Community Call over Jitsi to Discuss About Governance

I suggest Monday 18:00 CET for a community call. That way we can discuss this post:

Lets keep the meeting focused on transitioning power to community governance rather than partners, spin off projects, rebranding .etc Right now the core team is focused on this mission. Once the proper processes are setup then we can all begin to put out our own personal ideas and try to build consensus for them as community members. There will be no more core team, just the community.

Just waiting for @Silke , @lunar_mining, @jb87ua, @0xCypherpunk and others to respond


Assangedao is now the biggest DAO in the world. We could and should continue to become the biggest Dao in the world and we therefore can become the entry of WEB3.0 and NFT, ongoing raising money and buyback tokens through online marketing fees and cooperation.

It is simple steps:
1\ Maintain the DAO. The team should listen to community members. Currently, more than half discussion disagree the maximum bid while the team still put all the money in the NFT. Since, the money has gone, the governance of JUSTIC token should transferred to the COMMUNITY to someones good at listening and maintaining the DAO. We should have online community mods with different LANGUAGES and IDEAS since we are a global DAO.

2\We should cooperate with NFTS\GAMEFIS\DEFIS and other web 3.0 applications. Since we are the largest DAO we have the bargain power. Say, we can cooperate with artists like Pak and create NFTs with some revenue goes to the Assange fund ,some revenue use to buyback tokens or just Airdrop some NFT to token holders. We could do this for any web3.0 applilcations, use our advantages as the biggest DAO and use the marketing fees as the ongoing fund raising and revenue.

1 Like

I + one this and will be there for the call.
Continuing to safely* transition power and autonomy to the community is imperative.

May I also suggest an AMA or town hall format where the core development team can answer questions directly? It has been popularly requested in the discord although it has yet to make its way to an official proposal.


Continuing to safely* transition power and autonomy to the community is imperative.

Safety from what or whom? Violent attacks on team members, shareholders voting for “wrongthink”?

This is just concern trolling, to try to gatekeep investors, so the core team can retain control. I assert that any limitation of the exercise of shareholder power, is in fact a violation of securities law.

Furthermore any delay longer than Monday to do anything other than turn over full control to the DAO, is in fact a breach of the fiduciary duty to the shareholders, because it drives down the utility and therefore price of the governance token.

I’m ready to leave ASAP, but was going to stick around to ensure responsible transfer of power to the community. But if the community demands immediate resignation, happy to do that eventhough I believe it unwise and will crash the DAO.


Happy to attend the meeting.

I’m ready to leave ASAP, but was going to stick around to ensure responsible transfer of power to the community. But if the community demands immediate resignation, happy to do that eventhough I believe it unwise and will crash the DAO.

The DAO will always need some employees to handle day to day operations, the problem is that the current governance method is akin to a black box, and there cannot be a “consent of the governed”, if investors do not have any introspection or authority into how the organization is ran. This is why the current legal governance methods, such as shareholder meetings, shareholder proposals, and quarterly reports, are required.

The org needs to be oriented towards being transparent and accountable is all, and those who cannot accept that role, even if the reason is noble (such as being targeted by nation state threat actors), should resign so that there is more open governance.

Hi Amir, you are a very active and community-centered,talented developer. It would be a big loss for us if you leave the community. Could you stay and work together to make this Dao great again?

sorry to hear that. I hope you stay, you group of contributors and donors made history together, let’s make more history

The call will take place on Jitsi at this URL: Jitsi Meet


First thanks to the core team for making this DAO possible. I trust in @narodnik & the core team ethics for making this DAO a decentralized community based organization. It will take a some time before the transition occurs.
These guys are here for the people. Let’s be patient and construct all that together hand in hand with the core team.
Happy to discuss more of it tonight.

1 Like

Moving to a Twitter space. We wanted to use free software Jitsi but anybody can kick other people so it’s hard to manage.

Actually we figured it out. Here’s the new space:

Meeting notes:

Core Mission and Questions

  • What is the core mission of the DAO?
  • Define the relation with Assange.

Most people seem to feel the DAO should maintain some relation with Assange, but the degree to which the DAO is focused solely on Assange’s defence is the core question.

Many people feel strongly that Assange is the centerpiece for freedom of speech in the world, and the DAO should focus on Assange.

