Perpetual AssangeDAO Fund

General
1

I’ve been thinking about how we can evolve the idea of the “AssangeDAO Award” into something more aligned with our ethos and lasting impact. Instead of a one-off prize, what about setting up a perpetual AssangeDAO Fund, a fund that supports Ethereum projects (or aligned ones) that advance transparency, censorship resistance, and justice?

Basic Idea

-Use yield from staked ETH in the treasury to create a sustainable, perpetual fund pool.

-Support a few projects each year that align with our mission.

-Nominate from within AssangeDAO worthy projects - Or have application rounds.

-Bring in other DAOs or Partners (Juicebox, PAK, etc.) to nominate projects or individuals.

-Different rounds of voting within the DAO to choose short list, Wallet Weighted, Token weighted and/or Issue a new AssangeDAO Fund voting token.

-Keep the final decision with Julian, maintaining the integrity and original purpose of the DAO - this is an important peice and will make the fund very unique.

This way we:

-Keep the treasury intact, but make it active and regenerative.

-Build bridges across the ecosystem.

-Create a long-term, living legacy for AssangeDAO that continues to fund freedom.

-Give the AssangeDAO a real purpose and goals to keep it moving forward each year as the funding rounds are administered.

Would love to hear your thoughts.

Two ways to bring in more funds to this award is sell the Julian Assange x Pak NFT - with the purpose of using the proceeds to inject into the fund AND/OR issue a new fund voting token(would need a robust plan)

3 Likes
2

The progress is too slow, I hope to speed up the progress

3

This sounds like a good idea. We should try it, but at present, there is only 198eth in the treasury, and it will not produce enough profit even if it is pledged all. My suggestion is to divide it into two parts. As you said, take out half of the eth to establish the Assange dao foundation as a long-term project development combination, and take out the other half of the eth to build a token economy, such as increasing the v3 flow pool of uni, so that justice liquidity is stronger, so that The market gets healthy transactions, and in addition, justice is bought back from time to time and put into the treasury as an ecological incentive fund pool in the future. This separate operation can make the project go into operation faster, so that more people can participate, and the token liquidity has no value. This is the consensus!

1 Like
4

I think the DAO should aim to get one project off the ground soon. If this one has the Consensus Unit support - it should be looked at carefully as that is one of the obstacles to make things happen faster already removed!!! Good to see your input here.

1 Like
5

RE Funding for such a project - which I think would require long term planning and a budget. I recall this question

6

First, we express our affirmation for Gabriel’s enthusiasm in participating after becoming a multisiger.
We currently have many financial obligations—we need to register as an entity to prepare for reclaiming WHS funds in the future, we need to improve $justice LP liquidity, and we have several technical ideas and operational needs. These are things we often talk about, things we want to do but have yet to act on. Just do it—this is our consensus. The new team needs to advance these matters and commitments as soon as possible.

After addressing these tasks, how much remaining funds will we have to support Gabriel’s proposal? Essentially, this is a very conservative financial management plan. Assuming the treasury participates in staking with 100 ETH, it would generate around 3.5 ETH in returns after one year. However, with the funds locked up, our daily operations would become even more challenging. Withdrawing 3.5 ETH a year later, such a small amount would not make a significant impact on the project. We’ve observed that fundraising for projects outside typically starts in the millions or tens of millions of dollars. Additionally, we cannot accept Assange designating a project a year from now—that is too far away.

The need for financial management only arises when funds are abundant. For example, whether that NFT is auctioned—if we can recoup 5 million, we would certainly discuss how to spend a large sum, such as whether to allocate 4 million to support Gabriel’s idea. Clearly, at this early stage of survival, there are no funds to manage.

Regarding Gabriel’s mention of issuing new assets, would it dilute the original value of $justice holders? Our goal should be to expand participation, not to divide ownership. However, we can also discuss whether updating assets during a mission or brand upgrade is feasible. If it can activate the community, it’s worth trying.

We have too many ideas but have not yet formalized them into proposals. Several proposers and multisigers need to take action. The top priority is the implementation of the mission. Can Zylo publish this proposal soon? As for the other matters, the two newly elected proposers, BZ and Logan, need to step up. We have a long to-do list.

7

yes,this is a good idea,this can effectively resolve the issue of WHS fund repayment. we are creditors, not “consumers”.

The new team needs to implement every consensus and possibility, one by one.

8

I think that is the crux. Deciding on whether the GTU has been dissolved and what replaces it now. Then to develop technical teams to go through all of the proposal ideas, categorise them into which need to be tackled first (with a view to making revenue) and also consider some kind of incentive/compensation for people’s skills. Now whether that means in-house or external recruitment IDK - but surely this has to be done next? In the background the website and what Id call “housework” can be completed and I also think that Zylo or whoever does that should be remunerated. I also think the “mamagement” team need to contact Wau Holland for some financial support - for the more expensive on-going projects - such as this one - which is terrific. It appears that would be the ONLY way for people who have the skills to come forward or even join the DAO.

I don’t see a future for the DAO unless people’s skills are incentivised. The DAO has tried the voluntary route and its not working. So something has to change.

10

By continuously moving forward, we have currently added two active proposers and two active multisig signers, all of whom are now effective. The community is now capable of operating efficiently and smoothly. Therefore, I believe the GTU has been dissolved.The community currently has 4 proposers:Silk, Zylo, Bz, and Logan; and 7 multisig signers: Gabriel, Mike, Bz, Zylo, Silk, Amir and Rose.

