In our community Telegram it was asked by J K:"I had this idea of DAOs existing in Galileos time. How would have his contributions been valued in a system like DAOstack. Him providing content about earth being round wouldn’t have been oppressed by authorities, but since I find your reputation earning solution possibly supporting conformism and populist oratory abilities I wonder if his contradicting idea and content would have not been supported by other participants either because it might have seemed appealing to not put ones reputation on the line (betting on majority won’t vote for the idea of earth being round). I do realize this is a common problem in democracy, but maybe you have found a way to address this with your tech. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, but I know you’re busy with a lot of things so putting this out here to provoke thought in general too[?]
A.) Answered by @matan [Architect/CEO]:
It’s true that once a “common-ism” is generated (a common-based value system, often around the common denominator opinion), it is not likely that people would bet their reputation on the line voting against the common / majority opinion.
So no-less important is to have a “forking mechanism” with which anyone can easily generate a competing value system / world view.
If I feel that the current value system is not adequately representing mine, and that the gain from having a different value system is larger than the cost of losing the collaborative network effect of the old one, then I will choose to fork a new value system, in which perhaps I will be the first reputation holder to “dictate the truth”. Those who’ll be more aligned with me than they are with the old value system will gradually gain reputation in the new system and will possibly become more active there (and by that helping to build up a new network effect).
Of course, in Galileo’s times the problem of expressing your opinoin against the common-ism was more problematic than just losing some reputation, I believe you could also lost your head altogether.
Reputation flow towards the majority is one force that’s increasing external coherence (with the cost of decreasing internal coherence).
Forking is the opposite force that turns internal decoherence into external decoherence (and which thus increase the internal coherence).
A living system in which both forces are easily deployable (reputation flow and forking) will evolve and bounce between scalable cooperation and diversity of value systems, naturally finding the optimum between the two.