I’m not in favor of this proposal, as I believe that while it comes from a good place with positive intentions, it doesn’t address all the complexities involved.
- We have a unique governance model, and we’ve achieved a lot in a short period of time. The two-pillar governance structure has been, and continues to be, an experiment that evolves with collective feedback. Each season brings challenges, but we consistently overcome them, emerging stronger on the other side.
- To reframe the question: full decentralization may be necessary if people feel restricted, isolated, or censored in any way. However, at present, anyone can submit a proposal in this open forum. The grant distribution framework is transparent, algorithms are accessible, and anyone can become a delegate and contribute. In fact, you don’t even need to be a delegate to share your thoughts here.
- Ours is the only DAO with dedicated support from the protocol team, and at least in terms of headcount, the contact information for representatives of the OP Foundation is public. And this is coming out from soneone virtually unknown outside of this governance, from Jonas to Carl, they listen every single time.
- We have various councils, with dedicated and motivated delegates working to ensure we remain unbiased and sustainable in the long term. This process is not controlled by the Foundation. We, the collective, are responsible for writing proposals, approving and distributing funds—all in a distributed and decentralized manner. The Foundation takes a backseat, while we lead the way.
Additionally, I don’t think we’re quite ready to take full control of the DAO. We haven’t yet onboarded other members of the superchain, which I believe will happen in the next season. Onboard them, their project, dev and community. DAO budget will run out one day, only way to make sure we are sustainable long term, RPGF is to flourish and support positive contributions is highly dependent on members of superchain . Issues like projects capturing grant tokens to increase their voting power, the concentration of power, conflicts of interest, and misalignment are still concerns, especially in this fast-moving space.
There are clearly many open questions and points of failure. Just because one DAO is doing something does not necessarily mean we should do it too, the current working model and end goal play an important role.
We are progressing towards a sustainable DAO that is run, controlled, and managed by the collective. We should continue on this path, taking cautious but deliberate steps and iterating based on feedback.