daos

The concept of checks and balances have existed and iterated upon for millennia. Likewise with follies of plutocracies. Hubris is the only reason why almost all DAOs are 100% plutocracies with 0 checks and balances even after a decade of abject failure

(Not all DAOs need checks and balances, to be clear, but most do)

Absolute power corrupts absolutely

Checks and balances = accountability

Would love to see visual schemas / taxonomy of different governance models that avoid plutocracy.

What does 'hubris' mean here? Like, what kind of behaviors or attitudes are we talking about when DAOs end up as plutocracies?

📣 Let's Talk About /daos 📣

The weekly open space for DAO enthusiasts to talk, share news, ask questions, etc.
Thursdays at 9AM Pacific
8/1: aburra.xyz/space/249

✅ Agenda collab: https://bit.ly/4ca8mxd

➡️ DC group for 🔔s: warpcast.com/~/channel/daos
➡️ DM me for a recurring cal invite

You should join us tomorrow for our weekly call if you can! We love to talk about stuff like this! https://warpcast.com/thethriller/0x4823533b

Although there is also some admin stuff on the agenda regarding the /daos channel

I don’t suppose you have a DAO in mind when you talk about this cycles more serious approach to these incentives and checks and balances

and I do think this is changing. most serious projects have seen projects of the last cycle mess this up and are taking this a lot more seriously!

Imo hubris rarely the cause. Most DAO design mistakes stem from a combination of short sightness & misaligned incentives from teams