DAO Debt: Do we need a social consensus?

Your numbers add up to 110% (fyi)

1 Like

They do … that’s why the DAO was in debt

1 Like

How much GEN does the DAO currently control?
How much total GEN exists right now?
Will it get more GEN from some source (on some schedule)?

How many people/organizations have expressed interest in participating in a GEN auction (what is the perceived demand)?
What would a GEN auction look like? 10,000 GEN? 100,000 GEN? 1,000,000 GEN?

And also they pertain to proposals created BEFORE any consensus was even proposed.

@Kate @patdaostack @Lior … any input on these questions?

How much GEN does the DAO currently control?

None (beside small funds converted to GEN as part of the monthly funding

How much total GEN exists right now?


Will it get more GEN from some source (on some schedule)?

The goal is for Genesis to control the entire treasury of the un-minted GEN tokens (40M). this will probably be a gradual process to ensure the DAO is responsible and can manage these fund in a way that serves the interests of the project; and we try together with Genesis members to design what needs to happen in order to make the DAO as such

How many people/organizations have expressed interest in participating in a GEN auction (what is the perceived demand)?
What would a GEN auction look like? 10,000 GEN? 100,000 GEN? 1,000,000 GEN?

There is no GEN auction. can you explain what you mean ?

I mean if you want to run an auction, you should probably know that there are actual buyers who are interested first. Has anyone, ever, shown interest in actually participating in the proposed “GEN auctions”? How do you determine the proper amount to sell at any given time?

Also - you mention 40M unminted GEN that Genesis may ultimately control. Who currently “controls” that? I don’t understand the details of “unminted” and “control”.

Can you please refer me to the “GEN auction” you refer to ?

@Kate mentions it here https://t.me/c/1171640707/18120

Maybe i misunderstand, but it seemed like there would be a GEN sale for locking (pre-locked?) to raise money and distribute REP to participants. This was described as an “auction”…

Yes, you probably misunderstood. there is NO GEN AUCTION. GEN is not sold/auctioned
The auction discussed is for REP, and the new mechanism described is in the same concept of what dXDAO did when they first distribute the REP when the DAO was created, and the same one NecDAO is currently doing.

The idea is for people with long term interest in growing the GEN economy (= growing the DAOstack ecosystem), will lock their GEN and will receive reputation in Genesis. This is done via an auction mechanism so the amount of REP is dependent on the overall staked GEN and the total allocated REP. Those who lock GEN are expected to contribute to Genesis by doing work, contributing via discussion and guidance and help develop the tools and use cases that will help the ecosystem to grow.

Kate and Ezra wrote about this in more details, i suggest going over that again now the no GEN auction is clarified , i guess the context and rational will be clearer

1 Like

Ah yes, you are correct.

When @patdaostack was saying “hey we could sell GEN to get us out of debt”

And @Kate said in her Medium article: that money could be made (in the form of) DAI or ETH from the sale of LGN (aka Locked GEN)

And I saw discussions of a new REP distribution scheme based around locking GEN

And @Kate mentioned “auctions” but meant "awarding REP for locking your GEN (? weird use of the term)

I thought that meant “we will auction locked tokens from our 40M treasury to generate revenue and distribute REP”

I’m going to hop onto Ivan’s comments here.

Seeing the parallels between the method by which GenDAO has proposed a GEN locking mechanism intended to enable greater GenDAO accessibility and participation — and the method by which GenDAO seeks to jumpstart the GEN Economy with a runaway train of spending…I must ask why the latter is omitted in conversations of the former?

It seems to me that we are sacrificing optimal design and structure of the onboarding and participation processes in exchange for the ability to implement a new method of fundraising (minimum GEN-locking <> LGN sales).

I honestly don’t mind the method of fundraising, but I do mind the fact that it seems to be shrouded beneath a proposed feature with a completely separate intended purpose. By locking GEN, I’m basically giving an interest-free loan to the project in exchange for Reputation (of which I also think is unfairly distributed).

Emerging from traveling and working on China initiatives. Coming back to the two ‘sustainability’ approaches quoted here:

  1. Fund Raising for GenDAO

For us to pursue this path, which I think is essential and attractive, we should transform quite radically into a different Genesis (is it Genesis 1.0? I think it’s a MUCH BIGGER change than what we’ve discussed in calls and forums so far), a much more mature DAO participation structure. e.g. collaborative and accountable pollinator committees that together run the DAO-ops:

  • Fund raising pollinator committee - raising capital is often done in a fairly intimate high trust fashion and fund raising supportive conditions are relying mostly on non scalable social relationships.
  • Grant Pollinator Committee - Sourcing grants notoriously take a lot of time and often times past experience can be crucial for informed assessment.
  • (minimal) Accountability task force - This must be kept to minimum, but has to be there nevertheless.
  • Diverse and representative comms team - Would be important to include non DAOstack employee members too.
  • Onboarding and Happiness team - GenDAO equivalent to something between sales to IT support teams. Can’t overemphasize how crucial this is for GenDAO culture configuration, onboarding is one of the most important aspects of user journey.

This is a general idea for the structure, in practice Genesis 1.0 committees will likely look different.

Those teams/tracks should all be accounted for and accountable for in the DAO budgeting processes. Designating those community roles and responsibilities and in parallel allow spontaneous things to emerge (to a certain extent) will up the level of activity and output of GenDAO. In turn it will make the task of fund raising slightly easier for the Fund Raising pollinator committee as they’ll have simpler way to communicate a value proposition for respective funding sources.
Other pollinator teams will benefit by getting more clarity when following up and executing the operations that deliver desired outcome and create shared positive ROI for DAOists and those who fund GenDAO.

Now, I know it may sound like a ‘firm’ rather than a ‘DAO’, but it really doesn’t have to be a firm, it’s up to us to create the symphony that is GenDAOs vivid culture that will then echo through each and every GenDAO member’s personal impact.
I believe in the goodness of people to show up with honesty and responsibility to deliver and work for the betterment of the collective, but structure put in place can provide healthy framework to achieve it and serve for the right amount of peer pressure in a chaotic environment + it can help attract good future contributors too :wink:

  1. Creating support framework for GenDAO incubated projects (cc @liviade)

The assumption we’re making is that investing and incubating teams is a line of activities that we’re interested to run inside GenDAO. This is super important for GenDAO to start gaining equity + REP in initiatives that are funded by GenDAO, for that to happen, there are some needs to be met before starting:

  • Clarifying the legal framework (or lack of it ?) such that risk to members and contributors is minimized or completely removed.
  • Be a lot more ruthless and narrow down the focus and work with only handful of teams that has the highest potential to achieve exponential things on a global scale.
  • Form a reliable and well funded pollinator team to realize this.
  • How is GenDAO in general and the Incubation team in particular get rewarded from ventures it’s members support (in traditional professional terms: how is carry / management fees divided and distributes?)
    We’re working on a basic version for it with LongDAO(龙DAO).
  • Define thesis for the incubator and stick by it to a fair extent such that it’ll be possible to communicate and incubate with proper financial funding sources.

To summarize, we need to switch fast and steward a structure and culture of accountable and pro-active self-leadership, IMO it’s URGENT because the alternative of not leveling up the participation structure can be a major inhibitor to the greater DAOstack ecosystem.