ysgjay
commented
6 years ago @dckc for Greeter work, I am currently not compensated (Have been a greeter since April). I'll probably aim for an SOW since it's a consistent position.
Open dckc opened 6 years ago
ysgjay
commented
6 years ago @dckc for Greeter work, I am currently not compensated (Have been a greeter since April). I'll probably aim for an SOW since it's a consistent position.
zsluedem
commented
6 years ago @dckc I want to address a little bit more about the bounty in China. @ottermagically and Jocellin are drafting a business plan which includes an bounty program separated from this bounty program. The Asian bounty program will not only apply to China but also other Asian countries like Korea and Japan. The Asian bounty program is different from this bounty program based on the situations in Asia.(I actually don't know the details about the Asian bounty programs.)
dckc
commented
6 years ago We plan to go ahead, effective Weds Sep 19, by deleting all trust certs and only adding them back as we have sponsorship etc. in place.
Response to the 12 Sep proposal has been positive. I haven't see any reason not to proceed, so yestereday I began renaming member-site to zz-member-site and likewise other area labels. I changed their color to some hue of red.
Someone please review PR #973 to update ISSUE_TEMPLATE. I intend to revise Bounty Task Guides.
I just now reset the trust ratings:
delete from trust_cert;
-- 404 rows processedThere was a bug I had to fix to recompute ratings:
Note the archive of trusted authorities from Sep 9 in #925.
azazime
commented
6 years ago Won't it be important to point out sponsors RAMs can contact?? @dckc
dckc
commented
6 years ago Yes, it's important to help each other find sponsors. I am making an effort to do so; for example: https://github.com/rchain/bounties/issues/974#issuecomment-424515275
dckc
commented
6 years ago In #982, @azazime writes:
Is the Bounty Program still a decentralized system and how does these new reforms support it?
I stipulate that the reboot is a regression w.r.t. decentralization. I look forward to doing better.
But to understand why I think this is a reasonable step to take, please see Urbit isn't even really decentralized! It has a government!; an excerpt follows:
TLDR: it's technically impossible for Urbit to be decentralized at this stage of its life. Urbit is designed to achieve decentralization, not be born with it.
A young network can't afford to be decentralized. It has to act as a unit. Because it has no network effect, it needs every scrap of efficiency it can get.
A decentralized general-purpose computing network like Urbit can only be bootstrapped by a central government. For example, by default your urbit upgrades its OS automatically (like an "evergreen" browser) with signed network updates. Whoever signs these updates is a government by definition.
When it's impossible to eliminate centralized power, it becomes necessary to tame, stabilize, and limit it. This should not be surprising to anyone living under a constitutional government.
As we found out with the DAO, if a network isn't ready to be decentralized, its developers shouldn't even try. If Ethereum is hard-forked to roll back the DAO (which looks like the most probable result), it acknowledges that it both has a central government, and needs a central government. Decentralization is good. Pretend decentralization -- "decentralization theater" -- is harmful, and not a effective path to actual decentralization.
dckc
commented
6 years ago in #982 @azazime writes:
How effective are the new reforms in the bounty system?
I think you refer to the Sep 19 reboot that is the subject of this issue, so I recommend keeping discussion of the effectiveness of the reboot together here with the other discussion of the reboot.
dckc
commented
6 years ago @kovmargo writes in #982:
- Will [we] continue to vote for the issues that we open/close in September?
You should, yes. Everyone has always been encouraged to vote, regardless of their trust ranking. Voting wisely establishes a record that's useful when considering trust certification.
- From which date for open-issues sponsors will be needed? For example, issues that were open after 19 Sep should have sponsors
Starting with the 201809 pay period, the TAC intends to delegate impact on budgets and rewards only to voters who agree to more clear sponsorship and budget norms, regardless of when the issue was opened.
- There are 9 people with the rating at the rewards not 3 as it were describe above. Why? What is their role now? Is there a connection with sponsors?
Is there a list of all departments and the people who head them and those who can sponsor? I will explain. For example, I want to do smth valuable for coop and first I need to find the sponsor. What should be my steps?
The list of departments is https://github.com/rchain/bounties/labels along with https://github.com/rchain/bounties/wiki/Bounty-Task-Guides
Only core-dev and developer-education have sponsors established at this time.
If you have valuable work in other areas, you and I and the rest of us share the burden of finding sponsors. As I mentioned above, it's easier to deal with such things in specific cases rather than in a general way. So your first steps should be to share what valuable work you want to do, perhaps by opening an issue.
@dckc "As explained in #783, it's important to help each other find sponsors for good work. I gave an example of how I am making an effort to do so." Sorry, I read all #783 and didn't find clear steps how to find sponsors.
In my Sep 26 comment above, I referred to a Sep 25 recommendation:
"@allancto This seems to overlap with responsibilities of Derek Beres, Director of Content. I recommend you discuss the benefit to RChain with him." -- https://github.com/rchain/bounties/issues/974#issuecomment-424515275
It was clear enough for @allancto . Again, what good work do you have in mind?
The 201805 Bounty Progress report (issue #759), had no statement of the objectives and evaluation criteria for the bounty program, which was noted as a deficiency during the board meeting Friday, June 15, 2018.
The purpose of this issue is to establish Goals, Objectives and Metrics for the bounty system.
In response to feedback after RCon3, we are "rebooting" the trust metric and label guides, effective Sep 19. To get certified to vote / guide an area:
Note earlier draft initiated by @allancto :
Benefit to RChain
A culture of return on investment in the bounty system.
Clarity for the CONTIBUTING.md, our bounty-contract.
Budget and Objective
Estimated Budget of Task: $1200 Estimated Timeline Required to Complete the Task: 6 months How will we measure completion? endorsement of metrics by RChain president, executive committee, Task Approval Committee, and/or RChain Board of Directors
cc @deannald @patrick727 @kennyrowe @lapin7 @leithaus
Legal
Task Submitter shall not submit Tasks that will involve RHOC being transacted in any manner that (i) jeopardizes RHOC’s status as a software access token or other relevant and applicable description of the RHOC as an “asset”—not a security— or (2) violates, in any manner, applicable U.S. Securities laws.