The third meeting
Last Edited Time
Jan 3, 2023
Created time
Jan 7, 2022
Participants
Created By
Type
Created
Jan 7, 2022
Zoom Recording
Property
Property 1
Zoom recording: https://stanford.zoom.us/rec/share/4hMH9BGEP44Z1ctzVMFFY_V49CcUsvn7u-EwR7J2-V5By3SjaM0sJ3agRaj1zQLk.LPPdQAv0y-FxLz6d
Participants
Observers: Jonathan Dotan (Stanford), Umar Khan, Catalano Teresa, Keating, Amandeep
Agenda
- Introductions & welcome to new folks (10 minutes)
- Topic 1: Present the draft EIP (15 minutes)
- Topic 2: Discussion & questions (20 minutes)
- Topic 3: DAOstar DAO design (5 minutes)
- Topic 4: Vote (5 minutes)
- Topic 5: Launch plans @ ETHDenver, Schelling Point, and online (5 minutes)
Topic 1: Draft EIP
Topic 2: Discussion & questions
Minutes:
- Spencer: how will you deal with trust issues people might have with the data from these endpoints?
- Josh: DAOs themselves are ultimately responsible for it; they control the pointer. We can’t guarantee the validity of the data, but we expect many DAOs to subscribe to generic endpoints provided by frameworks or other third parties, which may be more trustworthy and verifiable. Ultimately, it’s still a black box though, since it’s off-chain.
- Eyal: ultimately, data from this standard is meant to be a starting point for verification. Right now, there’s not even a starting point.
- William Nuelle: what protections do you get from unwanted inclusion? Suppose they decide they want Vitalik in the DAO.
- Isaac: not a challenge unique to DAOs; e.g. what stops people airdropping tokens to Vitalik?
- Spencer: there are some emerging use-cases where people decay tokens to address this issue.
- Prima: I feel like asking the DAO to provide this final list of members is a big responsibility for the DAO, but also giving a lot of power to the DAO. Why ask the DAO to provide these IDs as opposed to asking the DAO to provide a particular function or resolution mechanism?
- Isaac: this has been discussed a lot! ultimately we feel that asking for the final list of IDs and asking for a particular resolution mechanism is actually the same thing.
Topic 3: DAOstar DAO design
Topic 4: Votes
Topic 5: Launch plans
See slides.
Zoom chat
11:01:35 From Joshua Tan to Everyone:
Slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MgZZWOHHHbkyMKgjQ13fYpqlyjn_oLn6eO-p589eS3c/edit#slide=id.p
11:02:28 From Wayne Chang to Everyone:
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1478262722047451137
11:03:09 From Joshua Tan to Everyone:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MgZZWOHHHbkyMKgjQ13fYpqlyjn_oLn6eO-p589eS3c/edit#slide=id.p
11:08:25 From Joshua Tan to Everyone:
Yury next 🙂
11:11:51 From isaacpatka to Joshua Tan(Direct Message):
Shall we record?
11:12:01 From Joshua Tan to isaacpatka(Direct Message):
ahhh
11:12:05 From Joshua Tan to isaacpatka(Direct Message):
I keep forgetting this.
11:12:13 From isaacpatka to Joshua Tan(Direct Message):
Also I can share screen when ready, have a couple tabs to share
11:13:11 From Jordan Gray to Everyone:
Jordan checking in, product owner for AstroDAO launcher on NEAR Protocol. First meeting and happy to be here 😁
11:27:24 From Wayne Chang to Everyone:
You could stick it in a JWT or add LDP
11:27:31 From Wayne Chang to Everyone:
(Depending on if you believe LDPs are real or not)
11:33:09 From Spencer Graham to Everyone:
William your point raises another (broader) conversation: what does it actually mean to be a member of a DAO? If somebody drops me a random token that they claim is a governance token for their DAO, and I “in” that DAO? Probably outside the scope of the present work, but I think it would be valuable to have some sort of consensus on (or maybe taxonomy of?) how membership can be defined (without being overly prescriptive of course)
11:35:06 From isaacpatka to Everyone:
+1 Spencer - intention here is not to be overly prescriptive of ‘what is membership’ because that is so variable
11:36:19 From Jonathan Kol to Everyone:
I think the base condition is that you opt in, and are not kicked out by your fellow members
11:37:08 From Spencer Graham to Everyone:
Personally I don’t think DAOs are ultimately about decision-making; rather, they are ultimately about taking (ie executing) actions collectively.
11:38:44 From Spencer Graham to Everyone:
What I think DAOs do uniquely is unbundle decision-making and execution
11:39:04 From Primavera DE FILIPPI to Everyone:
Where the DAO has Tokens providing governance powers
to the Token holder, the Token holder will be considered a
Member of the DAO:
(a) From the time the ownership of the Tokens is
established to be in the possession of an address, or
(b) From the time when ownership is first acknowledged
by the Token holder through an On-Chain interaction
with the DAO, through staking the Tokens, voting with
the Tokens Off-chain whereby results are implemented
On-Chain, submitting a Proposal or transferring the
Tokens to another address, in the event that no action
has been taken by a Token holder to acquire a Token,
such as in an Airdrop.
11:40:19 From Aaron (he/him) - Govrn to Everyone:
Is it worth keeping it simple. Anyone that has the ability to vote or take action is a member, but being a member doesn’t indicate “activeness”?
11:41:46 From Aaron (he/him) - Govrn to Everyone:
I think we’re starting to see DAOs play around with dilution or decay functions which would over time reduce people’s to actually vote, which factors in activeness in how people are a member
11:43:44 From isaacpatka to Everyone:
DAO Name: w̶3̶c̶ W4C
11:44:14 From Florent Moulin to Everyone:
Agree with Aaron, I think activeness can be measured differently. I think it’s like trying to gauge the number of BTC lost, it’s not possible to get the exact number, but you can derive activeness metrics, like the number of BTC that have moved in theist 5 years. I could see the same metrics (# of active member in last month, 6m, 1y, 2y etc..) has a good proxy for activeness vs just using members.
11:44:21 From Balazs Nemethi to Everyone:
https://discord.com/invite/DkmHCArkhD
11:44:26 From Joshua Tan to Everyone:
https://discord.gg/psSqZqBN
11:46:04 From Wayne Chang to Everyone:
Sapir-Whorf revisited with Discord constraint
11:46:30 From Scott Moore to Everyone:
+1 on that!
11:49:48 From umarkhan to Everyone:
Really impressive project! Looking forward to getting my hands on some of the data that comes out of this project. Hope this really reduces friction for DAO2DAO coordination and makes it easier for DAOs to fluidly find/onboard/offboard resources
11:50:15 From connorspelliscy to Everyone:
Thanks for all the hard work Josh and strike team!
11:50:35 From Jordan Gray to Everyone:
TG link? I'm in the discord
11:50:43 From Florent Moulin to Everyone:
Thanks a lot Josh and team!
11:50:48 From Jordan Gray to Everyone:
TY!
11:50:57 From Theo Gonella to Everyone:
Thank you! Keep up the good work!