4 ms·

I'm not sure about Decentraland specifically, but typically there will be a subset of the DAO members who actually control the DAO treasury in a "multisig walle

I'm not sure about Decentraland specifically, but typically there will be a subset of the DAO members who actually control the DAO treasury in a "multisig wallet". Say they have 10 signatories, they might have a requirement that 8 of the 10 signatories approve a transaction to either send ETH to Blender, or do the necessary swaps to give Blender USD. The signatories have committed to execute the will of the DAO. Voting happens "off chain" using a tool called Snapshot (https://snapshot.org/#/snapshot.dcl.eth https://snapshot.org/#/snapshot.dcl.eth). If people hold some Decentraland tokens/assets, they can vote, and their vote is weighted in proportion to their holdings. This isn't without its problems: https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/08/16/voting3.html https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/08/16/voting3.html If you want to learn more, I wrote a blog post on DAO tooling 101: https://blog.juicebox.money/dao-tooling-101/ https://blog.juicebox.money/dao-tooling-101/

nightpool 5y ago
That's pretty funny, that's basically identical to how standard corporations work, except instead of "signatories" you have "corporate officers" and instead of "off chain voting" you have (very thoroughly-regulated!) "shareholder proxy statements".
- vvpan 5y ago
  Well that's the point actually. It is a lot like shareholder/board of directors voting. Except that the DAO requires virtually no bureaucracy to get up and running. So if, say, you and your local community wanted to start an organization to fund some common-goods project you can do it in a few minutes, provided you have people who are onboard with the vision and have a little money to put in. After that all voting and movement of funds is transparent. The code replaces corporate structure. There are unsolved problems like vote-buying and all that, but then other mechanisms would kick like "rage-quitting" (a term used officially by some DAO systems) by which DAOs can dissolve and funds be withdrawn by contributors. Plenty of research projects on the table, but benefits are already being reaped, as in this Blender case.
  - FranksTV 5y ago
    The code doesn't really replace the corporate structure, as the structure is the same. The code replaces the ledger, I suppose, but that's about it.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

nightpool 5y ago

That's pretty funny, that's basically identical to how standard corporations work, except instead of "signatories" you have "corporate officers" and instead of "off chain voting" you have (very thoroughly-regulated!) "shareholder proxy statements".

vvpan 5y ago
Well that's the point actually. It is a lot like shareholder/board of directors voting. Except that the DAO requires virtually no bureaucracy to get up and running. So if, say, you and your local community wanted to start an organization to fund some common-goods project you can do it in a few minutes, provided you have people who are onboard with the vision and have a little money to put in. After that all voting and movement of funds is transparent. The code replaces corporate structure. There are unsolved problems like vote-buying and all that, but then other mechanisms would kick like "rage-quitting" (a term used officially by some DAO systems) by which DAOs can dissolve and funds be withdrawn by contributors. Plenty of research projects on the table, but benefits are already being reaped, as in this Blender case.
- FranksTV 5y ago
  The code doesn't really replace the corporate structure, as the structure is the same. The code replaces the ledger, I suppose, but that's about it.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]