A (partially) on-chain wiki for Genesis

Summary

We would like to offer to the Genesis Alpha community the opportunity to experiment with new patterns of collaboration and co-creation by developing an extension to Alchemy (DAOstack frontend app) that includes an information repository (similar to a wiki) with which the Genesis participants can co-create and co-evolve valuable information of the DAO.

We call this wiki “the DAO’s Mind” and it will have significant differences with other typical wikis, as it will be built using the Underscore Protocol (_Prtcl) and customized for Genesis Alpha specific needs.

After having had great initial conversations about this idea with @Matan, @Fran @Kate @alexz and @orishim , we are posting this idea here to see how this resonates, discuss and get your feedback.

The _Prtcl

The _Prtcl is a content management protocol designed to facilitate open and efficient co-creation at scale. It’s inspired by GIT but is designed to work with ideas instead of code. Its development was motivated by the very same purpose as DAOstack: to boost collective intelligence.

The _Prtcl includes three killer features that make it especially well suited to power the DAO’s Mind:

  • Each page or section can have multiple “perspectives” (that’s what we call branches in the _Prtcl).

  • Pages or sections can be combined and nested to build larger information structures.

  • Perspectives and data can live in multiple platforms so that, for example, one page can have perspectives on a web server and also on the blockchain.

Our plan is to develop the DAO’s Mind as a web component that can be included inside the Alchemy app and would look and feel like a wiki, but with the important addition that, for each page or section, a “common” perspective will coexist with many other perspectives.

The “common” perspective would be governed on-chain by the Genesis DAO through special proposals that, when and if they pass, will update its content. Other perspectives would be personal and authors would be able to keep them private before making them formal “merge proposals” to the “common” perspective.

How it could look

Here is an example of how the integration might look like (not a final proposal at all).

The DAO’s Mind location and scheme

A new section is created for the DAO’s Mind and a new scheme is used to channel proposals that will update it.

The DAO’s Mind content

The DAO’s Mind content looks like a wiki, but each page have the “common” perspective, plus a number of other perspectives.

The personal space to edit proposals to the DAO’s Mind

New perspectives for pages and sections of the DAO’s Mind can be prepared on a separate environment where users can keep them private, reorganize them as they please, talk about them and receive notifications about the ones that are more relevant to them.

The plan

The steps we currently have in mind to move forward with this proposal are

  • Share it with the community and receive initial feedback.

  • Make a proposal to Genesis Alpha with a small budget (~500 USD) to cover for a detailed design of the module to be integrated into Alchemy, including wireframes and an overview of the solution to key technical problems. This work would be done together with the DAOstack dev team.

  • Make a proposal to DAOstack to help fund the development of the integration in the case the funds needed will exceed the capacity of Genesis Alpha.

  • We would like this to be production-ready and available to Genesis Alpha by the end of the year.

4 Likes

Hey Pepo,

I see this, which I would describe as a blockchain state managed wiki, as an absolute necessity for the future of Genesis. We are essentially doing this with the navigation hub, but this is obviously a less than ideal solution as it creates an off-chain monopoly for the aggregation of information.

Two additional features I would propose:

  • The ability to “merge minds” with another DAO by passing a proposal through both DAOs.
  • The ability to “copy a mind” from another DAO, that is, to “fork the mind.”

I would also propose that you look at already functional open-source dapps tackling the same issue, such as Lunyr or Kauri, that could perhaps be forked to provide a starting point for this project.

2 Likes

Thanks for the references @Pat, will definitely take a look.

Regarding your two proposals, I think they are both possible out-of-the-box!

The ability to “merge minds” with another DAO by passing a proposal through both DAOs.

Two DAO’s can have, for example, one “page” in common, and each DAO can govern its own “perspective” of that page. You will always have the possibility to merge the two to align them.

The ability to “copy a mind” from another DAO, that is, to “fork the mind.”

This is also possible. You create a new perspective (which is also a copy of the latest version) of the “DAO’s Mind” and make it governed by another DAO.


Note that in the _Prtcl, there are NOT special objects like “DAO’s MInds”, “Pages” or “Sections”. In the protocol they all are what we call “contexts”, and any “context” can be forked by anyone on any platform. Hence, you can fork a DAO’s Mind.

Great stuff. A couple questions:

-Will the content sections /pages within the DAO’s Mind be customizable? (these: http://prntscr.com/nzbrdl )
-I would imagine that each of these pages would have a different format /layout (for example: Meetups would look different than Code of Conduct). For this proposal, are you looking to create designs / functionality for all pages listed above, or a subset?

That’s exactly what we should think about next.

The list of sections is just a random mockup, not a proposal.

That kind of special pages are indeed possible and are precisely within the scope of building a customized version of the content editor.

A detailed design of this custom editor should include the list of pages that the DAO’s Mind includes, and their user experience. This is within the scope of the first “detailed design proposal” we are planning to make.

Great! Do you plan on working with existing Genesis members on this? Happy to volunteer :slight_smile:

Hi @eric.arsenault, yes! that would be great. I suggest we have an open call to sync on how this process could look like. What do you think?

This conversation has moved to a working group space in CollectiveOne. If you want to follow it or participate, please sign up to www.collectiveone.org and drop me (@pepo) a message.