Return Proposal
The aim of Return Proposal is to prevent proposals with little to no approval from receiving funding.
Think of it like:
I think that any proposal, that has less approval than Return Proposal I vote for, shouldn’t receive funding from Decentralized Hive Fund.
Decentralized Hive Fund
The DHF (Decentralized Hive Fund) is an account on the Hive blockchain (currently @hive.fund) that receives 10% of the annual new supply. These funds are dedicated to Hive platform improvements.
Every day a portion of the HBD fund managed by the DHF is distributed to various proposals, depending on a) how much the proposal is asking for and b) how much approval the proposal has.
The DHF was a concept proposed by @blocktrades to allow Hive users to publicly propose work they are willing to do in exchange for pay. Hive users can then vote on these proposals in almost the same way they vote for witnesses. It uses stake-weighted votes, but voters can vote for as many proposals as they want.
The Decentralized Hive Fund (DHF) is a proposal-based DPoS financing alternative. The DHF places the consensus behind direct financing of development and other ecosystem-positive projects into the hands of the stakeholders. The distribution of the DHF is decentralized by design. Support for a proposal is calculated based on the total stake in support of that proposal. When a user opts to support a number of proposals, their stake influences the proposals equally. Support for a proposal may be granted or removed but the mechanism cannot be used to negate the sum of supporting stake with a negative vote. This prevents one single large stakeholder from doubling the impact of their stake and influencing the remuneration of numerous proposals, creating a level playing field.
Proposal funding is released when the total value of that supporting stake surpasses the stake behind a benchmark proposal. The benchmark proposal itself may vertically traverse the rankings as per the amount of its supporting stake. The payments are distributed on an hourly schedule over a set period of time as specified upon launch of each proposal. Proposals that surpass the benchmark proposal and unlock funding will receive the funding as remaining in the total ask of the proposal minus the time that had passed prior to funding. The total amount is only released where the proposal unlocks the funds prior to its scheduled duration.
Source: Hive Developer Portal
Proposal update
This post is an update to an old post that was created for the first proposal created on the platform.
Infamous Proposal #0: The Return Proposal.
I set it up (manually!) right after the Hard Fork that enabled proposals (just moments before @roelandp created his proposal).
It isn’t hardcoded, it isn’t special, it just serves a special purpose: it’s a benchmark proposal (see above).
So why this update post?
HF25 enabled us to update_proposal to some extent.
I can’t change the receiver of this proposal, which is and will be steem.dao.
(It’s not an issue because the treasury balance is consolidated into hive.fund anyway)
I can, however, change the permlink to get rid of yet another misleading reference.
It’s worth it because that proposal will be active for more than 3000 days.
Why not create a new proposal instead?
Sure, it would not only have a fancy permlink, but also hive.fund as a receiver.
But there are some serious drawbacks:
- All supporters of the old proposal would have to vote for the new one.
- It would cost a lot to create a proposal with such a distant
end_date.
@hive.fund is set as the 100% beneficiary.
Hi @gtg , I'm trying to understand the DHF. So this return proposal is the benchmark, proposals who have received less HP support than it will not get funded. But where does the support for this "return" proposal come from ? In other words, how is its own ranking calculated? Is it some kind of average or median of all the other, or some other mechanism? Thanks in advance
My return proposal is just like any other proposal, it's not some hardcoded concept, I was just trying submit it ASAP (still, manually), so it has first id: 0. It has ridiculously big amount of daily pay, to be sure that it can consume everything that is not consumed earlier (i.e. by proposals voted higher than that).
And support for this proposal is also usual, that is, mechanism same as for any other proposal: people are voting for it (or not).
Currently it might be better to vote for one of the HBD stabilizer proposal to play such "threshold" role, because not only it will return those funds back to DHF, but in the meantime it will help with the HBD.
Oh, thanks, interesting point. However, there are some things I still don't get: do you mean to say "Return proposal" is not hard coded but simply, through its "ridiculously big amount", it "crowds out" the proposals underneath ? In that case, it doesn't provide a "cut off" and the proposals below it still receive "a trickle" of funds ? Also, the "Hive Gamification Proposal" is above the Return proposal but in the peakd display it appears that it still doesn't receive funding - how comes?
DHF has some funds (x) to spend every hour, it goes from top to bottom (votes count) until x = 0.
If it will reach my proposal having x > 0 then my proposal will get all what's left (amount is really big enough for that) and send it back to DHF.
Currently however, HBD stabilizer proposal has a daily pay so big that it eats what's left from x, so neither gamification proposal or return proposal are funded.
Thanks, much clearer now!
So voting for this proposal makes it harder for people to grift?
Is there anyway to up the minimum number of votes a hive proposal needs for funding. I see the daily rates some of these places are demanding, when they probably, at best should be monthly or annual returns.
Granted, there are some good projects on the dao, but someone's little side project that they might tinker with 1-2 times a year shouldn't be subsidized to the tune of several engineer's salary in America. Is there anyway to set it to say 50 million HP votes?
The more voting power is supporting the Return Proposal, the higher is the bar to get funding.
(So yes, except not number of votes but power of votes).
Vote the return proposal so bad proposals that do not properly account for their expenditures are harder to slip past the bar.
Good stuff to brand it on Hive :)
IMO it is good to have some costs to prevent spam.
But I'm more a fan of " hire fast - fire fast". I also think the price is too high for microtasks.
Low-cost proposals and more of them are IMO much better than expensive ones and only some. 10$ is IMO good spam protection, and to hide the spam a downvote/hide vote would work IMO.
I would like more a mentality of "let's try things out" and if they doesn't work after some time period, defund.
I think we have a lot of know-how in our community from different topics. To get the potential out of it we should be more open to funding some things.
I think it is close to impossible to get a 20$ a day proposal get funded. But in these can be a lot of long term value.
Of course, that was the idea behind it.
For micro tasks author rewards are good enough.
that's also true :D
FYI: I just updated proposal to use new permlink with:
update_proposal 0 gtg "240000000.000 HBD" "Return Proposal" "dhf" "2029-12-31T23:59:59" trueI'm genuinely worried about so many great propositions being rejected, but it's more due to the whales not wanting than the fault of the return proposal
Or sometimes they are just not great enough. Viable way of voting for proposals is to start with voting all proposals you like AND return proposal.
Then reevaluate and adjust your votes.
I'm in fact currently NOT VOTING for return proposal.
Seems like the hbdstabilizer proposals get to the same place but do more.
They do but, at least in theory, stakeholders should have the option to vote them out and have the funds go to return if they don't like how it is being run. Also the stabilizer proposals will expire relatively soon (one already expired but it was small and I didn't think it was needed). I plan to submit renewal proposals but at some point I might not, or they might not be approved. So the possibility of needing a pure return is still there.
K cool solid reason
Yes, hbdstabilizer is in fact "return proposal that does fancy stuff in the meantime", but I want pure return as a safety guard, utilizing it's long expiration and crazy high "payout" (it was created when proposals wasn't charged extra for distant
end_date.It would cost a lot to create a proposal with such a distant end_date.my bad :pCongratulations @gtg! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Your next target is to reach 100 posts.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP@gtg I will support you
What happens when this expires? Instant renewal, without votes, until votes arrive? Or some better plan?
It's a proposal like any other. Once it expires, it's gone. I can also cancel it at any time.
Better plan is, before its expiration (more than 5 years from now) create a new one, and vote it accordingly.
That would have been my suggestion. Prepare in advance. So now I'm prepared in advance. Good enough.