If you don't want a stupid tweet to get you kicked out of a decentralized organization, then don't setup the rules to enable that. Effectively, this shows that

If you don't want a stupid tweet to get you kicked out of a decentralized organization, then don't setup the rules to enable that. Effectively, this shows that decentralized governance might actually work. It also shows the danger of codifying rules. If you do it wrong you can footgun yourself, and it'll take a lot more work to develop good blueprints for DAO governance so unfortunate things don't happen so much. I'm not so interested in the outcome, since they all joined the DAO and agreed to the rules. It was fair, according to their own rules. What's more: it was efficient and effective. The author asks "did this even need web3?" and that's what's so interesting about it. Of course, Twitter can't fire a bad CEO (or a politician). You can yell and boycott all you want, but it's up to the owners of the company as to what happens to said bad actor. Now, with web3, you can collectively use a vending machine of encoded rules and literally remove them. No pleas to the authorities, just direct action. Put a coin in, and the machine starts doing something. This has a whole lot of implications, both good and bad. It's really up to the developer community to figure out the best way to navigate this, because it seems most other people are busy shitting on crypto or trading shitcoins and useless NFTs to notice that a new overlord is hatching.