What should the DAO do next? Governance! Governance! Governance!

中文链接:腾讯文档

For a long time, I have been thinking, how can I do something for the DAO, so that the DAO can progress. The following text is a combination that I have considered for a long time. I know that the concise language is conducive to reading efficiency, but it seems that it is not a simple list to express my point of view, so I will state my views and suggestions in detail as much as possible. Also sorry for the inaccurate translations that google translate may bring, I just wanted to provide a discussion list, not a final solution, I don’t think everything I said is correct, it’s just my personal opinion.

I am a justice holder and original donor, and I am saddened why our DAO is in the current state, stagnant, divided, forgetting the original intention, and seeing no hope.

I have experienced all kinds of disputes, and I can understand the starting points of the various opinions.

Everyone has different interests to pursue. 》》 They do what they think is right and never compromise. 》》There are no rules to judge what is right. 》》Then conflicts arise, and they fall into quarrels and divisions.

Maybe we can solve the problem from the other direction,

Establish perfect community governance rules 》》 Let the proposers who can fully represent the opinions of token holders make proposals freely" 》》 Use Snapshot voting as the final judge 》》The community has entered a stable development, and the currency price has rebounded 》》Satisfy the different interests of different people.

At the beginning of the project, the Assange family and the founding team insisted on building the governance framework first, but the Chinese community token holders did not support this work, but insisted on a temporary multi-signature election first, and then the number of proposers ( This twitter conference I participated in, it’s a fact). Because the community has no governance rules, all kinds of work are carried out by various groups. Although they have made a lot of efforts, because there are no unified rules, the community gradually falls into chaos. During the process, part of the Assange family and founding team left, and part of them shrank their proposal authority due to concerns about the excessive pursuit of control of the project by token holders. Afterwards, holders of tokens fell into anger because they could not freely propose and participate in the construction of DAO. The price of the currency fell, the holders of the currency had different opinions and attacked each other, the community was divided, and the price of the currency fell indefinitely. I went through most of it, and the participants had their own valid reasons, but that’s how it happened. Of course, I don’t think the DAO status quo is caused by the fact that token holders insist on temporary multi-signature elections. Comparatively speaking, not reserving operating funds for the treasury is much more harmful to the project.

I think the only chance to change the project is to drive governance, which is the foundation of DAOs, the premise of everything. Establishing governance rules so that proposals can be voted on smoothly and let the votes make decisions is the only way to eliminate disputes. There is a clear imbalance in the “voting” related proposals that have been passed, but no one has come out against it, which is a testament to that.

So what exactly are we supposed to do, I don’t see anyone publishing a holistic action plan, just discussing a few single ideas. I don’t think any single action will push the DAO into stable development. The following are some of my thoughts, I hope to give you some reference.

1 Like

1. Alleviate concerns

1.1 Establish an irreversible consensus unit to dispel the concerns of the Assange family and the founding team

They believe that Chinese token holders hold too many tokens, and they are keen to control the project and only care about the currency price. Once the proposal is opened, the project will be manipulated to make the project go in an uncontrollable direction, and it may even be grasped by the CIA, which will harm Assange. So they control multi-signature, proposer, discord permissions, English Twitter. I agree with most people that this is not what DAO organizations should do, but I have to admit that their concerns are completely correct. What has happened since the establishment of the DAO is enough to show that most people are based on emotions. Action, and emotions bring disaster. But this is not a reason to keep the DAO in the hands of a few people, if there are concerns, remove them and it is time to act.

E proposed in discord that irreversible consensus units can be established, and I tried to list which consensus units should be established.

• The Assange family has veto power over the proposal (the proposal has been voted on)

• Assange’s core mission remains to save Assange (the proposal has been voted on)

• The official channels representing the project, including English Twitter, Chinese Twitter, forums, discord, and website, should be selected by the Assange family to control the person, but the impeachment power of each post should be opened to the community, so that the incompetent can be replaced in time.

