Why is the transition to a DAO described as ‘less chaos’ compared to the previous structure?
Why is the transition to a DAO described as 'less chaos' compared to the previous structure?
Share
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I agree completely with Janet. Also, it’ll be more organized and have proper visibility. Plus, it’ll answer the question of “who’s in charge”? Sure, no one is in charge; however, having a governance sort of answers that question — and anyone can be in charge! Everyone can have a vote.
Genius’s code (according to the technical white paper — http://geni.to/smartcontract ) has “special accounts” that can basically be a person or another smart contract. There are 2 interesting accounts that stand out as DAO-ish / governing-ish: one is called the “OA Grantor” and the other is called the “OA Beneficiary”. According to what is written there, I view the “Grantor” as the DAO / governance, and the “Beneficiary” as the Treasury.
Last I checked, it appears that 2 separate accounts have been (or are) the “Grantor”, and at least 3 other accounts have been the “Beneficiary”. But no one knew who these people were or how to contact them! This really needs to change, because in order for Genius to thrive, there must a a DAO that can make things happen, is willing to listen to people, and WILL ACT. Without that, it’s chaotic. And from what I’ve seen, the prior “DAO” for Genius hasn’t been organized!
Hope that helps!
A DAO creates ‘less chaos’ because decisions, rules, and fund management are transparent, automated by smart contracts, and governed collectively by the community rather than controlled by a few individuals behind closed doors as in the previous financial system.