don't have insight into what's transpired.

2.5 months has been the time of actual coding/building/framing/building copy/iterating from Final designs, scopes, and requirements. That is NOT that long.

I'm not going to engage in "arguing" with you or even trying to justify "time" with you. Remember, there was only ONE amount that was paid from the budget. That means this website:
  • building
  • coding
  • copy
  • proofing
  • later functionality/flow elements

Cost PIVX (from the official treasury) 4400. Everything else was either self-funded or volunteer, of which there has been a massive amount. Copy does write itself. Proofing site for grammar, or aesthetics, doesn't just happen. Ensuring proper flow for user engagement doesn't just happen. Building on-site SEO to help push new marketing efforts doesn't just happen.

There was an entire separate proposal put it to redo/change/lead the Project Management side from a design lens. You can ask that proposal submitter for their updates as to what was done, what is still outstanding (as for assets/designs/etc) for the new site. That's not in the purview of this proposal.

Thanks!
 

Borris

Pivian
Yes, discussions of the site/elements started back in March. But again, you don't have insight into what's transpired
And that is the problem there. These closed groups are the problem. Masternode owners and the whole community should have atleast some basic insight to what's going on.

The web team was chosen behind closed doors with no vote to confirm if the masternode owners even wanted them to do it.

Again the "click" should not have the deciding vote. They may have 500 votes on side but that is cutting out the other 1250+ owners who I'm sure would like to know what's going on so they can cast their votes.
 

Snappy

Administrator
Staff member
And that is the problem there. These closed groups are the problem. Masternode owners and the whole community should have atleast some basic insight to what's going on.

The web team was chosen behind closed doors with no vote to confirm if the masternode owners even wanted them to do it.

Again the "click" should not have the deciding vote. They may have 500 votes on side but that is cutting out the other 1250+ owners who I'm sure would like to know what's going on so they can cast their votes.

If you don't recollect (but if you care to DYOR in discord public chats) back in February and March of 2020, there was nearly an entire month of individuals including myself garnering support from the community to build a new website. Consistent pings asking the community who wanted to be involved in helping to build out the next site for PIVX. And that "door" never closed. Over that month a number of individuals from our community (and other amazing PIVIANS from other projects as well) stepped forward, and we began the initial process of working collaboratively on PIVX's website, aesthetic elements and positioning into the public. Also, at this time if you don't recollect, there was ZERO demand or request from the PIVX budget. Thus, the fact that we went through the process of seeking community help and involvement was a statement unto its own. And mind you, during those months, there was NO pushback from anyone, be it community members, MN holders, or the like. Nobody said "we need to vote to change the website" or "you need to include MN voters in the process." This is including yourself Borris. And I know you were AWARE of the desire to push a new website forward. Why?

It was your own private message (Borris) to me introducing Chris_ to me and suggesting/recommending we look at Chris_ for design work/marketing for PIVX and the new website. So you yourself were aware there indeed WAS website work going on (that was not requiring ANY demand from the budget), and thus must have had some modicum of interest to make a connection and suggest we look at Chris to engage. Again, at this time, you expressed NOTHING about "requiring" a proposal go forward pertaining to approving a new website, or the like. Yet, you 100% knew there was a website being built.

I understand one side that you MIGHT be saying "well, changing the PIVX website is a big thing and it would be good to have everyone in agreeance about that."

Great point. Every time we were asking (back in MARCH) about a website redo, there was a unanimous:

1) Yes, it is desperately needed
2) Yes, the current site is outdated and requires a complete overhaul of functionality AND content (it is still outdated and frankly awfully confusing information about PIVX remains on the current site that does not do justice to the developers' work OR community work).


While there was no "vote" via the governance system to redo the website, some would argue that those kinds of delays and use of the system become arduous and bloating. Additionally, the original start of the website redo had NO requests for budget from the treasury. Now, if you are suggesting that every decision in PIVX or that "involves" PIVX activities needs to go through the governance system, that's another matter. We currently do not have any "set" parameters per-say about what must go into the governance system, or what doesn't have to.

Cycling back though, the website development work (funded outside the budget remember) began, and directions were chosen. The community was volunteering, and there was great progress.

When the proposal (but 2 months ago) came in requesting a few PIV to help tide over developers, noise from yourself started to get loud screaming "money grab" and "scam", etc, you were met with pushback from a lot of the community as well. Why? Because a lot of the community (who had been DAILY, volunteering their time and energy to again, make and deliver a new website that till that point had not required budget from the treasury), saw YOU, a MN voter, basically saying the "efforts" they were doing was tied to nothing but a money grab. Also, you were tearing down the work/energy of their efforts by saying "it's behind schedule, it's a sham, what's going on, blah blah blah...".

As someone (You Borris) who had every opportunity to BE PART OF THAT WEBSITE PROCESS but chose not to (apart from in private bringing Chris to the table), to then stand on the outside and lob accusations and tear down their efforts, is not conducive for building up your community (again, and encouraging individuals to work FOR FREE on PIVX and arguably, the for the MN's benefit. Let's face it, price of PIV goes up, ya'll sitting cushy on MN nodes will stand to profit the most).

