This is something I have been considering a lot of late as I’ve been ideating around the concept of DACs. I believe the safe network will be considered a Decentralized Org/Co-op for a while and perhaps a Decentralized Autonomous Org/Co-op in the future.
I’m trying to climb up onto the shoulders of the deep thinkers of the forum in order to follow-up on what has already been asked about controversial changes and too much consensus. As the subject states, my questions revolve around Governance. I’ll start with the simple and work my way up to the crazier ones.
- How are clients updated?
- After the system is up and running who decides what pull-requests get accepted into the codebase?
- It’s been discussed on how vaults get updated. I still don’t understand this. Could someone explain it to me in detail or send me to a link that does this?
- Do the members who are not developers (all safecoin holders) get a say in the direction?
- Say there is a proposal to implement Homomorphic Encryption or Building Basic Income Into the Safe Network. How do we as the community discuss (probably in our forum on the network) issues and give our “vote” of ‘yah’ to Homomorphic or ‘nah’ to BI or to any other proposals that come along?
- As I’ve been thinking through a Builder DAC the concept of supporting and funding individual features by concensus popped up.
- Could we direct funds by votes through maidsafe.org to fund the work by different PODs on individual features?
- Could we direct our support for proposals through votes?
I’m not ashamed to show my ignorance on the subject. I know Bitcoin has governance issues. How do they handle these things today? I hear Ethereum has governance issues. How do they handle these things? Am I mistaken in saying that these systems are really driven by the development community? Is this the best way of doing things?