Firstly, can we agree on some terminology?
DAOs originated from MMORPG (see gnosis pre-history) and got traction with Ethereum … Vitalik himself distinguishes DAC (what I call digital automated comparies) from DAOs.
There are as many governance patterns as there are countries … with smart contracts you can implement whatever you want.
If people are unaware of work done in society axis (impact) I draw attention to Szabo early work on social titles
Another form of wealth, hidden from the archaeologist, were titles to offices. Such social positions were more valuable than the tangible forms of wealth in many hunter-gatherer cultures. Examples of such positions included clan leaders, war party leaders, hunting party leaders, membership in a particular long-term trading partnership (with a particular person in a neighboring clan or tribe), midwives, and religious healers. Often collectibles not only embodied wealth, but also served as a mnemonic, representing the title to a clan position of responsibility and privilege. Upon death, to maintain order, the heirs to such positions had to be quickly and clearly determined. Delays could spawn vicious conflicts. Thus, a common event was the mortuary feast, in which the deceased was feted while both his tangible and intangible forms of wealth were distributed to descendants, as determined by custom, clan decision-makers, or the will of the deceased.
The unique point about DAOs vs traditional firms is the “absence” of fixed titles/positions. Instead you might have
- classes (see RaidGuild)which describes the base skills and occupation
- roles (or hats in the BanklessDAO) where
would be putting on the accounting role in divy up tokens and budgetting - then there are defined patterns - for example a Raid adhoc party to apply for a grant. They would have sufficient structure with mart contracts to enforce the agreements. We at LexDAO wrote the escrow system RaidGuild uses for invoicing along with dispute resolution
The problem with big grants like Arbitrum Foundation is that is like waving juicy meat to hungry sharks … everyone wants a piece of the action b4 the $$$ runs out. This comes back to the purpose …
a) is it a VC style gamble to pick winners?
b) is it a co-op which identifies common-use facility, and seeds initial trials awaiting industry to uptake?
c) is it a tax/tithe disbursing public goods (restrospective or anticipatory if see a big pain-point)
The OpCo can be positioned (and funded) as all 3 depending on configuration
- inhouse … it picks a “winner” from all the bids
- ECH model which has enough legalities to contain the chaos but let individual firms collaborate to meet defined service level agreements
- tradeable bounties (xref SIB) which attempt to be outcome focused for public goods.
I don’t have a horse in this race, but some clarity as to where the OpCo sits on the charitable-4profit scale might help steer the conversation.