daos

DAOs are not about decentralizing decision-making. DAOs can, and often should, centralize decision-making. Not everyone is an expert on everything.

More important than "participation" in everything a DAOs does, or decides, is that members have better exit, loyalty, and voice options compared to other organizations.

I agree! Lately I've been thinking in terms of "onchain organizations" rather than just DAOs, because the former are more agnostic re: degrees and areas of centralization:

Independent, original thoughts. Onchain interests. Investor, entrepreneur, best-selling author. Cultur3. MetaCartel Ventures DAO. Opinions are my own.

I agree! Lately I've been thinking in terms of "onchain organizations" rather than just DAOs, because the former are more agnostic re: degrees and areas of centralization:

https://solosalon.clinamenic.com/5

Hmm that link preview doesn't seem to be working properly, but this one should:

Governance and knowledge services: www.clinamenic.com // @journodao @opencivics // limoncellist 🍋

Yeah I agree re: whether or not the term onchain org should apply, and I think it’s a spectrum sorta thing, like what percentage of an org’s operations are onchain, and what percentage use legacy institutions and infra

Nice article. Your write clearly, examples are well chosen, explanations are easy to follow.

One note: just using a smart contract does not make an org an onchain org. Verizon using a smart contract to issue an NFT collection does not make Verizon an onchain org in my opinion.

Hmm that link preview doesn't seem to be working properly, but this one should:

https://solosalon.clinamenic.com/

✏️ WIP @oco 🪽 Angel // 🌶️ MCDAO ETHos Pod (🍄,🍄) @SporeDAO // 🌑 🏘️ nonce 👹 MCV

Great minds think alike! @ho and I have denote the phenomenon of interest  we call DAOs as "onchain organizations" too. Our reason has been that "onchain" better reflects the kinds of orgs we find interesting as DAOs today rather than "decentralized autonomous" orgs, which is vague, unfriendly, and unclear.