"We have plenty of qualified coders here who would review the code for next to nothing" ??
Tuck, forgive me if you were being sarcastic (I can never tell), but this statement is absurd. We are talking about writing new code to change the native functionality of the blockchain. Do you honestly think that it is a wise idea to ridicule the idea of asking Cryptonomex (who are more familiar with graphene than anyone else) to audit and test the new code to make sure that it will work? They could do this faster, and more efficiently than anyone else at this stage.
So just to clarify, my understanding: you are talking about hiring someone who has little to no track record of writing code for graphene, and then just assuming that some (nonexistant) qualified graphene experts are just sitting around waiting to offer their code auditing skills for "next to nothing"?
I'm wondering why Dan is stating that CNX will have to review any code, as if we don't have any other options. There are other options, they are rarely brought up or considered.
Denying or ignoring that fact is just going along with the herd mentality that we see here far too often ... and I like going against the herd because it's the only way this forum will address any topic seriously versus the usual ...
"You da man Dan! Whatever you say is gold! I'm all for it ... with my proxy vote because I'm too lazy to think or vote for myself!"
I am not trying to come to the defense of Cryptonomex, they can defend themselves. I am just stating a FACT - They are the most qualified to audit any new code for graphene, and IMO we certainly want them auditing any new code that will be adopted by the blockchain at this stage- especially since we have still not achieved major adoption and (I would argue) are still vulnerable in many ways.
It's also a FACT that we don't have to use CNX.
Another FACT is that this forum rarely discusses any alternatives. The forum herd just listens to Dan and immediately announces they back whatever he says, without any further consideration.
Why is that? Where has that mentality gotten us so far?
Why is the majority of the forum so afraid to discuss other options?
Anyone bringing up an alternate opinion gets responses like this one of yours, which focuses on my post and it's intentions instead of discussing/seeking out any alternatives that may be available, while at the same time reiterating that Dan's the best answer we have. How do you know that? Have you sought out third parties within the few hours this proposal was posted? Nope, you haven't. You're just stating Dan's the best answer, when you have no clue if Dan's the best answer because you haven't even considered any alternatives outside of the one I mentioned, which I agree is not the best one, but at least it is one!
I haven't had more than an hour myself to find a better alternative, neither has anyone else, but hey screw all that, let's just go with what Dan says, because we've exhausted all possibilities in those few hours! 
It's as if Dan's the only answer and any other opinions are too "this or that", so let's just go with Dan's idea, because we don't want to have any sort of real discourse, that's too much trouble and time consuming. It's not like we have more than a few hours to decide.
Hell, v2.0 hasn't been out that long and we're already moving towards v3.0.
So tell me again how great Dan's 2.0 idea was? Oh yeah, so great that he himself is scrapping it after a few weeks. 
By all means, let's just continue to deride anyone else offering to solve the problems with BitShares by calling them "random coders" and rely solely on Dan, because we just don't have the time to think about things!
Of course we all hope this will change going forward, as outside teams of coders learn to write for graphene, but this has not happened yet.
Why would it happen when they will simply be talked to like a autistic step-child (it's OK, I'm an autistic step-child so I can say that) by Dan and the forum will give responses like yours, as if there's not possibly anyone else in the world as qualified as Dan and time is running out, we must hurry or else the "competition" (where are they again?) will get all our monies!
Think about it this way
No. Too many people here rely on others to think for them.
- if there were a bunch of people sitting around who were qualified to audit new graphene code - don't you think that they would be writing code themselves as we speak? Where are they? I'm not saying they don't exist, but I am also not just assuming that they DO.
How would you know? In the few hours you've spent reading Dan's proposal, who have you sought out as an alternative? Who's council did you seek that offered other opinions on the matter? How much were you able to cover in those few hours? Do you really want to make drastic changes to your monetary future that quickly based on the thoughts of one man who history has shown repeatedly has gotten it wrong? I mean, what incarnation of PTS are we on BTW? How many name changes (so we forget the past mistakes) have we been through? How many more must we endure?
Disclaimer : Dan you're the man bro! But I want alternatives discussed. I want to hear other opinions, other coders thoughts, other alternatives to your ideas proposed, and this forum constantly bowing to your ideas is not helping that progress. At some point we have to give this some time, let others have a chance, which has yet to happen and if things continue this way it never will happen. There never will be others offering to help as long as the Community continue to do whatever Dan says and not even give others the chance to open their mouth or even find out about the opportunity (like now). We might as well slap a disclaimer on all of Dan's Worker Proposal's that reads, "You have two hours to decide or else!".
wow, this is the second post that makes me think you might be suffering from tonyk's syndrome. Very dangerous condition according to the... crowds! Be advised seek help immidiately! Symptoms include thinking for yourself, voicing your thoughts and quite a distaste for brown nosing, among others.
And on the main subject - while Dan and co might be the only one qualified and willing to do the job, this does not mean they should simply propose something... not even explain why that thing is needed or bother to answer any questions asked regarding their unclear proposal.
If they do not get it yet, with every passing hour they just sit and behave like they are simply entitled to do it the picture looks more and more like this:
They created a company to do software development. They do something to about 80%. Wait 5 min and decide they will change it and get themselves paid to code another change [necessary or not] and whatever they change does not have to pass any other test but just to involve more coding. They vote themselves to do the work and all is good...at 80% the work done, rinse and repeat.
Yes, Dan start explaining:
why the changes are needed - aka why we NEED 0 fees?
will you finish first what is not finished with 2.0? With no pay?
why the change in fee collection for bitassets? Is this what it sounds like - not letting the LM traders get their discount on 50% or more of their trades?
Topic: Worker Proposal Review (Read 48728 times)
