Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/daos
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
TommyJo
@tommyjo.eth
I'm finally digging into a16z's decentralisation matrix. https://www.lw.com/en/decentralization 👀 One piece jumped out below: --> DAOs - to be deemed 'Partially Decentralised' in software development - need 'community approval' for any pushed code. ⁉️
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
TommyJo
@tommyjo.eth
I'm trying to marry this - which sounds great for immutable contracts or meant to last UIs- with progressively decentralising orgs in the trenches iterating on software. e.g. what if a vulnerability is found risking user funds. A 3-day fix approval vote may not be realistic. It'd alert attackers to the exploit ⚠️
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
TommyJo
@tommyjo.eth
Thoughts? I was thinking a quick fix is regular elections of DAO onchain representatives to sign off on code. They could approve code in hours instead of days whilst ensuring DAO fundamental accountability 🙏 @spengrah.eth - if we went down this path, is there a module for /hatsprotocol to permission github?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
TommyJo
@tommyjo.eth
note - all the above is only relevant for orgs running a tokenised protocol. Other DAOs probably don't need to be concerned to the same extent
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Spencer Graham 🧢
@spengrah.eth
Currently the only token-gating that's possible with github is access to a private repo via @guild. PR approvals can't be token-gated at the moment. This is just one of the reasons @radworks's Radicle is so important for DAOs, and I'm looking forward to enabling role management there with Hats
1 reply
1 recast
4 reactions
