3.7 KiB

Raw Blame History

title

status

lead-contributor

contributors

budget

DAO

research

Barry @bgits

Iuri @iurimatias

Jarrad @jarradhope

Ricardo @3esmit

Richard @richard-ramos

actual
$15k

estimate
yyy

currency
USD

DAO

Summary and Goals

One major drawback in legacy social networks is the lack of influence their users possess over the networks themselves. They are often powerless in having a say on how the platform evolves. We aim to democratise this power, giving stakeholders a direct influence over all decisions within the network, including how the software is developed with voting and allocation of funds via liquid pledging

Goals

Funding done on the mainnet. A goal is to have funds currently in the multisig of the GMBH to start moving to DAO’s for allocation to projects.

Contributors

Barry @bgits
Iuri @iurimatias
Jarrad @jarradhope
Ricardo @3esmit
Richard @richard-ramos

(+ Janitor swarm)

Communication

status channel: #status-dao
sync schedule: brainstorming on Mondays / stand ups on Wednesday
pivotal link: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/n/projects/2231548
research notes: #status-dao
github repo:
- https://github.com/status-im/liquidpledging/tree/embark-dapp
- https://github.com/status-im/snt-voting

Research

Consider using Aragon for DAO related functionality. Currently Aragon does not support the delegation chain used by Liquid Pledge, however this is something that could be built by us. This also promotes collaboration between organizations, reuse of expertise, and avoids reinventing the wheel.
Liquid Pledge uses Solidity < 0.5.0. Migrating to 0.5.0 would make debugging easier thanks to revert exceptions including an error message. However, the project uses OpenZeppelin and Aragon's contracts which would make the migration to 0.5.0 more complicated.
What information is important to be displayed to funders, delegates and projects?
What is the ideal specification for a "Pledge"?

Key assumption to test:

Voting is described as part of governance in the Status whitepaper. The voting dapp is currently used as a signaling tool, and it does not have in-chain consequences. Will voting be used also for project funding? (via topic democracy or other mechanism)
Principles signing should be required in order to access the funds. A plugin could be made for this, or in case identities are implemented, maybe a Claim could be created for an identity once the principles are signed.
Are delegates needed?
Is directly funding a specific purpose Aragon DAOs from the primary multisig easier to manage?

Specification

TODO

Implementation

Initial Sprint

Continue the work of @perissology of migrating Giveth's project to Embark: The migration to Embark has been a process that has not been 100% straightforward but any issues raised has been notified to and addressed by the Embark team. This has had the beneficial effect of making the framework even more robust.
Create a demo frontend that implements the main work flow: a Demo UI has been built, following the unit tests of the liquid pledge project. Projects can be funded, and pledges created and delegated.
Working proof of concept on Rinkeby Testnet

Feb 4th Update

Event Sourcing & Persistence solution (watermelon)
Liquid-funding is in the implementation phase. ETA is by the end of Q1.
Contracts are deployed on Rinkeby testnet. Client side data persistence + DB is implemented which gives the dapp much faster load times and flexible querying capabilities for the data generated by LF.

Maintenance