[bisq-network/bisq-website] Add blog post: summary of first 4 dao cycles (#211)
notifications at github.com
Tue Aug 27 14:28:32 UTC 2019
erciccione commented on this pull request.
Only Minor things.
> @@ -0,0 +1,179 @@
+title: "Bisq DAO: The First 4 Cycles"
+author: Steve Jain
+excerpt: "The Bisq DAO launched 4 months ago, after more than 4 years of development. It has now completed 4 voting cycles. In this post, we provide an update on how it's worked out so far. <br><br>"
+ <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zjdB5_r3mG8" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I see many other links in the website use `youtube-nocookie.com`. I cannot find any proper documentation about this service, but seems to filter most of the cookies coming from youtube, so i think it's better to use it.
> +BSQ bonds were locked for several Bitcoin node operators, the domain name holder, and the Bisq maintainer role. BSQ bonds are a mechanism meant to discourage foul play in high-trust roles. In a traditional corporate situation, this function would be fulfilled by legal contracts and human trust.
+## Cycle 2
+* Cycle took place between blocks 576 427 and 581 106
+ * Calendar dates: 5/17/2019 - 6/17/2019
+* 18 proposals
+ * 2 requests to change parameters (trading fees)
+ * 2 general proposals (discussed below)
+ * 14 compensation requests
+* 164 votes cast
+* 22 870 BSQ issued
+* 10 000 BSQ burned
+This cycle started right after a couple key developers stepped back from the project—hence the lower issuance.
maybe better to a space before and after `—`
+Otherwise, there was the issue of duplicate compensation requests noted above in the Overview. A contributor made a compensation request, deleted it, and then made another—but both requests remained available for voting. The situation was clarified on GitHub, so stakeholders knew to reject the old proposal and approve the new one. But with more voters, as there will likely be in the future, such communication won't be possible, and there would have been a risk that the contributor could have had both his requests approved (i.e., been paid twice). The hope is that such issues will be addressed while the number of voting participants is still relatively small.
+As mentioned above, the underlying issue was with the network's seed nodes, and was fixed. Vote results and BSQ issued were not affected.
+## Looking Forward
+In my opinion, the launch of the Bisq DAO has been surprisingly smooth.
+* BSQ adoption and usage is strong
+* Contributors have been able to sell nontrivial amounts of BSQ for BTC
+* BSQ market has retained strength in the wake of fee increases, which are needed to make the network sustainable
+ * More BSQ was burned in Cycle 4 than was issued
+With a functioning revenue model, the network's focus must now be to draw more developers to implement much-needed improvements to the software. [Our call yesterday](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJKldxdEnEY) attracted over 20 potential contributors, some of whom identified themselves as developers. Further efforts to attract contributors will continue.
see comment above about `youtube-nocookie.com`
+* Cycle took place between blocks 581 107 and 585 786
+ * Calendar dates: 6/17/2019 and 7/17/2019
+* 21 proposals
+ * 4 requests to change parameters (trading fees)
+ * 17 compensation requests
+* 302 votes cast
+* 22 730 BSQ issued
+* 20 000 BSQ burned
+Following the continued strength of BSQ usage and trading, Cycle 3 voting resulted in another fee increase, this time for both BTC and BSQ fees. Full discussion is [here on GitHub](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/99), but the basic reasoning was that strong BSQ markets, strong trading volume, and a need for the network to attract good developers made fee increases toward targets appropriate.
+The fee schedule this voting cycle approved look like this:
+<img src="../../images/blog/fee-increases-cycle-3.png" alt="Fee increase for Cycle 3`">
remove ` after *3* in *alt=*
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bisq-github