daos

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. ⁉️

I help run the /daos channel |
CEO of Stay Liquid | Bringing DeFi to everyday CEOs |
Gamer, Sountrack fan & dog owner|
https://linktr.ee/tommy.stuart

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 ⚠️

Hats Protocol 🧢

building /hatsprotocol | 
proudly mid-curving it since 1995

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

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?