Hi @carlbergman, I appreciate your explanation of the x/gov module and the autonomous voting process for validators. However, it seems our visions for the future of dYdX’s governance fundamentally diverge.
While fostering a degree of autonomy, the one-token-one-vote system leads to a disproportionate concentration of power, which contradicts the decentralisation principles dYdX aims to uphold. The governance architecture should incorporate preventive mechanisms for proposals that pose risks to the protocol or aren’t aligned with the community’s interests. To this end, establishing a governance council and a risk council to pre-approve proposals before they reach validators would improve efficiency and align with a commitment to decentralisation.
My vision of a comprehensive DAO framework extends beyond voting on governance proposals or introducing centralised entities such as trusts. I envisage an intricate, autonomous governance platform that isn’t manually managed by a handful of people but operates via algorithms and consensus mechanisms, thereby achieving genuine autonomy.
Take for instance, the current Grants Trust you oversee: all decisions and communications go through you, payments need manual processing, and communications remain private. There’s a lack of defined timelines for which you are accountable in assessing applications and issuing approvals, no automatic renewal procedures, and no guidelines for managing personnel.
This system exhibits opacity, reliance on manual processes, and centralisation - all contributing to time and cost inefficiencies. These are all substantial reasons why we should look to design, develop, and implement a fully autonomous and decentralised system. We understand there might be significant conflicts of interest for some people, but this is a necessary step to truly evolve into a fully decentralised platform.
Another crucial consideration, as highlighted in the collective DAO archives, is the significant mindset shift required from all employees of the foundation and Trading Inc. The transition to becoming contributors represents a considerable hurdle that may encounter resistance. Again, we would need to transition these entities into other council structures such as Marketing, Ambassadors, Market Maker and Validator BD, Legal, Treasury, and so on - with fully autonomous algorithms and mechanisms dictating operations at every level.
While it may seem premature to undertake all of this now, exploring a diverse range of approaches is essential to designing a full-spectrum governance solution and platform. Without initiating such exploration now, we risk fostering an echo chamber that stifles innovation and limits our view of what’s possible. Moreover, thorough research, idea generation, consensus building, and eventual implementation will undeniably require significant time.
Given the relatively uncharted territory of decentralised governance, we must remain open-minded and flexible in our approach. Let’s foster an environment where all ideas can be considered, and our community can collectively determine the best path forward.