So not helpful to the destitute.
If only there was a way that we could create systems with tokenomics that incentivizes people to do the right thing, that the authoratronic 24 carat AAA+ greedy cunts couldn't disrupt? I dunno, something immutable and decentralised would be a start I guess...
Ronnie, you’ve literally just spent several pages telling us how great capitalism is.
A DAO is democratic.
How are people running the DAO bound to follow the DAO results? You seem to imagine the DAO is an entity in itself. It may be for software-only applications, but real-life things where people are involved; nope. I'll skip over the fact that people can just ignore the DAO results and continue with your example. So the people on the DAO vote for Fred, and Fred is employed. but Bob holds the biggest stake in the DAO and doesn't like Fred. Nothing to do with his work or productivity. But something about Fred the Bob doesn't like. So Bob starts putting out rumours that Fred is a Big poo-poo head and wants a vote to get rid of him. No HR, No review just gone. Now Alice wants some additional funding for her work on the DAO. Alice only knows Fred in passing, well of course, she would, the DAO is totally atomised. Does she go with Bob and risk her funding or against Bob because she thinks Fred's OK.
In all the examples Im aware of, voting power is literally bought and sold. Money shouldn't get a vote!
It’s the ultimate neoliberal subjectivity. A social psychologist called Fiske wrote an influential paper in 1991 about relational models — the different ways that we can allocate resources. Equality means giving everyone the same, communality is giving according to need, hierarchy is giving according to social status. All of those have clear evolutionary origins and are observed even in pre-verbal infants. But then along comes capitalism and creates a proportional model — allocation is in the ratio of invested inputs — and that way of understanding the world starts to supplant the other concepts. People start altering their entire understanding of fairness and society in line with a proportional relational method. The result is this kind of attitude — I should be able to buy my vote. But hey, what do I know? StakerOne says he’s not a capitalist so that must be the case.
First Arbitrum DAO vote spirals into disaster: DAO rejects $1 billion spending proposal, but Arbitrum already started spending
(attribution)
After a bumpy start to the airdrop that distributed governance tokens to Arbitrum users, the first use of those governance tokens arguably went even worse. Arbitrum submitted a proposal for DAO members to vote on various governance processes, as well as the distribution of 750 million ARB tokens to an "Administrative Budget Wallet" — tokens that were priced at around $1 billion.
The vote, which still has a day left before completion, is currently standing at 75% against and 25% in support. However, it was discovered that Arbitrum had already begun spending those 750 million tokens, including via the movement of a substantial amount of tokens, and "conversion of some funds into stablecoins for operational purposes".
Another Arbitrum team member subsequently published a post in which they claimed that the proposal was not really a vote but rather a "ratification" of decisions that had already been made by the Arbitrum team, leading many to question what the DAO was even for in the first place. Others questioned the fact that Arbitrum was receiving so much money to use however they liked, not subject to DAO approval.
Things got even messier when the Arbitrum Twitter account "clarified" that "40M $ARB tokens have been allocated as a loan to a sophisticated actor in the financial markets space", and the rest had been sold off for "operational costs". The loan of $52 million worth of ARB to an unnamed actor and the conversion of another $13 million to stablecoins led some to accuse the Arbitrum team of "selling off", cashing in far more than would likely be required for foundation costs in a brief period of time.
I'd forgotten; isn't this the DAO the StakerOne received an airdrop from. If Staker, after meticulous research, had chosen this DAO to invest their money in, then it must be the best of the best, A1, first-class an exemplar if you will. But the humans behind it still cannot obey the rules of the DAO. What hope is there for less well run DAOs? And for users who put in less due diligence.
Still, at least you don’t come across like a member of a cult. Not one little bit.
Ah but the humans behind it were doing things that the DAO's governance tokens didn't have direct power over. Those tokens can only directly control on-chain decisions. The founders were able to go behind the DAO's back by conducting the business outside of the chain. Why's that?I'd forgotten; isn't this the DAO the StakerOne received an airdrop from. If Staker, after meticulous research, had chosen this DAO to invest their money in, then it must be the best of the best, A1, first-class an exemplar if you will. But the humans behind it still cannot obey the rules of the DAO. What hope is there for less well runs DAO? And for users who put in less due diligence.
Emphasis mine.
So it is a way of giving a lot of power to a few people while pretending it's democratic but claiming voter fatigue (which there will be) and then claiming to be a DAO for any investigation and that no one is responsible. It's cool grift.Ah but the humans behind it were doing things that the DAO's governance tokens didn't have direct power over. Those tokens can only directly control on-chain decisions. The founders were able to go behind the DAO's back by conducting the business outside of the chain. Why's that?
Arbitrum Foundation Sold ARB Tokens Ahead of 'Ratification' Vote; ARB Falls
The Foundation would be “severely damaged” without blank-check grantmaking powers, according to a blog post.www.coindesk.com
(With apologies to The Simpsons)
Tbh I've been listening in and thinking that this is how toxic bitcoiners are made.
The money doesn't come from thin air. It comes from someone else. And its value ultimately is underpinned by the useful work done by other people.
Most exit liquidity is VCs. I think people can sleep soundly taking their dough. For many people in nigeria or india an airdrop worth $6k is life altering money, even for many people in the west, it opens up possibilities that they would not have had.
Another of the comforting fictions, that it's helping people in the Global South who otherwise would have no opportunity to make this kind of money.
forum.arbitrum.foundation
