@DXgov Twitter Account

Discoveries from Lisbon
Over the course of our time in Lisbon chatting to other protocols and want to be DAOs it has become clear that what we have with our governance system is of great value and when people hear about it they want to know more.

However reputational voting, holographic consensus are concepts many people are not aware of.
And when they learn about governance 2.0 they always have even more questions and interest. Seeing as we have been doing governance successfully for over 2 years we are some of the most experienced and qualified to discuss the issues governance currently faces.

Future of DXgov
We have even had conversations with protocols that’s are so interested in what we do that they want to learn from and use what we have. Building DXvote for ourselves has been the current goal for a while and I think that’s what makes it special, but its obvious that it could be much more and it looks like offering some sort of a service will be the end goal of the DXgov team since the demand for it exists.

Twitter plan
The plan here would be to create a DXgov twitter account to start spreading the word of what we are building with DXvote (release notes, highlights, roadmaps) as well as joining in the ongoing conversation in this space not only at DAOist events but also on twitter to spread our message further.

This would be a bit of an experiment separate from the official DXdao twitter where we would focus more on conversation and increasing general awareness of our goal with governance so that when a product offering does come we have less work to do educating people.
If this goes too far against the current plan for twitter please let me know, but I think one way or another we should be making more content around our view of governance and I don’t know if the very formal PR style of the official account would suit this.

This would be run mostly by the gov dev team with help and oversight from DXvoice.
I’m making this forum post to get feedback and will then make a signal proposal on xdai.


I am still new to the DxDAO community and am currently studying the documentation and other resources about the project. Therefore, my opinion will not be fully relevant, at least until I study the DAO mechanisms in more detail.
From the current perspective, I think your idea is very good for the reason that DxDAO and its entire ecosystem are unique in relation to the entire crypto space. As a result, the system seems more complex from the standpoint of new users (potentially new community members), so that additional educational content would be helpful.

The governance system and organized contribution process is the main reason why I joined the DXDAO community.
Almost all protocols have a governance problem because they just threw out their tokens in order to provide better incentive programs than the competition and pumping TVL and similar metrics. These same protocols now have a problem with the decentralized way of making decisions because systems are not created and planned to become DAO.
I think it is a matter of time before all these non-DAO organizations will be forced to apply a holographic consensus (or some customized version) in order to function as a DAO, because for now, decentralization only serves them as marketing.


I’m highly for it and be happy to contribute to it.

This below is critical if DXvote will succeed as a governance system, from my 1on1 conversations in Lisbon people want to hear more about this and how they can use and utilize it.


Signal vote LIVE: dxvote.eth

Thanks for writing this up, Ross. It’s good to see in writing after our conversation on it in Lisbon.

A main goal for me right now is to build up DXdao’s reach and trust, and we already have multiple Twitter accounts. I understand you have a plan to run the account, but this will fractionalize DXdao’s audience further. As we build our audience and community, it’s best that we’re funneling our community and audience to one account, otherwise it will cause confusion and smaller audiences on each account, and in the long run, more work and accounts to maintain.

I do agree it would be great to focus more on increasing general awareness of our goal with governance, and it would be great to integrate more of this type of content into the DXdao_ Twitter account. This will show the cohesion of our products and funnel people to one account rather than dispersing the community.

Before voting on the signal proposal I’d love to engage in more conversation here, and hear your thoughts.



Absolutely, so I think the main difference here is the type of content. The DXdao twitter is very formal and mostly has well prepared content with graphics etc. Of course there is nothing wrong with that but I just think we need to be more involved in community conversation and less PR when it comes to an early stage governance product.

This way we could make public our governance journey in one location (something key to selling our service once it is ready) as well as educating and taking part in conversations where the DXdao twitter would never usually go.

At the current time the DXdao twitter doesnt seem like the place we want to be posting release notes or discussion in general about governance, maybe what could work better is having DXgov be a place for experimental discussion and then a rollup format into a well presented summary on the DXdao twitter?

Also the DXgov twitter would be less so aimed at the current DXdao audience and more at the specific niche of people interested in governance in general. After all the discussions in Lisbon it was clear that public knowledge about what we do with governance is slim and needs expanding, so we need to make more noise about what we do.

Is the plan to shut down the omen and swapr twitter accounts in favour of the monolithic DXdao one?


Great thread, Ross. I support the initiative, but right now DXdao doesn’t have the capacity to run all these multiple accounts:

As @nissa pointed out, this further disperses DXvoise. Not to mention, it creates more zombie Twitter accounts - examples: @aqua_eth, @Rails_eth, and @Mesa_eth.

Regardless, reserve the username for now.

1 Like

Username is reserved and rails, mesa and aqua are all so inactive I dont think they would even be associated with DXdao.

Alongside the gov dev team being willing to use the account it also seems @nylon and some others would be interested contributing.

The way I see it is that we have time on our side now, but by the time we are ready to launch publicly a governance product we need an active audience familiar with the benefits and developments of our governance system.