Point being made, to 2.5 months ago when the single proposal to request for budget, to publically SHARE the new website images, details, etc to the public so that "MN could vote on future work, or whatever you are demanding" would be asinine. When it comes to trying to market PIVX, you keep some things close to the vest so-as to not spoil the news. That's called marketing 101. So, yes, I get it. When that proposal came in, it was indeed "tricky" because MN holders were being asked to vote "blindly" on something they couldn't see, or experience, and trust that it would be delivered. However, nothing in the governance guideline says that a proposal like this cannot be put forth. So, I want you to know I understand that for a single budget payout, the MN holders were asked to "trust."

As for trust...I make unilateral decisions nearly every day about "PIVX." I have countless private conversations with PIVIANS and with 3rd parities, all in attempts to try and help the PIVX ecosystem. Why? because I care about the project, and the people, that are part of this project. Without volunteers like myself and others, I'd be shocked to hear or learn about much else going on with business development, exchange listings, platform integrations, and marketing activities. Maybe you'd like to take that up yourself Borris and help us work to get PIVX integrated into more projects, build alliances, do exchange integrations? The more bodies we have doing this, the better.

Forcing EVERY decision into a stymied funnel of monthly decision making would absolutely obliterate any hope of seeing PIVX run hard, fast, and wide into larger markets. Furthermore, as these recent budget shenanigans including bizarre massive unilateral downvotes of proposals just TODAY have highlighted, why would people WANT to participate in this model where MN holders are pissing back and forth on one another from personal vendettas. It creates an ethos where volunteers really don't want to be part of the ecosystem, because the folks (ironically) who stand to gain the MOST from the labours of those with far, far, far less PIV holdings, are those very MN holders who are creating a toxic environment that is disenfranchising the workers.

As for general voting: Casting 500+ YES votes for a proposal does not cut out the other 1250 MN holders.

However, downvoting proposals to death with > 10% no votes DOES cut out the rest of the MN holders from participating.

So I'm confused why you are upset with the first, but NOT the second.
 

Borris

Pivian
If you don't recollect (but if you care to DYOR in discord public chats) back in February and March of 2020, there was nearly an entire month of individuals including myself garnering support from the community to build a new website. Consistent pings asking the community who wanted to be involved in helping to build out the next site for PIVX. And that "door" never closed. Over that month a number of individuals from our community (and other amazing PIVIANS from other projects as well) stepped forward, and we began the initial process of working collaboratively on PIVX's website, aesthetic elements and positioning into the public. Also, at this time if you don't recollect, there was ZERO demand or request from the PIVX budget. Thus, the fact that we went through the process of seeking community help and involvement was a statement unto its own. And mind you, during those months, there was NO pushback from anyone, be it community members, MN holders, or the like. Nobody said "we need to vote to change the website" or "you need to include MN voters in the process." This is including yourself Borris. And I know you were AWARE of the desire to push a new website forward. Why?

It was your own private message (Borris) to me introducing Chris_ to me and suggesting/recommending we look at Chris_ for design work/marketing for PIVX and the new website. So you yourself were aware there indeed WAS website work going on (that was not requiring ANY demand from the budget), and thus must have had some modicum of interest to make a connection and suggest we look at Chris to engage. Again, at this time, you expressed NOTHING about "requiring" a proposal go forward pertaining to approving a new website, or the like. Yet, you 100% knew there was a website being built.

I understand one side that you MIGHT be saying "well, changing the PIVX website is a big thing and it would be good to have everyone in agreeance about that."

Great point. Every time we were asking (back in MARCH) about a website redo, there was a unanimous:

1) Yes, it is desperately needed
2) Yes, the current site is outdated and requires a complete overhaul of functionality AND content (it is still outdated and frankly awfully confusing information about PIVX remains on the current site that does not do justice to the developers' work OR community work).


While there was no "vote" via the governance system to redo the website, some would argue that those kinds of delays and use of the system become arduous and bloating. Additionally, the original start of the website redo had NO requests for budget from the treasury. Now, if you are suggesting that every decision in PIVX or that "involves" PIVX activities needs to go through the governance system, that's another matter. We currently do not have any "set" parameters per-say about what must go into the governance system, or what doesn't have to.

Cycling back though, the website development work (funded outside the budget remember) began, and directions were chosen. The community was volunteering, and there was great progress.

When the proposal (but 2 months ago) came in requesting a few PIV to help tide over developers, noise from yourself started to get loud screaming "money grab" and "scam", etc, you were met with pushback from a lot of the community as well. Why? Because a lot of the community (who had been DAILY, volunteering their time and energy to again, make and deliver a new website that till that point had not required budget from the treasury), saw YOU, a MN voter, basically saying the "efforts" they were doing was tied to nothing but a money grab. Also, you were tearing down the work/energy of their efforts by saying "it's behind schedule, it's a sham, what's going on, blah blah blah...".

As someone (You Borris) who had every opportunity to BE PART OF THAT WEBSITE PROCESS but chose not to (apart from in private bringing Chris to the table), to then stand on the outside and lob accusations and tear down their efforts, is not conducive for building up your community (again, and encouraging individuals to work FOR FREE on PIVX and arguably, the for the MN's benefit. Let's face it, price of PIV goes up, ya'll sitting cushy on MN nodes will stand to profit the most).

