DAOs need to take a growth funnel approach to onboarding contributors, as I think there is a 5x-10x output opportunity here.
There is a huge gap in the ability of new users to onboard to contributing to DAOs and I think there is low-hanging fruit to fix that.
I think a great example here is @iearnfinance who is probably ahead of the curve in terms of having documentation and still if you aren't engrained in that community there are a lot of open questions you can't easily find answers to.
-What are the core components a strategy needs?
-Can partners launch their own compatible vault?
-Who gets paid, who doesn't?
-What is the process for proposing and voting on new features/strategies/vaults?
-Where is the list of work needing done?
-Are the docs up to date?
Part of the reason this space has so many shitty "VCs" willing to use people as instant exit liquidity is this space feverously worships anyone who makes money, and thinks VCs are just for dry powder.
If the only way you vet investors is by assuming they have no value-add and seeing who gets simped the most on Twitter, then of course you're going to have a cap table filled with people happy to nickel and dime you.
Like lets face it, CZ could turn around, mint $10M in new BNB, blatantly dump it on the market and half of his followers would just say its for the good of the project.
I'll take the opposite side in this debate, somewhat.
I think most DAO's today are nonsense larps not because of decentralization but because their participants don't have a clue about business, and the teams have no idea how to set up strong governance systems.
That said I believe DAO's are absolutely the future of this space and many projects are decentralized, but they've decentralized without the right systems in place to manage that and without the right knowledge.
Many large companies still think you can't work remotely nevermind in a decentralized fashion, but that simply isn't true.
I spent the last decade working for remote companies many of whom are some of the most effective operators in the space.
Based on the snippets below the sanctions are expected to be focused, aimed at specific malpractice rather than something that is against the entire industry/asset class.
We don't know what those specific restrictions are, or who/what/why they are targeting, but the fact that they are specific and targeted, specifically to not cast a wide net is a HUGE improvement from the last kind of action we saw alluded to from the treasury.
At this point I'm convinced that the SEC's current regulatory stance on crypto is more someone's personal political agenda.
Highly technical, educated people, informed on this space cannot reach the conclusion that defi platforms can simply 'come in and register'
First take @brian_armstrong's post about the SEC blocking Coinbase aggressively, something the entirely doesn't align with a department that should be acting in good faith to support innovation while protecting consumers.