How would you define community owned and how would you judge its success?
This is a great question! Like I said in the temperature check post, I think it would be beneficial for the DAO to discuss and more clearly define what it means to be secure, trustless, and community-owned so it’s great to see this.
Here are my thoughts on what community ownership means and the current state of DAOs as a starting point:
- There should be checks and balances between contributors, participants, and token holders.
- A broad and even token distribution is something to strive for.
- I think the DAO should closely follow governance experiments like Optimism’s two-house system and think about other ways to move away from pure token voting.
- I think the DAO should consider what a community-led fork of Hop could look like and how to make it easier if possible. This is a messy but powerful last-resort tool.
- Bribes, tyranny of the majority, and conflicts of interest are all unsolved problems in current DAO governance setups and should be discouraged at the social layer while better solutions emerge.
- Giving participants ownership or giving them chances to earn it helps broaden the distribution and align participants.