GM Builders,
this one's a spark, to set an eventual fire of inspiration.
A DAO is supposed to be a fairer, better way of coordinating a group around a vision. Whether we're talking about profit or non-profit efforts, the aim is for it to be an improvement on the status quo of all businesses and communities.
Sure, examples like Maker DAO, VitaDAO, Uniswap DAO, Synthetix's DAOs, Constitution DAO, and Ukraine DAO exist. All of them have made considerable impact as stewards for protocols and their ecosystems, holding structures for scientific IP, collectively-run charities, and beyond.
Still, the top DAOs are run by a select few, most of whom are deep-pocketed individuals with considerable experience in the space. 1 token, 1 vote still reigns as a governance model and paths to contributor growth are opaque at best and non-existent at worst.
We're seeing Quadratic funding and voting, as popularized by Gitcoin. We're seeing multi-tiered governance, as Optimism currently espouses, and yet, 1 token, 1 vote still reigns.
In the early days, it makes sense for this to be the case.
A DAO needs to be more tightly controlled until it scales and there are experienced contributors beyond its founding team, ready to take on weight, both in votes and in responsibility. In my experience, however, once you hit the 12-month mark of a DAO being active in a form that has led to consistent growth, it's time to upgrade governance.
What that means in practice, varies on a case-by-case basis, with two elements remaining identical across all instances. The measure of quorum, aka the number required for a vote to be successful, needs to become dynamic instead of a static number. Imagine quorum as 10% of a DAO's token's supply. Now imagine that after a year, that becomes situational, such as a 20% threshold when a DAO's delegates are split on an issue.
Alternatively, imagine that a DAO is largely run by 3-5 ambassador hubs plus a group of 10 or so delegates. A dynamic quorum could mean that if all delegates are in agreement on a vote, that is its outcome.
I wouldn't, however, recommend structuring things in this fashion because it truly turns the DAO involved into something like an oligarchy.
Let's say that each ambassador hub has 10 ambassadors and there are 4 hubs. Now, what if a dynamic quorum is achieved when: 26 or more ambassadors vote and when 6 or more delegates are in agreement on said vote.
That's a structure I could get behind, with the right added considerations for voting power attached to it. Imagine you've decided that your DAO will determine the quorum needed for each vote to pass in that fashion. Now you need to also spell out voting weight.
Think about that same DAO, with 10 delegates and 40 ambassadors, with 10 participating in each ambassador hub. If you have 4 million tokens and you're just starting a DAO like that, how many does each group get?
How does that allocation evolve?
Voter weight plus quorum are the two most important considerations in a governance system once you've already sorted out the basics. Even so, they're often forgotten for long periods after a DAO's launch, leading to all sorts of issues.
Keep people assigned to researching and implementing solutions in these areas, in perpetuity, and your DAO will be in a far better place than most.
For now, thanks for reading friends.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of Gitcoin, Nouns, and everyone innovating with new and better governance systems than 1 token/1 vote. My main point is its early and we can and will do a lot more, starting with educating the world on why more is needed.
We're in the quickest industry in history and we don't have a lot of time. These blogs are kept short to account for that. Each issue will build up more and more of a library of practical considerations for those building in the DAO-sphere, at any level. If there's something you want to see mentioned, let us know!
Remember, we can connect at any time on the Push DAO governance forum or via the Push DAO X account. Next week, I'll dig into how workstreams play into governance upgrades but for now, here's to a future that's more collectively run!