1 Like
11

Logan is an excellent proposer, and I believe this proposal is perfect.
1)
It expresses recognition and support for Gabriel’s work, and we can provide more support when we have additional funds in the future.
2)
It responds to our consensus on improving liquidity. I believe token economics is the key to breaking new ground for us. We have seen many outstanding listed companies repurchasing their stocks when market capitalization is low, striving to strengthen and grow their market value. During bullish markets, they sell a portion of the stocks for daily operations. In the crypto space, successful projects operate similarly with their issued assets.

All of this is legitimate and lawful. However, there is always a voice in the community claiming that this is hype, unethical, and could harm Assange’s reputation. I believe this contradicts financial common sense. $justice is cheap, and the treasury should accumulate more when its price is low. We can use the $justice in the treasury to reward the work of individuals like Zylo. Both the shortage of our operational funds and the fulfillment of our mission require solutions from this perspective.

We cannot gain attention with a market capitalization of just 1 million,It is a fact that no one is willing to hold $justice and join the community. It is time for a change.
3)
It includes several technical and operational needs we previously agreed upon.

We should vote on this asap.

12

I believe that GTU effectively no longer exists, and the initial framework of community governance has been established. We will iterate and update based on this foundation.

13

Hey, don’t you considered setting aside funds for Assange’s pardon? Or rather, his pardon should be a priority for the DAO.

CZ just got pardoned, and BNB send immediately. Shouldn’t the DAO capitalize on this momentum? Wouldn’t that also send Justice tokens soaring?

This is the new narrative now, can be a win-win for everyone, isn’t it?

You’ve repeatedly emphasized your ability to seize momentum—let’s hope you do so this time.

14

I finally saw such an excellent proposal and look forward to its implementation as soon as possible.

15

Mr. Assange’s pardon is a long-term endeavor. The remaining 198 ETH in the community is far from enough. Currently, we should prioritize social development and attract more attention to Assange, which will naturally help Mr. Assange’s pardon. Additionally, I remember that upon his release, someone donated another 8 BTC to Mr. Assange, a significant amount that can be used for Mr. Assange’s pardon. Furthermore, the remaining funds in the German foundation can continue to support Mr. Assange’s pardon.

1 Like
16

Who told you that? Can you prove it?

Based on Logan’s funding allocation plan and your claims, it’s reasonable to infer that the community is unwilling to help Julian through his difficulties or allocate funds to projects aligned with his cause.

17

Seems that way but Zylo was going to confirm with Silke and let the community know formally - as in a statement.

Logan’s proposal above appears to be a Governance proposal - ? ( Ive added two new proposals to the growing List of Proposals!!! Refer - List of Draft Proposals - #4 by PeterT).

A DAO should have clear policies in place for financial/asset management, including budgeting, spending, and reporting. Yes/No/Not sure? Should involve further discussion, review, comparison with other DAOs operations. Should we consult with an asset manager too? How do ordinary community members decide on the scope of such proportions?

18

TBH - Im not sure how Assange can receive a full Pardon. Its not in the power of a President to erase the conviction.

image
image904×286 43 KB

I’ve often thought about whether Julian is under employment restrictions. I think the public may not be aware of how that conviction is affecting his operation of Wikileaks or moving on into running his own business and so on.

Many of our endeavours relating to Assange would be about promoting his legacy. I believe many of the current proposals would be effective directly and indirectly and will involve allocation of budgetary funding. (The main element however is the judicial work which the DAO cannot be involved. That’s entirely the work of his legal team).

The Perpetual AssangeDAO Fund could be incorporated into the legal entity arm of the DAO. This idea sounds like a not-for profit grant mechanism.

This proposal would involve alot of work, particularly the legal alignment with Wau Holland, if their funding could be involved. If the idea is coming from the Assange family though - part of that battle is resolved in that regard. How do DAOs operate grant programs? Usually alumini are involved in such resource allocation decisons. It is a very strong idea but the DAOs capacity would have to grow tenfold somehow before it could be achieved.

19

Given this speculation, I also wonder whether Assange might be unable to participate in the DAO before receiving a pardon. I’m not sure if that’s correct.
Additionally, whether he will be pardoned or receive a full pardon—I believe that if no one takes action, he certainly won’t be pardoned.

The DAO should standardize its budget mechanism, involve professionals, and release draft proposals only after incorporating feedback from all parties.

20

It is definitely my speculation!! But it could also mean that Julian wishes to recover from 10 years of persecution too. But if he is no longer is in the limelight himself - people will move onto other causes.

I think the DAO mamagement should talk more about teams and budgeting now.

The treasury is smallish – so what can be done to use it to add some revenue first? What is the most fitting and easiest project to implement?

I think the DAO leadership team should go back to two of those AIPs - and complete them.

https://snapshot.box/#/s:assangedao.eth/proposal/0xa7943076f21e5f88869d0f179e4a7c7a5e032ed025df18f93ea97c8261fa9538

https://snapshot.box/#/s:assangedao.eth/proposal/0xa662d77a7873452460ac8bf026140d07621abb72ddd8f7ad994a273796f62aef

So the leadership team first have to act on the votes of the community in relation to them. That would necessitate a discussion of budget and skilled teams.

So Website finalisation and these two should go first

Proposal 1: Request for the Return of 3,681.59 ETH from Wau Holland Foundation
Seek the return of remaining treasury funds held by WHF to AssangeDAO.

Proposal 2: Launch the Assange Pardon Petition Chain
A verifiable on-chain signature campaign powered by $JUSTICE, aimed at global mobilization for Assange’s pardon.

Its not up to the managemnt team to overide unless there is a strong argument for another vote.

1 Like