links, it is a great post and idea and I admire you for addressing such a complex issue. I just feel your approach is perhaps a bit to top heavy and reglemented and would change the culture of bDAO, apart from needing a lot of oversight. E.g., you were talking of promotions and demotions, different activity levels, categories of contribution, measured by daily, weekly, seasonal activity, categories for community acceptance (very questionable parameter - though I understand where you are comming from) etc. It just feels a bit to top heavy and dispropoprtionat to the problem you want to address. I think one can reach that easier by implementing a kind of BANK locking system (everyone part of bDAO will have an incentive to see it prosper), which would be more strait forward and at the same time reduce the selling pressure on BANK.
I’m worried that having stake-only alignment systems like BANK-locking will effectively cut non-holding members from governance. Holding BANK is a barrier to some, locking BANK is an even bigger barrier.
That’s why I suggested splitting stake from community acceptance, the two are currently entwined in our L2 level. Stake is a form of contribution, and the community can lift up those who embody the spirit of BanklessDAO.
I agree this proposal is a lot, but the basic concepts aren’t top-down, they are bottom-up. Anyone can buy or earn BANK, and anyone can contribute to gain
acceptance. All this proposal adds to that is for the DAO to reward those two positive actions.
A top down approach is someone set up rules and then everyone in the organisation follow or play by the rules. In a company, it is the top management or the board make rules. Most of DAOs use the approach too, only difference is that the voters make rules instead of top management. It is worse from my perspective, as usually a small group elites actually can make better judgement than the mass if the decision making process was transparent.
A bottom up approach is the bottom has the right to make rules. The bottom can decide how a job/person/team be evaluated and rewarded. It should be the clients to decide how they want to reward the vendors, as long as the vendors are willing to do the job.
And also I am not sure the level thing is good for bDAO. It is quite disappointed to find out we still need to climb corporate ladder in a DAO. It is against the principle of decentralisation I believe.
If there is no level, just records of projects we take part in and honour given by the clients, such as POAP or project NFTs, it is much more accurate and fair to define the contributions than any level system we can think of. The bottom/client make rules, not us.
This is exactly how bDAO functions and what this proposal continues to maintain. ANYONE (literally anyone) can write a proposal, gain consensus, and get funding. This proposal doesn’t change that at all.
…the level thing has been part of bDAO since Season 1 and has worked very well IMO. The only thing that the levels unlock is additional trust over Discord. This idea just adds perks for high levels.
Just to be clear to you: anyone can create a group, get funding, and make rules for their own group at BanklessDAO. This idea does nothing to change that.
Glad to know I was wrong and we agreed on the fundamental principals. As for the level system, I agree it worked well in the past, otherwise bDAO cannot be so successful. By the way I still think bDAO is one of the best DAO, as the others are worse. However, if we truly believe in decentralisation and bottom up approach, then why we need to give people different levels, especially making a rating system and sign different perks? It should be the right and job of the clients/buyers.
Maybe bDAO mixed its role as a platform and a buyer/client. The current level system is fine, and what you are suggested is better, if bDAO use it for its venders only.
By the way, I knew the rights of anyone you emphasised, but that doesn’t change my opinion about bDAO has a centralised and top down management structure, very much like a conventional company. Apparently we have very different understanding based on the same facts. Hope I was wrong as I am holder of bDAO tokens.