• … (some other consensus unit)

Proposal veto power should be enough to ensure that the above consensus unit is irreversible, and if necessary, it can be determined by code, I am not clear about the technical implementation. Then, at what stage should the proposal veto be implemented, before the proposal is issued, during the proposal process, or when the proposal vote ends. I think it should be during the proposal process. I don’t know how it should be implemented technically, but according to the current “pre-proposal” model, all proposals can only be issued with the consent of the Assange family, which greatly reduces the cost of community proposal builders. their enthusiasm. After the voting of the proposal is over, the veto will also greatly reduce the final referee authority of snapshot voting in deciding DAO affairs. Similarly, how to ensure the rapid execution of multi-signature voting results, rather than delay or even rejection, also needs to consider the design process.

1.2 Track the flow of funds of the foundation to reassure donors

I agree that the founding team and the Assange family created the DAO with a pure purpose, but you finally chose the DAO form and issued JUSTICE tokens. In fact, it already means that when you designed the DAO, you have acquiesced in donation behavior to a certain extent. It is an investment behavior. It is true that the donation leaves no cent to the treasury, so it is reasonable for the donor to question the possible money laundering of this DAO. Then maybe the doubters can form a fund tracking group, which can be composed of relatively professional people such as lawyers, and the Assange family should fully cooperate with this group to track the flow of all funds, especially coordinating the German foundation and the fund tracking group. Get in touch to make sure the funds are used to save Assange’s cause.

2. Establish governance rules

Who can drive governance, without a doubt, is the Assange family and the founding team. Establishing governance rules, which was also insisted by the founding team at the beginning, but was later interrupted by dissidents. From now on, don’t listen to any different opinions, because there is no unified opinion among token holders, and the opinions you have come into contact with are only the opinions of some people. The final expression of opinion should be reached by snapshot.

As a DAO organization, there must and must have governance rules, so when should governance rules be established? It is imperative to establish a governance process that token holders can freely participate in. This is an uncontroversial and crucial matter that cannot be questioned.

2.1 Open the right to propose, allow token holders to contribute, and stimulate token holders’ enthusiasm for participating in community building

I don’t know how the governance rules should be gradually established, but one thing is clear. After establishing an irreversible consensus unit, the founding team and the Assange family should completely give up their control over the DAO, and try to open the proposal authority to those who are willing to contribute. rather than a few people designated by them. Decentralized Autonomous Organization Please re-understand the meaning of these three English words.

1 Like

2.2 Set up a governance committee, divide the work areas, elect the heads of various fields, and divide the work

We can look back at the current working model. There may be some people who contribute a good idea, and then everyone rushes to one thing, and because these things are often short-term actions that cannot have a fundamental impact on the project, then People who work complain about spending too much time for no return, and face endless outside skepticism. I am referring to work such as airdrops, JBX refunds, etc. These are undoubtedly positive actions for the project, but investing all the core DAO manpower on these short-term projects and ignoring the fundamental construction of the DAO will eventually lead to us no accumulation.

At the same time, I noticed that the reason why the Assange family and the core team decided to do these things is often that most token holders want to do these things, and they are forced to do these things to a certain extent. I don’t think this method of work initiation is appropriate, so I think a more professional governance committee should be formed to carry out the day-to-day management of the DAO.

Just like a country has a constitution, but the affairs of the country are run by the cabinet. JUSTICE token holders establish the DAO constitution through snapshots, and at the same time elect representatives according to the constitutional rules to form a governance committee. The governance committee generates operating rules within the governance committee. After being confirmed by snapshot voting, the governance committee will become the only representative of the will of DAO except for snapshots. This allows DAO to operate flexibly and quickly.

DAO sets up working groups in 6 areas to work separately, and each working group has a person in charge, who can freely recruit working members. How to divide the work areas of the governance committee, I think the following aspects can be considered:

• Rescue Assange Team - More on this below

• Governance rules group - responsible for promoting the formulation and updating of DAO governance rules, and supervising the operation of DAO in accordance with the governance rules.

