You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Some extra changes are being bundled into hf24 regarding the proposal system, we want your opinion on it

in HiveDevs4 years ago (edited)

I consider these fairly "lazy" changes and disapprove of the second one.

This solves the problem where someone submits a proposal that is deemed too expensive by stakeholders but then your only solution is making a new proposal which means having to ask everyone to re-vote on your other proposal.

See thats a very wrong way to go about it and im fully aware why you took that route. This effectively changes nothing since support for proposals is based far more on popularity then it is on expense for funded proposals. If you can get funding for 50 HBD then you can get funding for 100 HBD.
Coming to the conclusion as the proposal maker that something is deemed too expensive involves guesswork, probing feedback and more often then not (almost always) how expensive your proposal is doesnt really matter right now and with your change.
With what i propose, the expense would matter, as should be the case!

Heres what you do.... (which im pretty certain none of you will support)

You introduce a voting slider that would vote a proposal only for the percentage you think the proposal deserves funding

So if you think the proposal maker deserves 30% of funding, you select on the voting slider 30% and the vote will be automatically canceled after the proposal has been funded for 30% of its days. Basically just coding in an unvote command after set days.

This would change a lot of things. While you could say "well just click unvote after set days".
We know that doesnt work that way and the way that people perceive the proposal voting and voting sliders is very significant.

This would encourage people to give lesser known proposal makers a chance to start up their funding, see what they come up with and if they will deliver. Why not give them a chance for a couple days?
It would also bring much more competition to the top spots reserved for the 4-5 of you.

Sort:  

If you're asking your normal rate for a job, and I'll tell you that I'll be paying you 30% of that, would you still do it? Not persé because of the money, but because someone is saying you're 30% worth the normal rate that your other clients pay you.

We must understand the value that it brings, and not judge the amount of what is being asked for. Based on credibility, prior achievements, set of skills and experience, person X is charging X, whether you like it or not. It's rude to say it's worth 30% and pretty ignorant since we don't have a clear understanding of their living conditions, expenses, or already invested time to be able to do what is being proposed. You can (and should) only judge the value it will bring and compare it to what is being asked for as funding. And if the funded ask is more than the value it will bring -in your opinion-; you simply say "No, thank you, this proposal is not for me".

Hes asking and i make the call on how much i think he/she deserves. The funding starts, its payed daily and the vote slider cancels your vote after 30% (or whatever) of the time.
I can say i value someone work at however much i want to value it.

Your objections are strange and dont really have much to do with my suggestion. This would be an additional option that would do good, you dont have to use it if you do not want to use it. Just click 100% every time.
Seems youre objecting for the sake of objecting.

"Seems like you're objecting for the sake of objecting"
Ah, you wanna play... okay :). For the sake of common sense and logic, I'll try to explain.

First off, I think your starting point in understanding what a proposal is about may be a little bit off track, which makes it hard for you to see/understand that your suggestion is rather obsolete and an option that disrespect applicant requests.

Secondly, the purpose of filing a proposal is to improve the blockchain, right? To be able to measure the amount of funding that is needed, the applicant has to calculate the time and resources it takes and cost. Depending on someone's experience, expertise, and skillset, they require to ask an hourly rate accordingly to that.

What you're suggesting, is the same as bargaining on a marketplace, except you're demanding a 70% discount, which is rude and ignorant. A problem that arises with your suggestion is that if everyone can say that they want to fund it for 5%, 10%, or 40%, the applicant will never get 100% funded. You simply cannot question someone's pay rate, but you can decline, or agree with it.

Lastly, a proposal is not about what you think a person deserves. In fact, it has nothing to do with what you think a person deserves. It is about the content of a proposal: cost/product. Again: if asked-funding equals and requires 100% and you want to fund 30%, you can't expect a 100% return as 100% is required. Unless you're okay by having an unfinished product.