when China community say no to worker proposals, the key point is not "we are poor, we do not want to pay, we hate dilution", but "we need better planned,organized and estimated development". users hate that the worker proposal reduce to just a way for someone to make money by doing thing with little sense, especially when some developer said that "if I can get money from worker proposal by just typing some codes, why would't I? what sense does the codes make? who cares?"
Bitshares is now in a stable stage that most of the features work well and no one feel big pain at any settings, however do we really need not to do further big development? I am not sure, regarding the planned but unfinished features such as bond market and KYC/identity system, have any plans come out from any developer's brain ? or even is it possible for bm to come back to lead the development of these features?
on the other side, we also need some development which do not touch the core codes but focus on the scalability/advanced user experience, for example roadscape's cryptofresh, xeroc's python library.
I feel we still need worker, however the worker proposal process need to be redesigned, this is a big topic, which may include but not limited to:
- add rating part for worker proposals, users can rate a worker propsal in a certain period after it is finished, suppose 60 stand for "pass" and 100 stand for "perfect" , the contributer can get 100% payment only when the rating score is above 60, and say 5%+ payment with score above 80, 10%+ for higher than 90 etc.
2.add a "tip" button to each worker, contributor work not only for money, but also for appreciation, in many scene tha latter play a more important role. these feature will help to discourage the workers that "just for money"
3.update the rule to avoid the case that the proposal is voted on and the work started for long time, then the worker is voted down and the worker get nothing.
RE: Why we reject all Bitshares workers?