Talk:DAO Governance Framework project

NOTE

Anyone can contribute. To edit this wiki create an account.
Click 'Add topic' to separate subjects.
Please sign all comments by typing 4 tildes (~).

To answer, use colons (:) to indent

Use two colons (::) to indent twice

Etc.

Craig Calcaterra (talk) 04:26, 27 March 2023 (CDT)

Plan for root page

This is the root page for the DAO Governance Framework project, so it needs a lot of consideration. Edit right here in Talk whatever comments you have. Craig Calcaterra (talk) 08:57, 28 February 2023 (CST)

The goal of the DGF project is to make and provide tools for individuals to engage with their communities and for communities to organize in pursuit of their values.

DAO Governance Framework

Main page: DAO Governance Framework

[??In Discussion Page: Perception/Judicial ; so it should include links to Cultural things (such as constitutions and settled laws, agreed upon ways of doing things, design philosophy, values statements, contributors' guide); up-to-date Marketing/Advertisements; fixed Code (!!!), Fixed Plan, Theory, Formulas]

DGF Fixes Blockchain

Main page: DGF Fixes Blockchain

[??In Discussion Page: Thought/Legislative; so it should include links to anything relatively dynamic, such as the evolving goals/plans for the project; roadmap; arguments/discussions for and against ideas]

Applications

Main page: DGF Applications

[??In Discussion Page: Action/Executive; ; so it should include links to what’s working, especially IRL or outside the platforms associated projects, such as functioning DAOs]

See Also

• philosophical motivations
• theoretical economics and game theory arguments
• mathematical formulas for tokenomics
• sociological justifications
• legal analyses
• marketing
  • recruitment
  • advertisement of products
    • art repo
• download the latest software
  • UIs
• affiliated projects
  • data storage
  • deSci community
• engineering philosophy
• design plan/roadmap
• software specs
• code & code audits

Please sign pages you edit, so we can recognize and attempt to reward any surviving useful contributions. Pseudonymous identities are supported to protect members’ privacy. Trolling and graffiti with valuable criticism which eventually results in platform improvement will be rewarded. Doxing of any type will be punished with loss of REP. The proper way to encourage healthy communication is filtering content. 

<-- I kind of want to encourage graffiti and trolling. We could recognize (maybe even reward) the most affecting posts as contributions to the defensive structure we build. They contribute to our immune system, making us stronger so we can better anticipate new attacks. Quiet angry enemies can be much more damaging in the long run. And those who are expressing their disagreement—even from the outside—can have beneficial consequences to the analysis. They can’t be rewarded too much, of course. The edge figures must remain on the edge until they contribute to the improvement of the core, not just the defensive walls. So the reward should not be as great as those who actually solve problems that trolls complain about. But complaining is an echo of a positive contribution—maybe a pre-echo—and so makes a positive contribution. Spam is less rewarded (usually punished, actually by DDoS fees) than clever graffiti. But we also don’t want the criticism culture to metastasize.) This means we need to employ some of the trolls that can be tamed somewhat… reward the monsters at the edge who fight the monsters further away from the edge. Craig Calcaterra (talk) 08:55, 28 February 2023 (CST)