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)

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

hosting /dekodemodoor . building @protector . content gatekeeper

Not OP - but people who have been around the longest tend to starting thinking of new people as « not getting it » and centralise power.  Or private companies launch DAOs and don’t fully buy-in, keeping power for themselves (and investors).

It is a tough line to walk because some group of people needs to be empowered to move the org forward, but if you aren’t leveraging « the crowd » there’s no point in a DAO.