General questions about DAOstack, Holographic Consensus, and GEN #fromtelegram


#1

In the DAOstack community Telegram @matan had a back-and-forth with multiple community members, with many general questions about the project.


@JulienBTC"The holographic consensus is the decision making consensus for the DAO stack[?]"

Well, the DAO stack is not an organization, it is an operational stack for DAOs, including the Arc Solidity framework, the Arc.js javascript library, etc.

However, we are founding in the coming weeks the Genesis DAO (if you want, the DAOstack project DAO) on top of the DAO stack, that will have the mission to enable and nurish large-scale cooperation via the DAO stack, by:

  • further build the DAO stack (and allocate Gen tokens to those builders),

  • further adopt the DAO stack (and allocate Gens to early adopters),

  • and enable large-scale collaboration / super-scalable organizations via the DAO stack (and in particular holographic consensus governance protocols) and its Genesis predictors network

It that’s what you mean, then yes, the governance model of Genesis DAO itself does include holographic consensus.


@JulienBTC"DAO stack is a DAO where the goal is to create modules for decentralizing governance?"

See the above answer, the DAOstack project DAO (=the Genesis DAO) goal is to enable super-scalable organizations (including creating modules for decentralized governance but not only).


@JulienBTC"GEM [sic] is the Dao stack token to buy collective attention and use holographic consensus[?]"

Gen (GEN) is the DAOstack (or Genesis DAO) token that is used in staking over proposals within DAOs on the DAO stack that are using holographic consensus governance protocols (and possibly in other protocols). One good way to see this is indeed that GEN is buying collective attention.


@JulienBTC"All the new Dao who use DAO stack can choose to no use the holographic consensus an [sic] can create another one? Or they all have to use holographic consensus with the gem [sic] token?"

Every DAO on the DAO stack can use any governance protocols they wish, either by using existing ones or by deploying new ones themselves. We argue that super-scalable governance requires a sort of holographic consensus - and will aim at proliferating the possible space of such protocols (that provide super-scalable governance). Thus, I believe that DAOs that would like to scale significantly would prefer using holographic consensus protocols rather than not to. Important to emphasize: “holographic consensus” is not a single protocol. It’s a concept and a wide family of protocol, of which we identify the first few examples.


@JulienBTC"The modules are the different rules for the Dao but not new consensus[?]"

Different modules reflect differnt rules. A certain holographic consensus protocol is also one such rules, and there can be many others. Having an ICO is also such rule. Etc.


@JulienBTC"The ownership of a DAO is represented by the DAO token. This token is used to reward contributors and gen token to reward collective attention in every Dao with holographic consensus[?]"

Each DAO has its own purpose, own value created, and accordingly own token utility model. If your DAO is making films, then perhaps your DAO tokens will be related to royalities of the films created. If your DAO creates products, than perhaps the DAO token utility is using those products (such as blockchains). If your DAO creates curated lists, and institutions or individuals want to be on those lists (for sake of PR/advertisement), then the DAO token utility could be paying for subscribing those lists.

This DAO token should be rewarded those who create the DAO value proposition.

GENs should be rewarded to a larger collective attention of auditors/predictors that is externally observing the DAOs proposals and make predictions over them.


@JulienBTC "What happened a minority of reputation holder vote for the boosted proposal?"

The purpose of holographic consensus and boosted proposals is to allow for small groups in a DAO (holding minorty of the total reputation in the DAO) to make decisions on behalf of the larger DAO. I’m not sure what you mean by “what happens” to them.


@JulienBTC "How devellopers [sic] are reward [sic] to create new modules?"

Part of the Genesis DAO / DAOstack mission to enable super-scalable DAOs, is to reward valuable contributions to the DAOstack project, and in particular valuable contributions to the DAO stack, and in particular the Arc framework and its open library of governacne modules. So developers creating great new modules will be rewarded via the Genesis decision-making system (using Alchemy) itself.
I hope it clarifies a few points, let me know if there’s more questions @julienbtc


@HaitianTrader – "IF one DAO coin is used for hundreds of projects I suppose the ROI for orginal [sic] investors would be insane for long time holders."

Each DAO (possibly around one projects or several, or hundreds) should have its own token, related to its own value contributions.

But indeed, when your project enables any other projects, that your own token is valued from the success of many tokens, and thus has the potential to have singificant value for early investors in the token. That’s indeed the case with ETH (which enables a wide plethora of projects), and that’s also the goal for GEN.


@HaitianTrader – "How is this project different from ETH?"

ETH is a blockchain, enabling decentralized computations, operated with smart contracts.

DAOstack is a second layer on top of ETH (and possibly more blockchains in the future), enabling decentralized organizations (at very large scale), operated via the Arc framework (coded on top of ETH) and the rest of the DAO stack.


@Avisky – "Wouldn’t it be prudent to design your own blockchain for enabling decentralized organizations and then allow leveraging of the DAO stack tools like Arc Framework and Alchemy…instead of allowing it to run on Ethereum or any other blockchain. Making a specialized wholesome ecosystem for very large-scale decentralized governance[?]"

[B]uilding a proper governance system for DAOs on Ethereum is already super hard. Building a whole blockchain is no easier (as you can see from other blockchain projects) and makes a big big project by itself.

If it’s found to be worthwhile / crucial at the end of the day to build a customized blockchain for DAOs that could be persued afterwards, with the established collaborative community.


@JulienBTC – "So for example, if I create a new film production Dao and I choose using holographic consensus so only, in this case, I will have to use GEN token to submit a proposal and attract collective attention? Also, DAO stack genesis will create other consensus and allow more utility in the GEN token?"

Yes, only for the usage of the larger predictors network attention (as in holographic consensus) you need to use GEN tokens. DAOstack Genesis will create more and more (and better and better) protocols for large-scale governance. But I believe that any good large-scale governance protocol will require the attention of a larger auditing network and would thus be related with GENs (or other tokens related to other larger network; but it makes much more sense to use the already building up network effect of the multiple projects building on the DAO stack and using the GEN auditing network).


@HaitianTrader – "Aren’t you worried about congestation [sic] on the ETH network?"

For low-frequency decisions the ETH blockchain will work. As soon as congestion happens we’ll need to resort on more scalable (likely off-chain) solutions such as Plasma, which is building fast. More so, we’re already planning to make the next-step architecture of the stack migrating most of the logics off-chain “in house”.