Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
rafa
@rafa
Currently, we’re on the path of protocolizing digital governance. Yet it seems to be converging on esoteric jargon and functions, is there a path out? Is there something else that won’t lead us to localized ossification with niche standards, procedures, and a working class of governance technical support?
4 replies
14 recasts
80 reactions
krel
@krel
whats the worst jargon? im too deep to realize probs
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
1𝐴35𝐸1
@1a35e1
Its fine IMO, In time best practices will come out in the wash. Over simplification, is just dumbing things down which would lead to a dominate two-party system we see IRL which defeats the whole point of governance innovation. Ultimate goal here is to show people they can have an effect on outcomes.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Trigs
@trigs
I feel like we're still experimenting with primitives and speed running the entire history of human governance onchain. So I see the jargon as part of the process as us nerds really nail down the inner workings before actual communities can abstract away the language. For example, look at bean.money and how they use abstract language for defi. It's cool and clever and makes a great narrative, but it's also even more difficult to fully grok what is going on behind the scenes because defi is so nascent still. Hasn't helped them gain adoption for a concept that hasn't caught on yet: credit based collateral. I'm short: I think once we start to see governance that works in niche communities, we will start to see projects build abstraction that makes it more accessible and we'll see the jargon fade out of the common vernacular.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
@na
if you're talking about ribbonfarm's new letter than i think it probably depends on nature, whether we find a patch of simplicity in the otherwise weirder and weirder math of it
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