• Treasury Operation Team–Details will be discussed below

• Marketing Team–responsible for learning more about DAO and joining DAO

• Technology Application Team–Although it has been determined that the core work of DAO is to save Assange, Assange can link cypherpunks and has the potential to expand web3 technology, which will bring more possibilities to DAO. At the same time, after Mr. Assange is released from prison Or even in prison, DAO may be a starting point for his web3 career, of course, depends on his personal wishes.

• Official channel operation team–responsible for the operation of English Twitter, Chinese Twitter, forum, discord, and official news release

The Governance Committee consists of 11 members, who simultaneously become the 11 proposers of the DAO. Members of the Governance Committee cannot be multi-signatures of the DAO to balance the governance structure. The first two jobs are very urgent, so I recommend two candidates so that the work can be pushed quickly. All members of the Governance Committee should ultimately be confirmed by a snapshot vote and be impeachable at the same time. Specifically:

• Save Assange team leader 1 I recommend Rick Squirrel as the leader, no one is better than him, “Save Assange” related work is so urgent

• Governance Rules Team Leader 1 I recommend slik as the leader, no one is better than her.

• 1 person in charge of the treasury operation team

• Marketing team leader 1 person

• 1 person in charge of technical application team

• 1 person in charge of the official channel operation team

• 4 representatives of token holders are held by ordinary token holders, and the top 4 with the support votes can be

• 1 representative of the Assange family This position can be held by a family member, or a person who can express opinions on behalf of the family can be appointed

The Governance Committee can hold internal working meetings every week, and can directly make decisions on daily matters. The decisions made by the Governance Committee in accordance with the operating rules are the only form of will that can represent the overall community of Assange except for snapshots. This can relatively ensure that the DAO is managed by relatively professional people, and at the same time allows the DAO to have the ability to respond quickly.

A Twitter conference with Assange’s younger brother is held every two weeks. All requests for the Assange family can only be issued through decisions made at the meeting. At the same time, the content of cooperation must be specific and can be directly implemented to achieve accurate use of Assange. The Qi family energy empowers the community.

Before the small meeting and the general meeting, there must be a list of the issues to be discussed at the meeting. The host will discuss it one by one according to the list. The meeting will be conducted in English without translation (that is, the members of the governance committee must be proficient in English). The most important time is within one hour. Each meeting ends within a limited time.

2.3 Clarify the role the Assange family should play in the project

The Assange family member currently working in the DAO is Assange’s younger brother. He has his own work, and he also needs to contribute more energy to the actual action to save Assange. Regardless of the wishes of the donors, he can Very little time is allocated on DAOs. At the same time, he lacked working experience in the blockchain space, we pushed him to be responsible for JBX refunds, and then we saw that things got so bad that there could have been many possibilities.

Then it is better to completely liberate him, we need to establish a more precise connection with him. Assange’s younger brother’s ability to link DAO and Assange-related resources is irreplaceable. Therefore, I suggest that he should not be required to participate in the day-to-day affairs of the DAO, and the governance committee should be the only communication channel between the DAO and him.

2.4. Establish a close link between the governance committee and token holders

DAO managers and token holders have been in a relatively scattered state, because most token holders are Chinese, and they are mostly active in WeChat channels due to network restrictions. Token holders don’t know what managers are doing, and managers are told that most people in the WeChat channel have different opinions, so the news is not blocked. But this is not a reason to require managers to move to WeChat for communication, or to let all token holders enter discord to communicate.

At present, the discord+ forum mode is enough. Don’t adjust the existing workflow easily, and the hidden cost that may be incurred in the middle is very high. Whether the proposal process still uses discussion and temperature testing in the forum or discord should be confirmed by SNAPSHOT.

