I am trying to summarize the AirDAO governance process on one page, and this is in light of the little information that I was able to access.
This makes it easier for the community to be able to examine, understand, and present ideas for development.
I see that the process of transitioning towards decentralization is going well and is gradually being developed.
In fact, it is always difficult to establish rules and steps in the DAO governance process for any crypto project because each project has a different nature from the others.
We cannot copy the same steps from another project and work without modifications.
to make the process suitable for this project specifically.
I am a member of several crypto communities and the governance system here is similar to other systems and this is logic and therefore has the same problems.
Some communities have solved some of these problems and others have not solved anything and have all the problems related to decentralization
Decentralized governance is wonderful and revolutionary and will change the shape of the world, but unfortunately, it has some problems
I have some notes, and they are probably known to everyone. I just mention them so that we remember to find solutions to them.
The requirements for publishing a proposal are not easy.
Now there is mention that the proposal can be discussed before submitting it on an external channel to ensure that it is appropriate before publishing it so that it is not deleted.
Where is this channel?
In other communities, there is a channel on Discord for this.
Is it on Discord? I couldn’t find it.
Let’s say the AirDAO community has experts in the crypto industry with great experience in various fields and is able to properly evaluate any proposal, but in the end they are not obligated to follow all proposals, interact with them, or comment on them.
Therefore, we cannot guarantee that we will obtain their opinions regarding the evaluation of any proposal.
The AirDAO community is still in a growing stage and has different current circumstances,
and currently there is not much interaction with it.
Perhaps things will change in the future.
Any proposals, whether good or bad, will not receive any interaction.
On what basis will we be able to judge whether they are worthy of going to a vote or not?
There should be temporary rules governing this, and when the community grows and becomes more interactive will be changed but we need rules for our current circumstances now
In several crypto communities. I have seen a lot of manipulation. You can easily post any proposal that contains harmful things.
Only someone interested in crypto will discover it, and it is very easy to bring my friends or fake accounts into a forum and create a fake interaction and my proposal goes to a vote.
And believe me, they are smart.The accounts are not new, they will be old and more interactive than the real accounts. They have planned for this for several months.
As I mentioned previously, there is no obligation here for experts in the crypto world to comment or publish their ideas to alert the community to the hidden dangers in this proposal.
Most investors do not follow the proposals on the forum. They put their money into dozens of projects, and it is difficult to follow all of these forums.
Some crypto communities have a delegate system, meaning that I am now a small investor or even a large investor, and I do not have enough time or experience to judge the proposals and vote on them.
There will be people who offer themselves to be delegates for these people.
When a delegate votes, his or her voting power is equal to the sum of each of those they have chosen.
They are obligated to read and comment on all proposals, and they are also obligated to vote on any proposal.
This is just an idea
It is possible for one or several people to purchase a large amount of cryptocurrency and thus have complete control over the decision-making process.
His choices, whether his intentions are good or bad, may not be good.
There should be rules to control and prevent this.
There should be members of the community who are obligated to comment on any proposal in the forum and give an honest opinion.
They should be known to the community, and therefore they are trustworthy.
They are alerted to any dangers that may be hidden, and in the end, everyone in the AirDAO community has the right to choose what they want as long as they have a clear picture of the proposal and are not deceived.
The Council does not have any authority to make decisions. This may be good, and this is decentralization, but what if the Council finds that this proposal is harmful? What should it do?
Any proposal will have four days in the forum and three days for voting.
This is probably a good thing for making quick decisions.
But the Council should be able to extend this period if it sees any harm in any proposal, so that it has the opportunity to alert the community to the hidden harms in the proposal.
The Council must be granted this right, which is the ability to extend the period of discussion and vote while presenting the reasons for this to the community.
How can the Council, in a few days, convince the AirDAO community of hidden harms that may be complicated to explain?
When the council clarifies the facts, the community after that has the right to make the decision it wants; that is decentralization.
There are other points I want to talk about related to the governance process, but I will do so in other posts.
If there is something inaccurate in the illustration, please let me know and I will correct it.