We are witnessing something historic with @JunoNetwork #Prop16. Over 50,000 people have voted (> 84.79% turnout), and a immense debate has erupted all over #CosmosTwitter.
As a member of @core1_official, many have been asking me to weigh in with my thoughts... 🧵
As a member of @core1_official, many have been asking me to weigh in with my thoughts... 🧵
tl;dr we need better governance tools and processes.
https://twitter.com/zl00ba/status/1502605575959502848
Regardless of your take on it, #Prop16 should be a big wake up call.
Politics is coming to a blockchain near you, and no chain or DAO will be immune.
What's happened on Juno could happen on any chain (or DAO) with on-chain governance... a community can vote to change things.
Politics is coming to a blockchain near you, and no chain or DAO will be immune.
What's happened on Juno could happen on any chain (or DAO) with on-chain governance... a community can vote to change things.
It's always been this way... it is all just social consensus at the end of the day. The original DAO hack a shining example of this.
https://twitter.com/zmanian/status/1502418957789147140
I am a big believer that communities should have tools to govern themselves, but there are many open questions without easy answers...
How should this function in practice? What processes should be put in place to prevent abuse or mob rule? How should powers be limited?
How should this function in practice? What processes should be put in place to prevent abuse or mob rule? How should powers be limited?
Potentially anything is possible:
- minting / burning of coins
- forced redelegations
- banning a validator
- electing validators
- undoing a hack
- freezing smart contracts
- things we can't yet imagine
We're at the start of a brave new world full of possibilities and dangers.
- minting / burning of coins
- forced redelegations
- banning a validator
- electing validators
- undoing a hack
- freezing smart contracts
- things we can't yet imagine
We're at the start of a brave new world full of possibilities and dangers.
Now a great thing about the #Interchain, is that there inevitably will be a multitude of perspectives and ideas about how chains should govern themselves, and we've seen that in the #Prop16 debate.
This is a good thing.
There is no one right answer.
This is a good thing.
There is no one right answer.
An important principal to remember here, is #exit.
The ability to leave to start your own community with it's own rules, to fork a community... these are fundamental rights.
The ability to leave to start your own community with it's own rules, to fork a community... these are fundamental rights.
https://twitter.com/jack_zampolin/status/1501973642778857479
We need to design better governance tooling and systems. What we have today is too primitive.
We need experimentation and frankly more diversity... Cosmos Governance all uses the same module with few tweaks, this needs to start changing.
We need experimentation and frankly more diversity... Cosmos Governance all uses the same module with few tweaks, this needs to start changing.
What's been amazing about #Prop16 is that it has brought all these issues to the forefront of discussion in the Cosmos community.
Regardless of how you feel about the proposal, this discussion has been healthy... or at least, I hope we will look back and see it that way.
Regardless of how you feel about the proposal, this discussion has been healthy... or at least, I hope we will look back and see it that way.
There have been some great write ups on all sides of the debate.
https://twitter.com/lavender_five/status/1502881981100531715
Governance is hard. Still, the passion and memes have been great to watch. How can one not be bullish on the #Cosmos?
https://twitter.com/Cosmonaut_Lexy/status/1502985451321409543
Text proposals are non-binding until they are backed by code.
Even if it passes, #Prop16 does not actually have the teeth to enforce it's will.
Even if it passes, #Prop16 does not actually have the teeth to enforce it's will.
In the upcoming Juno Constitution discussions that will inevitably arise from this, I will be arguing that text proposals should signal the will of the community, but be non-binding.
The community can still change it's mind.
The next proposal should be much higher quality, and it should be refined on @hicommonwealth before being posted on chain.
The next proposal should be much higher quality, and it should be refined on @hicommonwealth before being posted on chain.
Where do I stand? Frankly, I find a lot to agree with on all sides. Many great points have been made.
However...
However...
#Prop16 was rushed, and not as fully thought out as it should be for something so serious.
I think the process of how it came about was deeply flawed and the actual text is filled with a shoddy argument about "gaming" the airdrop.
I think the process of how it came about was deeply flawed and the actual text is filled with a shoddy argument about "gaming" the airdrop.
What actually happened is worse than gaming. The airdrop criteria banned centralized exchanges for good reason because they would confiscate people's airdrops for themselves.
Well a centralized entity confiscated people's airdrops without compensating them. It's upsetting to me that #Prop16 instead chose to use a flimsy argument that does not hold up instead of highlighting more credible narratives and evidence.
https://twitter.com/LunaCosmos8/status/1502622392690294795
Most annoying to me personally, is that the proposal says "Proposed by Core-1", and yet it didn't come from the actual @core1_official multisig.
If it doesn't have the signature of the @core1_official multisig, it did not truly come from Core 1.
If it doesn't have the signature of the @core1_official multisig, it did not truly come from Core 1.
I am not against slashing the whale (I do consider them a threat to the chain), but I am not happy with the current proposal... or how it was rushed out and under the @core1_official name.
Personally, I think the funds should be burned rather than transferred over to the community pool.
The next proposal with actually binding code to make this happen should clarify some very important things and outline some principals for going forward.
Number one should be: *Wallets are sacrosanct.*
A full "Bill of Rights" should follow, after careful consideration.
Number one should be: *Wallets are sacrosanct.*
A full "Bill of Rights" should follow, after careful consideration.
This event has shown the need for innovation in governance.
There is much to consider...
- Types of voting systems
- Vetting processes for proposals
- What the state machine makes possible
- What due process might look like in DAOs
There is much to consider...
- Types of voting systems
- Vetting processes for proposals
- What the state machine makes possible
- What due process might look like in DAOs
My challenge to each and everyone of you is to think...
How can we make on chain governance into what we want it to be?
There will be many different answers to this question, and that's ok. ☯️
How can we make on chain governance into what we want it to be?
There will be many different answers to this question, and that's ok. ☯️
If you're at all interested in working on DAO tooling and governance, do join the @DA0_DA0 Discord.
daodao.zone
daodao.zone
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