The key to maintaining the information alley is that after all the meetings of the governance committee are over, the governance committee must write a formal meeting announcement to publish community decisions, work progress, and work plans. The content is simultaneously posted on official Twitter, forums, discord, telegram groups, Various Chinese WeChat groups, in order to allow currency holders to contact project information in a timely manner as much as possible. This work should be undertaken by members of the “official channel operations”, including meeting minutes.

3. Saving Assange always comes first

The basic logic of most donors on this issue is that we’ve donated, we’ve done a lot to save Assange’s cause, and it’s time for the DAO to reward us. I respect Mr. Assange and the spirit of Assange, but here I have to analyze that continuing to “save Assange” may be the best way to bring returns to donors. Please forgive me for using such utilitarian language to associate with Mr. Assange.

Save Assange related:

• This is the original intention of the project, and it is the core task confirmed by snapshot voting;

• This is the best way to change the outside world’s perception of the project and increase the currency price in the short term;

• A wider range of sympathy can be obtained, and the probability of obtaining the support of KOLs and exchanges in the later stage is greatly increased;

• It can be favored by Assange supporters, bringing great advantages to the growth of the number of token holders;

• It is easier to link Assange-related resources, including cypherpunks and organizations from various countries, which are the most advanced resources in the blockchain field and the gold mine of our project;

• Allows the Assange family to have a continual drive to be associated with the DAO, rather than the current stress

The work related to saving Assange can only be carried out by the “Save Assange” team, and only an organization can execute it. At the same time, most Chinese currency holders do not necessarily understand Mr. Assange, and at the same time do not understand the social operation mode of foreign countries, they can help very little. In addition, “Saving Assange” is a political act. Although the Chinese government supports Mr. Assange, all political activities in China are sensitive. Pre-isolation is a kind of protection for currency holders and projects. In the operation to save Assange, the use of voting by token holders is the simplest and most effective support.

If the importance of “saving Assange” is measured by treasury funds, I think the use of funds related to saving Assange should account for half of the treasury funds. Please don’t deny it first, because whether you focus on supporting the rescue of Assange is related to whether the funds in the DAO treasury go online at 1000E or 10000E.

4 treasury operation, establishment of economic model

Coin holders believe that as long as the treasury has money, everything can be changed, so they are so eager to work on all possible channels to obtain funds. However, there is no unified and complete treasury economic model and operation plan, no matter how much money is proposed and distributed by the holders based on their emotions, the funds will be quickly exhausted. We need to recruit more professional treasury operation volunteers and let them make unified long-term planning.

Including JBX refunds, NFTs, and Wau Holland Foundation funding applications, all should be fully planned by the treasury operation team. Of course, the JBX refund has been completed. If a more professional person was responsible for it, there may be a different result. The most important point is to establish a treasury economic model that is closely related to the growth of justice’s currency price and the growth of the power to save Assange, and use interests to bind opinions from all parties. I have always believed that only the exchange of interests can go further.

2 Likes

5. Marketing comes last

Our current currency prices are so low that they can be manipulated at will. Therefore, trying to change the currency price trend in the short term through marketing activities is not a lasting behavior, as our past marketing activities including airdrops have proved. This does not mean that I disapprove of the staff who have paid for it. On the contrary, I respect and appreciate their dedication, and I also regret that their efforts have not been reasonably rewarded.

In addition, different groups of token holders should be encouraged to freely conduct marketing activities, and those that need to be supported by DAOs can be conducted after snapshot voting. I don’t think there is a necessary connection between running a marketing campaign and directly controlling an official social account. What’s important is that we have a tacit cooperation.

So, what should the DAO do next? Governance! Governance! Governance!

I have noticed that among the current coin holders, there have been rights protection groups and split groups. I am not personally involved with them, and I do not support their actions, but I am not against them either. Because the DAO should not deny the actions of any token holder, they have the right to do what they think is right. At the same time, whether or not they are enemies of the DAO, I don’t think so. When the currency price rises back to the issue price, they and others who left will come back, as long as we can protect the rights and interests of the currency holders.

