10 hours ago · 3 min read
After a referendum was launched to demote Dash CEO Ryan Taylor due to missed deadlines, one disgruntled Dash community member put the privacy coin’s decentralized governance model to the test.
Submitted Aug. 6 by user SavingPrivateDash, the proposal suggests that Taylor should be bumped down to an advisory role and that human resources should appoint a new CEO.
As a network governed in a decentralized fashion, Dash designates the power of voting solely to masternodes. For the cost of 5 Dash ($681), any user may propose changes and initiate a vote, which is what was done by the pseudonymous SavingPrivateDash.
The network appears to have confidence in Taylor’s leadership abilities, however. At the time of writing, 830 masternodes voted against the motion and 95 in favor. For Taylor to get the boot, 1218 additional “Yes” votes are required by Aug. 28.
What’s This All About?
The proposal wields an arsenal of reasons for Taylor’s supposed incompetence, but the chief accusation seems to be that the executive’s mismanagement of funds and failure to develop the project, which resulted in the coin’s dwindling value.
Down over 91 percent from its January all-time-high of $1,561, Dash has been one of the bigger losers of the top-25 by market capitalization. The entire market’s unrelenting downturn may be unremarkable, but SavingPrivateDash is pointing the finger at Taylor.
The proposal states:
“Ryan destroyed the market’s confidence in Dash by repeatedly breaking promises and missing deadlines. Dash was once valued at 0.09BTC and it is now 0.02, in spite of millions of dollars available to him. Vault accounts, usernames, friends lists, easy to use mobile wallets, marketplace. None of the 2016 promises were kept.”
SavingPrivateDash, who claims to be a masternode operator, lists various unfulfilled promises and “mistakes” presumably made by Taylor. On the development front, the user seems mainly concerned by the apparent lack of progress on Evolution, Dash’s new decentralized payment platform.
The document’s author appears equally scornful of Bradley Zastrow and Fernando Gutierrez, Dash’s head of business development and chief marketing officer, respectively.
Describing Zastrow’s abilities with unrestrained derision, the proposal notes:
“If Bradley were a community project he would have been defunded after just two months. He is allowed to underperform and underdeliver without consequences, in spite of the disproportional salary he receives.”
Should the current plan fail to reach a quorum, SavingPrivateDash stated it would be followed-up with subsequent bids to “fire” Fernando, Bradley and, once more, Taylor.
A number of points are untrue or unverifiable until proven otherwise; but intriguingly, SavingPrivateDash does not appear open to the discussion through the usual online channels, explaining:
“I do not have any other alias and I do not post on Reddit, Dash Forum or Discord, because Dash communities are not welcoming to criticism.”
Regardless of its outcome, the proposal may be celebrated as a triumph of the project’s decentralized governance; a system granting liberties not always readily offered.