⚡ coCrypting #1: Closing iteration 01

Hej hej everyone!
This is Joss & Thomas R.

The first iteration of the convivial research study group around DAO-specific risks has closed, and we are here to update you.

========================================================================

  • Reference: the main content hub is here.

.

  • The resources the study group managed to use: notes from the workshop (the workshop became “going through a list of contents that allowed us to know what we didn’t know we didn’t know”).
    Note: we still don’t know the content, but we know the items we ignore!
    See the image below as a document here.

.

  • Our breakthrough: Seeing & understanding DAO-specific risks as a restaurant you’ve heard of but never eaten at.
    i.e. you have an idea what’s going to happen and could happen, but it’s still new to you. A restaurant contains roles like cooks and guests; has recipes i.e. combinations that render something, and which can be strict or not; has ingredients i.e. individual items; considers dangers and allergies…)

========================================================================

OUTCOMES

1. A reflection

Why may risk analysis constitue a flawed process for the GenesisDAO ?
Why is the GenesisDAO an awkward entity to approach? Understanding risk implies understanding the system. We understood most of the individual elements - crypto/reputation/etc. but still failed to see how they come together.

The people who know the system are the only ones who know. The content is hard because it’s hard, not from lack of trying to understand it.

Understanding is both the problem we are trying to solve and the problem with the whole process. The insides and the outsides aren’t able to communicate in a shared language, which is the first item we decided to work on.

Maybe it is not yet possible in these pre-teen DAO years. It is possible the system itself has yet to come of age in order to be understood: is DAO-specific risk assessment too early? Is it better to humor the process and then know what we need to worry about? Is it simply lack of caring to explain carefully?

As we worked with analogies like a restaurant ( see below ) some of the problems we worked with in the process were:

  • The mission is an expansion - that means new clients for the restaurant,

  • We need to increase the value of GEN. That is higher prices and more sofisticated ingredients to the restaurant,

  • There is an outspoken No sheep / No shepherd policy which even extends to people being unwilling to assume roles. At the same time there is the reputation system which means then we may have paid sheep dogs who are in control of both sheep and shepherds ( roles could change the whole time ) We don’t know what this corresponds to in a restaurant.

Knowledge transfer is a very word-intensive culture in the Genesis DAO– documents are long with complicated layouts. Maybe the GenesisDAO should recruit tech-people for now and build it while a group create a marketing plan for the outside world - that would possilly be a good way to identify risk also ?


2. Daorisks - an analogy (and our deepest deliverable in this iteration)

Screen Shot 2019-12-11 at 19.05.02
Screen Shot 2019-12-11 at 19.05.15



Screen Shot 2019-12-11 at 19.05.57


3. Closure

  • The audience showed up: the newbies were there per my (Joss) promise.
    The knowledge holders unfortunately could only join to point out what we should learn.

  • My (Joss) promise was to deliver a different view of my earlier mistake with risks, fulfilled with:
    – The house visual, which will help others see, and place themselves in the areas that they need to know around risk,
    – The kitchen, restaurant, and cookbook (mostly Thomas’ work) guides newcomers on the choices and options [items] they should consider when interacting in DAOs (we all can relate to the choices and risks we face when in a restaurant).

  • We –the newbies– consider the skeleton of what’s to learn quite complete, but utterly impossible to learn without hands-on guidance. It was disappointing to lack this, but we must close the study group, as it’s gone beyond the time we imagined, and let others into what happened!

  • We consider this still a work group, not static content – i.e. a newbie can use it << because >> they can reach out to Thomas and Joss in 2020.
    No wordy documents, not lengthy explanations: we shall use the simplest visual language we can, and hope experts can help out.

========================================================================

Thanks for reading!
We are available as usual here if you’d like to comment or ask, and on Telegram on the usual handles.

j&t :alien: :alien:

1 Like