SAFE Network Governance v. DASH Governance

What is SAFE network’s governance plan and what are the pros/cons versus DASH’s plan? I reference DASH since it seems like of the crypto currencies out there that I’ve read about, DASH seems to have a governance plan that does a good job of providing sufficient funding for innovation and adaptation in response to future challenges.

I am aware that SAFE is striving to be much more than what DASH is striving for. Nevertheless, a flexible governance structure with sufficient sources of funds seems important to me, and would be interested in hearing people’s thoughts, both pros and cons.


There’s quite a bit on the forum in different places about the structure and roles of:

  • MaidSafe Limited (core development and apps developer)
  • The MaidSafe Foundation (educational charity that majority owns/controls the shares in MaidSafe Ltd, and holds the intellectual property)

[hope I’ve got that right!]

The plan, I understand, is for the network to be as decentralised as possible in its development, maintenance and evolution, so the code itself will have features designed in to facilitate this as well as to protect it.

Regarding funding, this is planned to be built into the network code with rewards not only given to farmers, but a proportion of earned Safecoin is also diverted to fund core development, individual app developers, and the MaidSafe Foundation (see other posts for more details). Related, there is also a proposal, contentious to some, for uploaders to receive rewards for popular content (called Pay the Producer, or PtP).

That’s a quick summary of what comes to mind, well aired and discussed on the forum, but not written up all in one place. Some of course will be literally hard coded :slight_smile: