To DAO or not to DAO

A comprehensive explanation outlining the legal entity supporting Keom Protocol, along with its integration of decentralised governance, will be published imminently. This will be followed by a Community Charter that will delve into the mechanics of the decentralised governance model in greater detail.

In the meantime, some thoughts about decentralized autonomous organisations ("DAO"s) ...

DAOs don’t have a formal definition but it seems customary (including according to ChatGPT, as some have quoted it before) that they rely on tokens and on-chain decentralized governance mechanisms.

DAOs are not yet fully understood by all, and each DAO is different. Some projects submit everything to the decentralized governance process, while others submit only part of the decisions to their community despite calling themselves DAOs. Also, some DAOs have a thriving public forum for discussions but extremely low participation in votes, sometimes only gathering a handful and frequently not reaching quorum (just have a look at the data aggregated by DeepDAO).

The very concept of decentralization is continuously debated and as a result, understood/applied in various ways. Some refer to progressive decentralization, others aim at sufficient decentralization while for example the new European regulation, MICA, requires full decentralization (and disintermediation).

Which standard is the right decentralization standard for a group to deserve calling itself a DAO? That’s a question to be still answered for many DAOs, and one that probably won’t be answered anytime soon...

Want to read more? Please check out some further thoughts here.

Last updated