Constitution & bDIP Standard (Part 2)
Draft Authors: 0xJustice
Working Group: GSE Team
Two weeks ago the GSE group posted this proposal:
The intention was to validate the vision and gather feedback on readiness. Many of you responded to the call and we are forever thankful! We have responded to and resolved tons of questions and concerns shared both in the original forum post and the constitution doc.
Now that all of these changes and all requested refinements have been made, we are kindly asking everyone to again review the constitution and speak to its current readiness.
Please keep in mind that this is just a 1.0. We can and should be always improving, expanding, and clarifying the doc. Perfection is the enemy of progress. We all want to do some things differently but this is the time to capture the current structure and operations.
Letās get this established as a baseline so we can start the improvements we all want to see!!
Love the effort here and great job of making an approachable handbook that provides high level understanding of the DAO. The bDIP template seems appropriate and sufficiently detailed to get going.
I hope we can manage the handbook as a living document and improve its utility as the DAO grows. Would it make sense to direct users to official onboarding channels, FAQ info, links, guilds, projects, policies, and procedures? Iām not suggesting that indexing these things is a requirement to kick it off, only suggestions for potential improved usability.
A small quibble might be one of semantics over the term āconstitutionā. For this to be a complete constitution, it might need to incorporate more detail on responsible groups and separation of powers. Also, perhaps it should include a Bill of Member Rights? What are the rights and responsibilities of membership? What utility does the token provide beyond voting rights? Who can participate in each area of governance? Some of these are touched on but could perhaps be made clearer. Again, treat these as suggestions for future improvement. I voted yes and I think itās ready for implementation as is.
Thanks for the feedback. My intention is to directly leverage the doc as a key element of onboarding. Bankless academy has agreed to allow us to make it a dedicated course and if we do move to a season pass system for membership that introduces a cool flow:
Person buys a season pass
They are directed to the constitution and community handbook course on Bankless Academy.
They pass the course on BA and are given an SBT for the season.
The pass and SBT open access to Discord channels.
Iām also a fan of creating auxiliary DAO playbooks that provide more of what people can do and recognized best practices.
If you have a sense of the other things mentioned, please say what they are.
Member rights and responsibilities
Token utility
They are not included because they donāt exist to my understanding. Itās my hope and expectation that they will come to exist and that far greater clarity can be brought to all of these once we have a canonical document like this to build upon.
Iām voting yes, because we need to move forwards.
But I would respectfully ask that any concerns be noted and addressed over time, so that we move progressively from 80:20 Pareto solutions to 90:10 support plus situations, and better wherever possible.
This is looking really good! Seems like a solid starting point!
Something that feels like it is missing, although isnāt enough to hold up progress, would be to lay out some sort of return of value when funding projects - how does the DAO capture value from successful projects, besides growing the name & brand? bDAO will need to have a revenue generation capability to endure the hard times.
A challenge is that BANK flows out from the treasury, to guilds/projects/contributors, and some amount of that BANK continues on to the markets. Of course there are things that can be done to add value to the BANK token, but it is hard to compete with pure return on invested capital, which is what funding a project is, effectively.
Just some thoughts for the next iteration Getās my vote!
Iām getting the feeling there are two groups of folks, with different ideas about Level 1 achievement.
One group is pretty bullish, and wants to hive off access for those folk who are not Level 1, and who canāt get quickly through GP, for whatever reasons.
Another group see that life often has its own ideas, and if we are to be fully inclusive, we may need to allow some folk to go at a slower pace.
āOnboarding 1bn folks to cryptoā
Do we mean only the already fit and fast? Or can we provide onramps for everyone, so that they can also prosper?
I would say while I do not disagree with you that these may be desirable features , there is no prescription for the content of a constitution and a constitution is a mutual contract and can be anything the collective decides.
The features of model political constitutions of the 18th and 19th centuries address specific mischiefs related to centralized control and unfettered and near unlimited exercises of power and denial of individual self-autonomy. A presumption that measures to curtail Absolute power that existed and the arbitrariness of inequity is one that might be approached with a level of caution.
I am a little biased because I work with @Oxjustice in GSE and I know a bit about what is behind and went into this.
I am 100% behind this proposal.
There should be no expectation that our first iterations at conception of the DAO would be the ābestā or even āGoodā. We ran with it, we learned lessons and discovered defects and inefficiencies and are collectively smart enough to recognize we need to evolve. This step is milestone in growing up together and keeps us fresh and a leader in the space.
Getās my vote!