These are the speaker’s own words. We have not checked their claims.
0:02A: You have a logo submitting competition. Mm-hmm. Everybody in the whole world submits logos to you guys. Ungated process. You now pick your favorite 6, and each one of them goes up as a proposal. Hey, we want to approve this one and this one and this one respectively, right? And you get 6 content posts that represent, hey, is the logo gonna be this, this, this, or this? And then people swap their token in to decide, right? That’s probably a simpler way that adds less friction into what you’re already trying to do somewhere else. But the process of doing this is what builds your community, right? Like, more so than them coming and giving you the logo and then seeing it become the choice, participating in the decision.
0:02A: makes them actually a member of the community. That’s what brings them back and gets them to own their own vertical. Mm-hmm. And this is a significant -- if you start with this, you’re significant, like, leaps ahead when people say, I don’t like decentralized communities. You can start to scoff at them and tell them they don’t know what they’re talking about, right? Because this type of decision-making, typically people just parade around the fact that they’re in a DAO, They ask people to send them logos, and then this little body of people just pick what they like, and then they put that out there and they say they represent that as decentralized community governance.
0:02A: It’s totally fucking not. It’s centralized intermediaries making choices without any enforceability from the broader participants, right? So, the moment you start making choices this way, or even a little bit more formalized and on-chain, you can credibly call yourself a decentralized community. Maybe not autonomous, but definitely credibly decentralized. And what makes you autonomous is whenever every part of your organization is enforceable, it doesn’t rely on you or informal agreements, but there’s mechanisms to enforce it. I would say like down here, once you have your decision, like we need to work on enforceability down there, like how do we make those things actually manifest. But that’s why we, when we talk about the coin, we say we’re providing governance signal and not like consensus, because it’s still up to the DAO up here with the voting assets to approve the final content, right?
0:02A: Mm-hmm. So consensus remains with the top-level organization, but you give the ability for your community to provide strong governance signal. And that starts to address like the founder community tug of war that people are always trying to play, right? This, the founder community is the top-level authoritative body. This is people who have staked into the DAO with equity, like who have done work, who contributed intellectual property, or who have staked in with investment, right? So, those are the only people whose decision-making you really are trying to value. That’s what this top-level body is. But then when it comes to the people who are affected by your product, the users, the consumers, or people just in general, if you’re trying to do a public good, this is where they get to weigh into the process.
0:02A: Not authoritatively, but nonetheless. It at least gives you a place to start from if you’re a member, if you’re a regular community member and you’re going to say, why didn’t my logo get picked? Right. It was -- it met the criteria. It got the highest market cap. Why didn’t it get chosen? Right.
That was the whole tape.