Point being made, to 2.5 months ago when the single proposal to request for budget, to publically SHARE the new website images, details, etc to the public so that "MN could vote on future work, or whatever you are demanding" would be asinine. When it comes to trying to market PIVX, you keep some things close to the vest so-as to not spoil the news. That's called marketing 101. So, yes, I get it. When that proposal came in, it was indeed "tricky" because MN holders were being asked to vote "blindly" on something they couldn't see, or experience, and trust that it would be delivered. However, nothing in the governance guideline says that a proposal like this cannot be put forth. So, I want you to know I understand that for a single budget payout, the MN holders were asked to "trust."

As for trust...I make unilateral decisions nearly every day about "PIVX." I have countless private conversations with PIVIANS and with 3rd parities, all in attempts to try and help the PIVX ecosystem. Why? because I care about the project, and the people, that are part of this project. Without volunteers like myself and others, I'd be shocked to hear or learn about much else going on with business development, exchange listings, platform integrations, and marketing activities. Maybe you'd like to take that up yourself Borris and help us work to get PIVX integrated into more projects, build alliances, do exchange integrations? The more bodies we have doing this, the better.

Forcing EVERY decision into a stymied funnel of monthly decision making would absolutely obliterate any hope of seeing PIVX run hard, fast, and wide into larger markets. Furthermore, as these recent budget shenanigans including bizarre massive unilateral downvotes of proposals just TODAY have highlighted, why would people WANT to participate in this model where MN holders are pissing back and forth on one another from personal vendettas. It creates an ethos where volunteers really don't want to be part of the ecosystem, because the folks (ironically) who stand to gain the MOST from the labours of those with far, far, far less PIV holdings, are those very MN holders who are creating a toxic environment that is disenfranchising the workers.

As for general voting: Casting 500+ YES votes for a proposal does not cut out the other 1250 MN holders.

However, downvoting proposals to death with > 10% no votes DOES cut out the rest of the MN holders from participating.

So I'm confused why you are upset with the first, but NOT the second.

Lets start with checking discord. if only i could do that now due to the ban which is power hungry Eric admin ban. That wasn't put to a vote. I wasn't attacking anyone just pointing out worst case.

Also discord is not a good place for looking up information. So this then links back to the proposals which there was none. The only proposal that came up for that was when they had already started and were now trying to recoup money and it wasn't just a small amount either. That is not how the proposal system is meant to work. I will be writing a pre-proposal that will be open to discussion at some point.

I messaged Chris when the marketing was going to pot. Which it still is and i have seen the disagreements.

unanimous vote? don't remember seeing that one. maybe in your private groups but that vote should of been put through the masternodes to agree that this is the plan and to go ahead. there may have been no monies asked initially but there also has been no mn vote to agree to them taking the work on. You cannot just skip the masternode vote. I will include this in my pre-proposal to set the guidelines which we can all discuss.

I am not lobbing accusations these are facts. The vote was skipped and the "click" has decided the course.

Trust is not the reason for a yes vote. A clear proposal and meeting milestones is how you earn trust which none has been earned yet.

I am happy to help where i can. Unblocking me from discord and adding me to these private chat rooms would be a start, then i can actually see what's going on. But at least basic information from proposal owner is needed to see if its continued on the following month or to cut the losses.

Pointing out the flaws in everything that is happening is helping PIVX. To make the project more transparent and to create a better dao.

ALL MASTERNODE OWNERS CANNOT VOTE YES ON TRUST! THEY NEED TO SEE WHAT IS GOING ON. THIS IS NOT A GET THROUGH THE FIRST MONTH DAO AND YOUR SET FOR YOUR NEXT MONTHS. IF CLEAR DEADLINES ARE MISSED, NO WORK TO BE SEEN THEN ITS THE MN OWNERS RIGHT TO VOTE NO! BUT NONE OF YOU ARE PROVIDING ANYTHING. If more information was shared I am certain more people would become involved. Currently I feel everything has been put behind closed doors with no accountability. My views of it I cba with this tbh because i'm hitting a brick wall with the "click" who yourself included are just pushing the views to the side and not seeing some common ground but im still here trying to push for clear transparency. If i was looking from the outside i would think whats the point.

You maybe volunteering but what exactly are you doing? again i don't remember a vote for whatever your doing? not just tasks need setting by the voting but positions to. that's not a dig at you just pointing it out. people are getting brought in without a vote to say yes we want them. Clear roles and descriptions for these jobs need putting in a proposal. someone could come along and say ye i can do that or i can help out with that, it doesn't matter if their volunteering or not. But without the vote its just boys club rule.

Forcing everyone to vote is how it is meant to be. your just sidestepping the vote with no accountability because no one knows what actually their job role is! maybe we don't want someone to be helping out because there doing a shit job? that proposal gets voted down, someone then puts a proposal in for the same tasks, maybe additions, maybe just a different way of doing things. It doesn't have to ask for piv, just a simple yes or no vote to decide. THAT IS HOW IT IS MEANT TO WORK!
 
Top