A (partially) on-chain wiki for Genesis

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.

Hello Genesis! :wave:

We will be reusing this thread to share the updates around the DAO’s Mind initiative from now on.


  • “Proof of feasibility” done and is looking good.

  • The overall strategy was reconsidered to give much more time and relevance to the UX research and design.

  • We worked out an ambitious 6 months UX Research and Development Plan as the path to Mainnet and are looking forward to starting working on it.

  • The plan has an overall cost of 53k USD distributed along 6 months and a sequence of 6 proposals of 8.85k USD each.

  • We will partner with dOrg to absorb most of the effort in terms of development.

  • We plan to make the next proposal on Alchemy, associated with the first phase of the plan, soon (this week).

Delivery of the current proposal

As some of you already know, we have reached the milestone associated with our first Genesis Proposal and the results are exciting: we have built a “proof of feasibility” of the integration from a technical perspective and an ambitious development plan with a strong emphasis around the UX research and development.

While we were originally considering to move faster in terms of UX design, and have some deliverables already at the end of this early phase, feedback from the community-led us to confirm that the UX challenges are key for this proposal and significantly reframe our strategy.

We decided to partner with Holon.cat who are experts in the field and with whom we created a 6 months UX Research and Development Plan that is both ambitious and realistic in terms of the complexity of what we want to achieve.

From the technical side, the work done these past weeks was extensive and deep, and we managed to identify and solve two of the key technical challenges of the integration: Making sure a DAO can update a perspective of the wiki, no matter how big it is, with a single proposal, and making sure our web-components can be integrated and connected with the rest of components inside Alchemy.

This video shows the results of this stage, it is longer than the one we tweeted and includes more details regarding the work done and the next steps

This document constitutes the formal delivery of the proposal and details the UX Research and Development Plan, including an overview of all phases and of the technical aspects.

(click on the image to open it)

UX Research and Development Plan

As mentioned above, the challenge of creating an _Prtcl-powered GIT-like co-creation flow on top of Alchemy to govern a wiki is significant and we think that it’s better to frame it that way. While the proof of concept we have built proves that our solution is feasible. Making a tool that people can use, that feels natural and intuitive and that solves a real problem is very challenging.

The UX Research and Development Plan is our proposed approach to tackle this challenge. It is divided in 5 phases with a significant dedication in terms of UX, UI experts, and software developers.

The plan is to request the funds needed for each phase at the beginning of that phase. We have created a baseline path, but the process is subject to change as the research advances and the tool is better specified.

Here is a summary of the time dedication we currently foresee for each phase and each role. The hourly rate applied for all three roles is 45 USD/hour.

Phase / Dedication in (hrs)



We believe that the _Prtcl integration into DAOstack could be strategic and impact the overall evolution of the project in the mid and long-term. It’s not a coincidence that _Prtcl was in fact inspired by the very same vision of DAOstack: open and scalable collaboration.

In this sense, we think that the integration of _Prtcl into DAOstack could, in the future, go beyond governing a Wiki. It could impact other aspects such as coordination tools, discussion, and debates, complex proposals submissions and domain decomposition of DAOs into sub-DAOs, among others.

We are aware that the funding requested represents a relevant effort from the community, but we think it is a reasonable effort for the kind of work that needs to be done and that it should result in higher returns for the Genesis Community and the DAOstack ecosystem in general.


We have been discussing with Jordan and Ori from dOrg about this initiative as it is linked with some of their own work and plans, and have decided that the best fit is that dOrg absorbs most of the load on the development part of this initiative as it will be DAOStack specific.

This way Pepo and Guillem from _Prtcl can focus on developing a general-purpose architecture for _Prtcl. Note that the funds from Genesis will only be used by the DAOStack specific work executed by dOrg, with a small part going to _Prtcl for the time devoted to supporting the work of dOrg.

:pray: Please let us know what you think!


I think it’s great you’re taking the time to do UX first. Definitely a good project for genesis, as far as I’m concerned.