Others feel the DAO has raised $50m for Assange, and there are other freedom fighters who deserve justice. Additionally they feel the name of Assange is befitting for the noble causes of truth and justice.

This is a core question that should be addressed since it directly impacts questions surrounding the governance structure.

Whether the DAO expands its mission of justice or remains solely focused on Assange, many members feel strongly we should remain connected to Assange, as our original cause that defined the DAO.

Consensus Unit

Additional questions to be added are:

  • Other options other than pure veto power?
  • How members of the consensus unit could be made to step down if for example there are allegations of misconduct.
  • Address the relation between AssangeDAO, Assange, Wikileaks, the family and Wau Holland foundation.
  • How to ensure the consensus unit is taking correct decisions on behalf of Assange?
    • The DAO has a substantial interest in Assange’s defence given the large donation.
    • Is a direct line of communication possible such as videos, voice or text messages?
    • Can the DAO communicate through Assange’s lawyer?
      • Note: Gabriel assures me this is possible to setup if desired by the DAO.
  • How long a proposal remains open to a veto.

The DAO should formally ask the consensus unit what the conditions they impose on the DAO are before moving forwards with this important question.

Additional questions are when the consensus unit would not exercise its veto power. Even people in favour of the maxbid want to see some safeguards against the absolute authority of the consensus unit. One possible proposal was having the veto power limited by a quorum of non-family multisig members to avoid conflicts of interest.

One proposal was replacing the consensus unit with the legal team of Assange which has a final say on all proposals.

Communication Channels

There are allegations of uneven application of rules or outright censorship for anti-maxbid views that many people felt unfair.

To remedy this the community wants a clear system of rules with the usual rules of conduct, and a system of warnings, time-outs before applying bans. When the new rules are brought in, then everybody should be unbanned from Discord and the new rules applied from that point onwards.

There were also allegations against community member by several people from the Chinese community. Evidence should be brought forwards by all involved parties otherwise these remain unsubstantiated.


Questions on treasury, staking, liquidity and other income streams should be addressed post-governance and is outside the scope of this immediate power-transfer stage.

Many people felt we should not mint more JUSTICE and the DAO is bound by a covenant. To put this question to governance would undermine the economic foundations of the DAO. But this question requires more consideration.


Many people desire the multisig to be much larger, either 5 of 7, or 6 of 9 with snapshot elections for members.


Should there be a quorum? What should the quorum be?

Should there be a temperature check by the current set of authors?

How long proposals are visible before entering voting? Should it be 24 hours or one week?

How long is voting active for? 5 days? One week?

We should likely hold a community town hall for competing discussions in 3 weeks.

Additional Questions

Official translation group to translate official announcement info with 6-10 people working part-time. Particularly into Chinese, given our large Chinese community.

Crypto people know better than anyone that money isn’t real. This isn’t just about providing financial help to Mr. Assange; Anyone with the means can make a donation and he likely has made some wealthy allies.

AssangeDAO can provide him what money alone can’t buy; A collective entity, powered by many different types of talented people, who united can generate a powerful message, in support of his life’s work; and yes, we can back it up with our collective assets as necessary.

We can continue to call out injustice, and as we grow in numbers we can show the powers that be that this entity is also a power.

1 Like

Thanks Amir for your detailed conclusion. I am a member of Chinese group (which represents more than 10% of holdings of Justice) and actually we have sent a representative to the last night meeting. However, due to network connection problem and timing problem, He failed to provide his ideas.
I would suggest that we could make the calling time (say 12:00CET-14:00CET) earlier and using tools such as twitter or zoom for the calls.

Overall, Thank you very much for your effort! We are very appreciate your great work and we would like to work with you to build a stranger DAO and community.

A few quick things - I am just thinking out loud and not speaking on behalf of anyone else.

  1. Assange himself personally would not need or want any money. He is in prison and can’t spend anything except a couple dollars a day on prison food. If he is extradited to the United States, the US government could try to seize his bank accounts/other assets. Money to him except to cover his legal fees is useless. He needs our actions most of all.

  2. His legal fees are obviously now covered for quite some time. As the Assange family communicated that was Assange’s greatest need, to help cover massive legal fees as his case enters the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom.

