Communication tools integration: 1 username for all

In short

Posts are often republished between DAOtalk, Telegram & Discord.
So members of the DAOtalk community might want to use the same username on each platform so username tags can work across all the platforms.


Let me explain further

The DAOtalk post appearing under the “DAOS > Genesis” subcategory are automatically reposted on the “Genesis DAO Community” Telegram chat, which itself has its content automatically reposted on the “genesis-community” channel of DAOstack’s Discord.

So for instance, a post I made on DAOtalk then appears with my tagged username on Telegram
38
And if I click on it, I get:
07
That’s because my DAOtalk username & my Telegram username don’t match.

The same goes for Discord, when a post containing many people tagged, only very few actually had their tag working.
23
That’s because their DAOtalk username & their Discord username don’t match.


The only issue is that if changing the DAOtalk username requires the help of an admin. So best to try raise new members’ awareness on that point so that forum admins don’t have to get involved. i.e. something to mention during onboarding or simply on DAOtalk’s welcome post

2 Likes

It’s great to raise awareness, and I’m happy to change usernames as needed! Let’s just remember this is a recommended best practice and not mandatory :slight_smile:

1 Like

In regards to communication tools, I wanted to ask the following question:

Considering communication is absolutely critical for sustaining a DAO, does DAOStack have a vision for the evolution of communication tools for the DAO’s utilizing DAOStack, and what is your philosophy towards it?!

At the moment I assume DAOStack has a degree of centralized control over the communication tools utilized by DAO’s on the platform.

If this is the case, do you see future communication tools being built within DAOStack and provided as a feature, or does DAOStack hope to avoid communication features altogether and let DAO’s manage their communication paths independently? A combination of the two?

My thoughts on this are concerned with learning about DAO development. If we want successful DAO’s, we should know what infrastructures are necessary for them to become effective — independently from the broader ecosystem.

At the moment, the DAOs within DAOStack seem to be using the combination of their own communication paths and the communication paths provided by DAOStack.

The communication tools currently at our disposal are maximized for certain types of communication, and not necessarily what is optimal for DAO Communication. As a result, the communication paths will have a direct influence on the development path for DAO’s.

An operationally effective DAO has yet to be built, and a large part of that is because it has never been done before. I believe how communication and coordination are facilitated is extremely important if we want to build that first operationally effective DAO.

I was hoping someone could shed some light on this issue, and how the DAOStack team thinks about communication on a broader scale.

I’ll start by quoting myself, emphasis added, as it touches on a few prompts from the above:

…ideally, the only official channels for proposal communication would be within Alchemy itself. Right now Discord/TG is seen as a semi-officialish channel, which isn’t at all the long term goal. The vision in the long term is for there to be one hundred different “Genesis” channels (note that a community like Bitfwd, which has its own chat, effectively is managing a “Genesis” channel as they are a significant part of the DAO, even if it’s not explicitly articulated), covering many applications and communities. The channels provided by the DAOstack team (or more specifically, the comms team, which I manage) are a service, but they are not meant to be a local monopoly in the long-term, as this is inherently unsustainable. As GenDAO maturates I’ll be taking special care to emphasize this point. Coincidentally, I have no desire to moderate a ten-thousand active person community.

(1) Any DAO can use any communication tool they want. We have no intent to emphasize certain tools over others. The channels managed by DAOstack are available as a service for DAOs that want to benefit from a network effect – the PolkaDAO, for instance, shares this forum, but that’s due to a convo w/ them.

In the future Alchemy will have some native comms tooling. Initially they will be centralized, but in the future, decentralized comms services like 3Box are on the table.This is ideal for proposal / DAO discussions – from the recent Alchemy update:

So if I had to summarize the philosophy:

  • DAOstack does not determine comms channels for DAOs, and ideally in the future they’d have independent control of their own comms.
  • DAOstack has various comms channels that are provided as a service, but they are by no means “exclusive” and we encourage folks to create their own.
  • Additional comms features are being built into Alchemy over time, with the ultimate aim being decentralized chat integration (among other “social” features, such as profiles et al.)
  • We’d generally like to see a migration of discussions to Alchemy as the comms features improve over time.

We’re currently set up as Disqus admins, but this is not the long-term plan by any means.

1 Like