I’d include a robust permissions framework, allowing for documents to be immutable, or changed only if a certain percentage of rep is voting for it, or changeable for a time period and not afterwards. There are probably other use cases I haven’t considered.

To be honest:

I don’t really care about doing research first: we need this feature now, and I want to see implementation fast-tracked, even if it’s ugly and hard to use.

We collectively should be the testers. I don’t see interviews in isolation giving information that’s a tenth as rich as Genesis using this today. Let us break this.

@pepo when can we expect a first implementation if we postpone the other elements?

Edit: I want to be clear I see value in the entire proposal – I think it’s awesome, in fact! – it’s just the order that strikes me as being wrong. While traditional apps need to be polished to the point of perfection, open-source applications don’t have the same standards for a first release. Genesis has a history of being willing and capable guinea pigs, and collectively, quite apt guinea pigs.

Great stuff! Happy to see this integration progress to the next stage

I agree, there is a need for good UX, but 8 weeks of full time UX work seems like overkill. I feel like I could whip something up in 1 week ¯_(ツ)_/¯

I agree with @patdaostack above: let’s get it live, test it in a real environment, and iterate / change things if we need to. If we need some minor UX changes, we can probably deal with it internally within the Genesis community for much less time, by people who already know the tools and vision.

I feel you. Lets see if there are inputs from others. In the meanwhile we will think about the options we have that are still realistic and come back to you.

Hi there! Here is an update on the DAO’s Mind proposal based on the early feedback received from the community.


  • We propose to start developing a “coarse version” of the DAO’s Mind and test it in Mainnet ASAP. The requested budget for this is 9 full-time weeks (16,200 DAI) to be split in two proposals, one for the first 5 weeks (9,000 DAI), and another for the other 4 weeks (7,200 DAI). We have already made the proposal for the first 5 weeks of work.

  • We understand the DAO’s Mind as instrumental to DAOs in many ways that go beyond a Wiki. We invite the community to consider supporting the development of a staged User Experience (UX) Research and Development Plan, designed and adjusted to the complex and distributed nature of DAOs members. We will make a proposal to start working on this after the first proposal of the “coarse version” has been approved.


We understand the priority of having something as soon as possible and of moving fast. Accordingly, we decided to adapt our plan and create two work tracks: The “coarse version” and the “detailed version”.

The Coarse Version

The “coarse version” will build upon the recent achievements and have at least the following features:

  • The DAO’s Mind will be a wiki-like space made of multiple pages.
  • Each page will be able to hold text, links and images stored on IPFS.
  • Changes to the DAO’s Mind are applied as follows:
    • Anyone can propose changes by creating a new “perspective” of the wiki (or of a single page) on a Web 2.0 environment. These changes include adding or removing pages, or editing existing ones.
    • Once the new perspective is ready, they can propose a “merge request” into the official DAO’s Mind wiki. This will kick-off a proposal using the generic scheme to approve the merge request.
    • If the proposal passes, anyone can apply the merge request, effectively updating the DAO’s Mind content.

The budget for developing the coarse version and deploying it to Mainnet is one developer working for 9 weeks. A developer from dOrg is expected to focus on this work while the team behind the Underscore Protocol will provide support to dOrg.

This proposal is a request for funds for the first 5 weeks of development which accounts for 9,000 DAI at a rate of 45 DAI/hr.

The Detailed Version

The Underscore Protocol was originally conceived as a co-creation tool to help decentralized collectives reach agreements and move forward without a static hierarchy of roles. From our perspective, decentralized governance is not so much of a voting problem as it is a communication one.

We think the protocol could be instrumental in the mid and long-term evolution of Alchemy in ways that go beyond just a content repository. For example, the Underscore Protocol could influence the proposal process by contextualizing each proposal around a bigger plan, facilitating multiple members to shape proposals before they are voted on, letting proposals grow into larger plans by decomposing them into subproposals, or even letting a DAO scale by splitting it into subdomains.

The “detailed version” proposal acknowledges this potential and starts a process of research among DAOstack and Genesis community to explore how feasible this vision is, to identify potential new features powered by the protocol and to develop and experiment with them.