  3. It would be in Julian’s every interest that the DAO sticks to it’s core mission to free him and that the DAO is able to function properly so it can come up with other ways to help free him that are not just about getting his legal fees covered, because that is obviously done. To function efficiently and properly the DAO should have a well stocked treasury.

  4. Assange’s family and lawyers are the only way Assange can communicate with the outside world, he is in Belmarsh prison, which is literally where terrorists are sent. It is the highest security prison in the United Kingdom.

  5. If the DAO’s mission is to Free Assange by all means possible (no violence), and Julian’s need of legal fees covered is complete, and Julian’s family is our direct connection to Assange, we should keep the family as close as possible. They don’t want any money for themselves! They needed Assange’s legal fees covered and that has been accomplished. It is a massive achievement and a huge blow to the US government who has been relentlessly hunting and spying and trying to cripple Assange and WikiLeaks for years.

  6. Julian obviously wants the DAO to succeed. Money alone cannot free him. His case can’t be won in the courts alone, it has to be won by the people.

  7. Additionally, we need Assange’s family to continue the DAO, they have been fighting for Julian for the past 10+ years, they know what we can do to support him, they know artists and world famous individuals who could possibly contribute and help promote the DAO, as long as it remains focused on its one clear mission, to Free Assange. They obviously don’t want control over the DAO, but they need some assurance that it is completely impossible for the DAO to act against it’s core mission - even if it’s as simple as them being able to strike down any proposal they wish and they agree that they cannot ever make a decision where the DAO funds would be used for their personal gain or benefit. Assange’s family want nothing more in this world to see Julian free. He is a father, a brother, a son, and soon to be husband.

  8. Our mission is not complete until Assange is free. When Assange is free the DAO can then re-examine it’s purpose and mission and the community can vote again.

  9. If by some chance our mission is not to Free Assange - say the community votes AssangeDAO’s core mission should be to ‘save the whales’ or something - don’t expect support from Assange, his family, WikiLeaks or Pak or any Assange supporter. The reason this DAO has been so successful is because it’s goal and mission is quite narrow in scope and because Julian is an international household name who has millions of supporters across the globe.

Also please read this article, the CIA will stop at nothing to spy, subvert, kidnap or assassinate Assange. Kidnapping, assassination and a London shoot-out: Inside the CIA's secret war plans against WikiLeaks


this is not true, prisoners are allowed to communicate with the outside world, even those on maximum security. The most frequent method is the postal mail, here is his address.

Mr. Julian Assange
DOB 3/07/1971

HMP Belmarsh
Western way
London SE28 0EB

Julian obviously wants the DAO to succeed. Money alone cannot free him. His case can’t be won in the courts alone, it has to be won by the people.

The court of public opinion is supposed to be separate from a court of law, the whole notion of the “independance of the judiciary” and “rule of law”, is to protect litigants rights from being infringed on by the court of public opinion and politics, the matters involving Assange are solely in the hands of judges, juries, and attorneys.

I very much agree with this entire statement.

Not only is freeing Assange more than just a contribution to a legal fight. It is representative of the greater issues societies face with ever increasingly authoritarian regimes blanketing their corruption in secrecy.

Assange is the measure by which we will all be judged by this globalist regime that labors under the pretense of division.
Look no further than to the nonsensical nature of Assange’s case, where the prosecutorial party quite literally plotted the accused’s murder. They stalked his infant children. They sought nothing less than his total destruction, and flouted their own legal system to make it happen.

This is the defining moment in our collective history. What happens to Assange, will define our rights and freedoms for decades ahead, if not centuries.

Our purpose should be resolute, varied in action, and centered around the core focus of freeing Assange, and by virtue of it, protecting the rights and liberties of people everywhere; and strongly increasing legal precedent protecting whistleblowers and investigative journalism.

It is certainly fiscally wise as well.
The connections are quite evident, and any board of investors would be foolish to relinquish that much leverage for the removing sake of core mission security measures.

I hope, pray, and trust that this DAO decides, strongly, to move forward with its original intent wholly in mind as it seeks to manuever itself into positions of greater liquidity and proper governance. I think our potential, globally, would be unrivaled.

Try to unite all the members of the dao community in order to make the community stronger.
These supporters are the strong backing of AssangeDAO.
It will play an important role in rescuing Assange in the future.