If I were the enemy of the DAO, such as the CIA, to destroy the DAO and prevent the DAO from contributing more to saving Assange, there is no way to be more effective than “Let the DAO maintain the status quo”.

Thanks for your time, to reiterate my point, I don’t think everything I said is true, there can be a lot of unprofessionalism in the idea. My purpose is to hope that everyone will have a discussion list, so that managers can establish a longer-term work plan for DAO and accelerate the promotion of DAO governance.

thank you for your time.

1 Like

@zian I commend you for this outstanding contribution to AssangeDAO Forum. You’ve given us many excellent talking points that deserve discussion. You are showing us a way out of the morass in which the D in AssangeDAO stands for Disorganized. Kudos!

2 Likes

Thank you for your reply, it made me feel that my remarks made a difference. The advice I have given may give representatives from all sides something to back down, so they will feel uncomfortable to a certain extent, because I believe that only a balance of interests can enter a stable state. As a partner replied, no matter how good an idea is, it depends on whether it can enter actual discussion and application, otherwise it is still empty talk.

2 Likes

Thanks zian for taking the time out to expand upon your thoughts.

There are thousands and thousands of supporters like myself who would like to “officially” be part of this DAO.

However, I consider myself to be a newbie in the crypto world.

So I’ve been coming to the forum as a long term Assange supporter who is considering joining the DAO. But I have seen aspects that give me pause to be cautious.

The initial invite to join the DAO came via Twitter. But coming to the DAO I find
zero explanation re steps that need to be taken to become a fully-fledged Justice token holder. The FAQ section hardly contains adequate information.

I would really appreciate if someone can write up a beginner’s Assange DAO step by step guide to becoming a Justice token holder.

The presumption is everybody has knowledge and experience of crypto. For thousands of Assange’s supporters that isn’t the case!!!

I can also see the loose ends re governance and I’ve noticed personalities trying to take control.

This is where diversity in roles and vetting become important to protect Assange’s reputation.

I believe the Assange family do need to vet people - or else Assange could be easily damaged. He has been harmed by so many fraudsters and informants and intimidating media in the past.

I think the governance loose ends ought be tidied up before the next project commences. That should be a priority.

Edit - to prove to you how lacking my knowledge is - I don’t even know what a Justice token would need to be surrendered in order to place a vote. :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Very strong point - communication is crucial. It is a missed opportunity to be unaware of what is being discussed.

Is there such a thing??? I didn’t hear that there was any formal mechanism???

The beginner’s guide should probably be considered after the community has stabilized its governance. There are too many uncertainties. Of course, it can also become the DAO operating rules, so that anyone can use this content to determine which link should be added to contribute energy.

I very much agree with the importance of protecting Assange’s reputation, because in the process of saving Assange, in addition to legal defense, it is also crucial to obtain broad sympathy and public opinion support. But this is not the reason to stop DAO. We need to actively explore solutions. The excessive control of DAO by human factors is an important reason for the deterioration of the situation. We need to establish rules to allow DAO to improve itself and establish an irreversible consensus unit to ensure that DAO does not go towards the opposite of saving Assange.

Communication is really important, but based on the current state of DAOs, a lot of capable people have left. This requires that the few managers who insist on staying can act forcefully to establish governance rules for the DAO, which is the basis of all development.

It couldn’t have gotten any worse, we’re at rock bottom, we should be thankful we won’t lose more, and we’ll be dawning soon.

This is the abbreviation of Wau Holland Foundation by the Chinese community. There are indeed inaccuracies in the expression, and I will correct it.

In addition, if the DAO is in an ideal state and makes a continuous contribution to saving Assange, it should be possible to apply for financial assistance from the foundation.

The Wau Holland foundation is a non-profit and has to conform to a German regulator. That money has been set aside for Assange’s legal costs. Should be clarified with Gabriel Shipton whether there could be an application process.