The first stage of this process consists of running a Frame phase in which we talk with DAOstack and Genesis key visionaries to identify the most promising ways to frame this combination of the Underscore Protocol and DAOstack. The Frame phase is followed by a Discover, Prototype, Pilot and Release phases. A detailed overview of the plan is described here.

The first stage of this plan will be proposed after the “coarse version” proposal is accepted, with the idea to be run in parallel to the “coarse version” development and to integrate as many of its results as possible.


Hey @pepo,

I’m really, really happy this is the direction you’ve gone with, and deeply appreciate your transparency and flexibility! Kudos :space_invader:

I cannot wait to see this in action.

1 Like

It would be great to have document access and editing permissions. A couple of examples:

  1. An NGO constitution should be editable only if a supermajority passes a proposal to merge an edit suggestion.
  2. Meeting notes should be fully immutable.
  3. A white paper could be editable (an edit suggestion merged with the main branch) only by an agreed on subset of members, or only by the creator.

Regarding access permissions not all documents should be public. The constitution obviously should be available to everyone, but a white paper may not, certainly not while editing it, and meeting protocols may need to be available only to an organization’s members and not to the public.

@pepo Is this something you guys are planning, or not at this stage?

1 Like

Hey there! What do you think would need to happen in order to be able to contribute to this? I’m coming from an art perspective, and eagerness to learn about on-chain content development :)))))


@Eyal, thanks to the nature of the Underscore Protocol, some of the things you mention will be possible without much additional effort.

Each page can have its own owner. If they are owned by the DAO Avatar, a proposal on the DAO will always be able to update them. But you can “burn” the owner (set it to 0x00) to make the content immutable, or transfer the ownership to another DAO with different governance settings. Some pages could have be governed by an external account.

Regarding privacy, we will support having private perspectives of a page on a Web 2.0. platform with configurable access permissions. A private perspective can be used as a draft.

What I think would be out of scope for this version would be to have a decentralized-but-private versions. It seems more likely that a 3rd party service like 3box will help us achieve this instead of us having to develop it.


Hey @jossbot, the first versions of this feature will be focused on text content with in-line images. In the future, maybe graphical content could be handled, but that’s a long plan.

I look forward to running different experiments as soon as possible.

1 Like

Thanks @pepo that’s great. I guess the supermajority is more a feature of the proposal scheme, and not the document’s.

Who will have permissions to create a document in the DAO Mind? Would it be by a proposal? From my talks with existing organizations it would be difficult to have everything decentralized, although this could be worked around by creating a one person (for example an admin) sub-dao with permissions to create a doc in the main dao.

(thinking out loud.)


Thanks! Do you mind if I watched the design process somewhere? :slight_smile:
Like when in hospitals where there is this glass cabin to watch surgeons take spleens out?!


yes @jossbot, definitely!


Thanks! I’m on telegram with this same UN, find me? :partying_face::star_struck::partying_face::star_struck:

1 Like

Hello there community!

We have been working full-time on the Underscore Protocol and exclusively focused on the multi-perspective wiki for 3+ months now and we are close to having a deliverable.

At the same time, Genesis funding has been re-framed and it’s possible there won’t be enough funds to cover for the second payment of our work as originally agreed.

We asked for funds for 9 full-time weeks, and got paid 9,000 DAI for the first 5 weeks. The payment for the other 4 weeks (7,200 DAI) is still pending.

Among dOrg and _Prtcl, we have definitely already dedicated that amount of work and more, and are fully committed to delivering something as soon as we have it stable. Note that we depend on this delivery for progressing with our vision of enabling GIT-like web3 powered processes as a co-creation tool.

We are here asking for the second payment to avoid the scenario in which Genesis runs out of funds and we cannot be covered by our work and dedication.

Thank you all and keep up! Creating new stuff is slow, uncomfortable and sometimes painful. But that’s how it is. There is a long and amazing road ahead even if we are not able to see it clearly on a daily basis.



Great stuff guys!

It seems like you are going to make the cut :slight_smile: in the last Genesis funding round :slight_smile:

1 Like