To your first point, it would be great to broaden the range of content we share on the DXdao_ Twitter. As the DXdao narrative continues to evolve, the most effective strategy is to engage more people to our whole ecosystem rather than silo’ing them to separate accounts. Although the longterm goal is GAAS, the initial product we’re creating for our own use. Yes, I agree, it is absolutely useful and relevant information, though it is best for the broader DXdao community. Especially since governance is vital to every DAO.This will showcase DXdao’s leadership and authority in the space. I’m not opposed to a DXgov account in the future, if it fit’s the strategy. For now, the focus is to solidify DXdao as a strong foundation for everything we do.

Our governance journey is incredibly relevant and worth sharing. One of our major distinguishers is our unique governance model, and we want to educate and display that to as many people as possible.

Over the course of the retreat, workshops and our time in Lisbon a majority of contributors expressed we already have a lot on our plate, and I would hate to add another account to maintain, especially when it’s not a necessity. Focusing on growing the DXdao Twitter will position us for long-term success on growing and launching products. DXdao will be the launchpad for current and future products.

We won’t be shutting down the omen and swapr accounts. They are already in place and have audiences. Focusing on growing what we have is the strategy for long-term growth

1 Like

Forgive any imperfections or gaps in logic here, feeling super under the weather and got little to no sleep.

I see and feel the points of @adamazad and @nissa. Fractalization of attention and its effects were key metrics for me when establishing and growing the community we have today. (See privatization of old Telegrams, Reddit, bridging of social channels, etc). Additionally, DXdao has been lacking in consistency of engagement (bar Discord) and could sorely use the described content - as I discussed with @ross in person.

HOWEVER, I do think that the strategy @ross is describing is the right choice for a multitude of reasons:

1). Large value for little bandwidth.

Ross was clear that this account would be run primarily by Gov_Dev, welcoming support from others or DXvoice when or where needed. The additional bandwidth cost is non-zero, sure, but from the DXvoice side it should be a very minor addition as Gov_Dev takes charge.

2). Fractalization minimization.

Not to mimic Ross, but the purpose of this account would be engaging with and attracting a community of very relevant people. We aren’t translating any existing content or discussion from the current brand, but instead introducing new weapons to our arsenal. This can always be translated to DXdao itself at arguable no negative impact. We can always X-P important posts from the Dev_gov handle if we were to notice any negative implicit effect on the primary DXdao handle.

3). Zombie accounts.

I’m not so sure I understand this point. DXvoice prioritizes the voice of products in our current suite. Perhaps there is something to be said about a “formal” degradation of Rails/Mesa/etc, but they are not requiring active manpower. Additionally, if we have a live product it needs to be supported - leading to:

4). DXvote and GAAS.

I understand the idea that we are building for us first before going to market, but we are being offered a very unique opportunity to cultivate a relevant community and translate that success (or even lack thereof) directly into the DXvote brand and therefor DXdao’s GAAS strategy. The benefit is that we have engaged and talented governance focused members who want to build this brand from the ground up to no net negative to DXdao’s current narrative and negligible impact to resources when weighed to the benefit. (Actually, likely detracting since identity will form naturally).

To conclude, I support this proposal in its current condition and would love to aid our budding Gov_Dev squad in propagating and communicating decentralized governance - and of course translating this momentum to DXdao’s GAAS approach via. DXvote.


Sure it’s an idea, and I absolutely think we should be sharing more content about our governance. What I don’t want to do is take mindshare away or fractionalize from growing DXdao’s audience. Looking back at the past 100 tweets on the DXdao Twitter there is very low engagement, especially if you exclude likes by DXdao contributors, and this needs to improve.

It’s clear @ross and @KeenanL have strong opinions on this, and I’m not going to stop you, but I do want to be clear, keeping our focus on growing the DXdao_ twitter audience and not funneling followers to a new account is the correct strategy for the DAO’s future success.

1 Like

I’m a little confused as to why the Quick Wallet Scheme is being used for this Signal Proposal.

To my knowledge, this is the first proposal that has gone through the scheme, which was just installed last week.

All signal proposals on xDai have 4 days in the boosted period, whereas this only has 2. Is that enough time for REP holders to vote?

And I don’t think the Quick Wallet Scheme is showing up on Alchemy? Only DXvote? I use DXvote, but I don’t know if REP holders are checking it frequently.


I had forgotten that the boosted times were shorter on the new QWS making it not ideal for signal proposals.

The main reason I used it was so i could boost it with DXD instead of GEN.

Bearing in mind that the topic has been open here for 6 days and spent some time pending boosting in DXvote I personally feel the 2 day time does not seriously impact the legitimacy of the vote.

I’m happy to make another vote using a longer time after this one if a clear majority by a number of voters is not met?


The signal vote has passed on xDai with good participation and 20.14% for with 0% against.
I’ll begin posting on the twitter over the weekend