Many DAO projects had found hurdles around those three flexions points:
Centralization x Decentralisation
Accelerated growth x Organic growth
Lack of engagement x Excess of proposals (low-quality ones)
Decentralization is utopic for most stakeholders’ actual behavior around a project. Therefore, we need to create a journey where people can gradually increase their commitment before assuming the responsibility of sensitive subjects.
User participation is THE elephant in every DAO’s room. People just can’t be bothered with what’s going on around all the different activities that IOTA is involved in, and they want things to get done on time.
The governance framework proposed will consist of multiple working groups promoting a symbiotic relationship between our core and community members.
If we build a framework capable to allow the community to move forward fast and decisively while giving at the same time guarantees that each individual has the freedom to express themselves according to their individual needs.
Some strategies that some projects are testing:
Quadratic votes: The voting power is the quadratic root of the Tokens at the wallet. (10.000 IOTA = 100 VP / 100 IOTA = 10 VP / 9 IOTA = 3 VP)
NFT’s: each tier represents a certain level of commitment wit the project
Time-Based: instead of the amount of IOTA, it counts the amount multiplied by the time it is on hold. (If John has 100 IOTA holding for 10 time-unity [weeks, days, months, hours] he will have 1000 VP | Mike has 500 IOTA for 1 TU he has 500 VP)