LilPing

@pingfeng

1727 Following

2383 Followers

LilPing pfp

At a Protector session, I heard this line: 'This thing is complex, not chaotic.' Turns out it's from Ostrom's wisdom. The speaker had been applying Ostrom's theories for years, but recently had a shift, he no longer looks to property rights theory for governance solutions. You can't expect institutions to solve everything because institutions are too expensive. I didn't fully get what he meant. From what I've observed, DAO researchers from both the 2017 and 2020 cycles tried to find insights from Ostrom's work for building crypto communities and DAOs, but nothing really clicked. Everyone seems to assume Bitcoin and crypto communities are commons that match Ostrom's cases. But is that actually true? Why aren't we questioning the mismatches? Also, talking with researchers, I picked up on something, sometimes academics need to 'make their bread' by heavily promoting concepts or theories from influential scholars. They'll spend tons of time talking up how some new phenomenon or theory could work in practice, like 'Commons exist in blockchain space,' so they can get grants for research. In this process, they might not mention, or just ignore the fragile parts where the theory could fall apart, because saying that would kill their grant chances. Academics are human too. This just made me realize that when everyone's hyping up some idea or new theory, I need to think about why they're doing it and stay calm and independent in my thinking, not get swept up in someone else's hype.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

So what are 'regulatory wrappers' exactly? The way I see it: centralized teams want to launch tokens without getting hit by regulators (avoiding securities classification), so they slap on the DAO label. They set up fancy governance structures and get some people to play along with the decentralization theater, but behind the scenes they're still calling all the shots. Basically, DAOs became regulatory loopholes, letting the real controllers shuffle money around without legal responsibility, creating zero real value. Could be wrong, but that's not what we're after at DAO channel. We want to build something actually new, not play these wealth transfer games.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

LilPing pfp

✅ blit world clear ✅ world: "start here!" time: 184.92s coins: 17 / 52 deaths: 7

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

“钱开道，利为先” 但什么样的发钱方式，既能让大家都开心、认可，又能让发钱方产生最大的影响力，双赢？

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

Why is procedural justice important in governance? When opposing the Nouns Fork proposal in the past, I hadn't yet developed the awareness of "approaching substantive justice through procedural justice" when Protector's researchers pointed out the procedural justice perspective. Looking back at the VWR from 2 years ago, the core issue wasn't opposition to Fork/Rage Quit itself, but that facing constitutional-level reforms, DAO members clearly abused their agenda-setting power without self-awareness. https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/356?tab=activity&item=0x2a019853a00ca3af202c262076da3308f606277f-356 I believe this mistake should be curated as a lesson learned and preserved in memory, so that when other DAOs face similar issues, they can avoid repeating the same errors.

0 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

LilPing pfp

Applied to DAO governance, this transforms political voting into economic prediction, requiring high rationality and complete data variables. https://www.paradigm.xyz/2025/06/quantum-markets

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

LilPing pfp

https://farcaster.xyz/eriklarsson.eth/0xb690501c

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

LilPing pfp

Information flows are more fundamental than value systems.

0 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

LilPing pfp

This principle extends beyond governance scenarios to my understanding of the entire industry. Noisy and unreliable reality signals, like endless memes and financial nihilistic behaviors. 'Noise itself is a characteristic of reality', noise is an objective part of reality that should be viewed and processed through new information processing mechanisms, breaking away from binary opposition thinking. Perhaps only this way can we coexist with bubbles and forge a future for the crypto industry that generates real growth and innovation.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

LilPing pfp

I'd love to find such a garden too, but most likely there isn't one ready-made out there, so it would need to be built from scratch.

0 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

LilPing pfp

其实我一直不知道清真的具体含义是什么？总有点语焉不详的感觉，而大家好像使个眼色就“你懂的”，但实际上你懂的和我懂的是同一回事吗？😂 似乎有点 crypto 中的保守主义的意味。

3 replies

0 recast

3 reactions

LilPing pfp

I was looking through the old group chat in @protector and found this: I feel that the ultimate destination of governance research is to handle non-performing asset disposal.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

小红书上介绍 Labubu 的文案，跟两三年前那些 NFT 雄文几乎是一样的：文化符号、共创、认同感、归属感、情绪价值……

8 replies

1 recast

10 reactions

LilPing pfp

Just discovered I'm a Retired Chad on the Regen Energy Chart! My cautious energy builds sustainable futures. Analytical Observer shapes my journey. Find your energy:

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

My cockatiel Meimei has been such good therapy for me through this long period of feeling really low and down on myself.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

How does one move beyond epistemology and morality to reach this perspective? Information-theoretic governance philosophy.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

LilPing pfp

这个 replyguy bot 就像社交的做市商，有时候还撮合得不错😌

0 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

LilPing pfp

I first encountered the concept of "institutional loss." AI explained that it refers to clear mechanisms of cost and consequence when decisions fail - likely from political science or institutional economics theory. Simply put, it's institutional design where wrong actions have costs and right actions have rewards. Blockchain currently lacks such clear reward-punishment mechanisms. For example, in the Nouns community, Fork is a design that causes massive treasury losses, yet the designers and those who voted yes face no consequences - while those who bid high prices for Nouns with real money get hurt. When governance reaches deadlock, project founders and major token holders aren't questioned, or even if questioned, they pay no price.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

LilPing pfp

关于参与治理一事，一开始只是以为做做提案研究投投票。但是后面逐渐被引导要去补政治学知识，读列宁著作。虽然我不知道这样是否就能让自己的行动不那么草台，但直觉告诉我，有政治素养打底是正确的道路，参与那些过家家的 DAO 只是练习的素材，辅助思考的养料，要思考的是里面的人性与制度。

0 reply

0 recast

8 reactions

LilPing pfp

Are there any similarities between the reasons ApeCoin DAO became ApeCo and Nouns' current situation? (Not that Nouns should do the same) https://x.com/cryptogarga/status/1930670768104353992?s=46

0 reply

1 recast

6 reactions