Yes that’s right, although “similar” here still covers a huge amount of ground given the choice of available parameters. Many existing DAOs could fit into it, assuming they use the same PROPOSE, DISCUSS, VOTE, IMPLEMENT structure.
The plan would be to:
Register the various legal entities needed
Build an MVP / prototype version that provides what the Community Trust needs (basically the registration smart contract, Discourse instance, address-forum pseudonym links, participation monitoring, and Safe integrations integration for auto-implementation of on-chain proposals and safer / more transparent management of the trustee multisig)
Use the prototype to apply for grants from various sources. There are a lot of projects with existing but somewhat creaky governance who are funding research and development for improved systems and tooling here.
Which grants we received would set the direction and available resources for a while, but ultimately a v1 would contain:
Registration UI, where new projects can build governance according to their needs or existing projects with tokens could plug their existing governance into Lexicon. This would include streamlined registration of legal entities.
Automated delegation and bond services
Connections been phases and tools: i.e., automate the process that passes a proposal from discussion to signature to vote to implementation
Audit marketplace, for matching projects with legal and security advisors
Wallet connection, so users can connect their wallet and be automatically shown governance they can participate in.
Improved vote UI: taking lessons learned from using SnapShot and building a UI which is cleaner and has less unwanted influence on vote outcomes
This is largely modular, so it makes sense to develop these in various orders or in parallel, depending on outside demand.
The Community Trust would be the name for the trust registered in the British Virgin Islands. It would register its governance rules (decided here) on Lexicon and take its instructions from the HOPR token holders, who would be registered as the set of governance participants for the Trust.
But this link would only exist on the Lexicon platform, not in law, so this would sidestep any need for tokenholders to identify themselves.
So basically everyone who can participate now would still be able to participate, in a way that feels almost identical, but there would be a lot more legal certainty and protections
Do you have a more specific suggestion? Crypto marketing at the moment generally seems to be very ineffective.
Obviously we haven’t tried everything, but our experience at HOPR of paying for marketing has been that crypto marketing is a predatory industry where the projects are the target. Content gets funnelled into a part of the internet which seems exclusively populated by bots and fake engagement. Sites refuse to share actual numbers. It’s just a bottomless money pit.
The only thing we’ve found to be even remotely successful is to build new products and pitch them directly to other projects and investors at crypto-focused events. That’s what we’ve done with RPCh, and now a dozen plus wallets and RPC providers have entered arrangements which will see HOPR generating actual revenue for the first time.
When we did the Twitter Space which first described Lexicon, we received interest immediately and had our first collaboration call within 36hrs.
By contrast, we invested much more than this into the first RPCh content push and saw no tangible results. Perhaps a much bigger marketing spend would achieve different results, but then you’d need to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Supporting this!
Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to actively participate in the current DAO experiment this time, but I am monitoring the discussions try to follow all the topics!
Keep up the energy guys!
As Proposal 3 was to increase hardware availability why do you believe this has been hard to implement. Currently with a AVADO node costing around £1000 to buy couldn’t the costs been reduced by a HOPR subsidy or similar as that’s a massive pay back period so probably has put most people off buying one.
Hopefully the Rust implementation whereby you can run a Raspberry Pi or similar for a fraction of the cost will enhance the number of nodes that are running.
If this isn’t viable then I’m all for using it elsewhere but not sure what a Lexicon is or what it means for the future, but like the idea.
I’ve perhaps quoted the wrong proposal number (although the link is correct). It was the proposal to allocate DAI to help spend the HOPR tokens from the HOPR-token based proposals. In the end this budget proved far too high, and spending the HOPR tokens without converting them to a different currency was easier than expected.
