There is two aspects to this submission ERC717 (not official name) and TAO, both are symbiotic to one another, the theory was formed all on my own accord since Thursday after seeing the state of governance in ETH and in DAO's especially.
A true form of on-chain open governance, known as a Tokenized Autonomous Organisation (TAO), allowing all who wish to participate towards contributing the direction regarding a subject entity. For its many confrontations and proposals that need to be approached in a distributed manner. The motivation behind an initiative such as this comes for many reasons but the majority of which resides on the many flaws related to standardised on-chain governing techniques that have seen quite the interest in the past year. In reality, these systems aren’t what they claim to be, with sub-entities dominating the delegated power, which ultimately juxtapositions the use of a distributed organisation.
Given the state of governance in the Ethereum ecosystem, it is clear that it is not viably sustainable, which major highlight to an aspect of voting within MakerDAO. Where internal users feel that their contributions are ultimately insignificant due to the centralisation of voting weight. When we analyse other coalitions like MetaCartelDAO, MolochDAO, dxDAO and finally DAOstack, we can see a correlation between low participation attendance and a use case of delegating grants usually for non-profit motives. After analysing the state of DAO’s, some postulations were formed on some of the flaws regarding long term sustainability.
Rigid focus only on delegated funding
Not a form of open-governance
Centralised delegate power
High financial entry barrier
No form of reputation
No Incentive to vote
In comparison to standardised DAO’s, there is no locked value to exemplify commitment, instead, users are free to propose their involvement and the organisation as a whole either approves or declines one's involvement in governance.