Hey DAOists fam,
On the one hand, open and abstract one stop shop is good to let things emerge, but, on the other hand the clarity that can come from the way Alchemy as a product is designed with multiple schemes as streams is something we can utilize and can increase the efficiency.
I think about it as analogy between Telegram channel and a discord server.
- A Telegram channel is great, but far from suitable as a productivity platform with topics, workgroups, roles, sure it works to a certain extent but it’s patchy and cluttered with all other groups etc.
- A Discord server give you the necessary granularity needed for a more mature and active community. I believe we’re getting to that limit with GenDAO Alchemy.
What do you think of the idea of having different schemes for different activities: e.g. scheme for
- REP requests (would be an equivalent of introducing yourself channel on Discord)
- Small cap and beginner DAOists contributor (<2ETH)
- Mid: <10ETH
- Advanced and/or complex projects category >10ETH
- Focuses the discussions and there’s more clarity on the social consensus for each stream.
- Time constants and staking size for different streams proposals can vary accordingly (faster for smaller cap) etc
*ETH figures are kinda arbitrary
Other ideas as a preparation for the KoalaDAO #Blockathon launch are:
Gamifying the onboarding and education process by encouraging newly joined DAOists to submit a reward request for a predefined easy task in the small cap scheme.
A lot of people get too overwhelmed encountering Alchemy’s interface having it all bundled. It is almost a prerequisite to become weird fanatic DAO cult member to see the power of the concept, it has to be more accessible if we want to grow.
Happy to hear other people’s thought re the UX aspects using different schemes/streams.