Strike Team #23 / Community Call #6
Last Edited Time
Jun 13, 2022
Created time
May 5, 2022
Participants
Created By
Type
Created
May 5, 2022
Zoom Recording
Property
Property 1
Attendees: Ido, Josh, James Brennan, Elias (visitor), Azfar, Isaac, Farhaan (Metagov)
Community: lotusleaf
Minutes
Isaac: DAO API manager contract
- Edge-cases:
- Nothing restricting the DAO from calling the API manager contract multiple times. Spec won’t restrict it from being called multiple times.
- Assume latest one is the most accurate one. OR emit a support request?
- “Ownership” transfer — what happens here?
- Initialize default owner as sender
- Add a manager role
- Are we rewriting the 721 NFT standard? Should we just make this a token standard?
- 721 with consensual transfer
- Could technically abstract this as two NFT standards: 721-w (rewritable) and 721-c (consent)
- Diagrammed how this would interact with Moloch DAOs
- Can be used as an initialization action in any DAO framework
- Josh: could you imagine upon automatically updating
- Isaac: could be cool if a new Zodiac module is created, here’s a easy way of updating the URI
- Elias: it would be nice to support programmatically update the owner of the API? e.g. gated actions that you don’t want the owner to do
Â
Ido: is it a problem if two DAOs point to the same daoURI?
- proposal: call can’t just be directly to the contract, in order to enforce uniqueness, you have to have all the registry update calls go through a central contract that tracts all the URIs
- Elias: i’ve seen that implementation through ENS. Even Solana works like that. Delegating write access to that one central contract
Â
Elias: question, do you have a token ID equivalent standard? since the URI is not the unique identifier for a DAO. We assume DAOs will have one tokenURI.
Â
Azfar: ERC-721 token ID; we get a lot of spam tokens, spam NFTs have been going crazy. If there is a way of doing an NFT-based token strategy, it can definitely get used for DAO spam.
- James: if someone were to do DAO spam, would there be any way of preventing your address from ending in a DAO spam contract?