Before the Decentraland DAO ReGenesis summit in Lisbon, I held open discussions on X spaces to explore the various aspects of the Decentraland DAO that could be improved. Some of the suggestions included:
- Getting rid of the Discord server and moving all governance discussions to the forum
- Dissolving various committees
- Finding ways to incentivize people who actually contribute to the platform
- General reform discussions
I believe the ideas agreed upon at the ReGenesis summit can address the core issues behind many of these suggestions. I’ll attempt to share the full story of my ReGenesis experience and explain how I came to support the ideas presented above.
I didn’t realize that a lot of key discussions had taken place during a workshop at the first Community Summit in Argentina earlier this year. The workshop on DAO reform was held at the same time as a workshop I hosted for Virtual Land Manager, so although I heard it was productive, I didn’t get many details on what was discussed. Considering that, I arrived at the ReGenesis event feeling relatively unprepared. I had the beginnings of an idea for implementing a reward system for creators and contributors, but it wasn’t discussed much at the summit. My group felt that, with all the other changes that needed to happen, this idea might be too much and that other reforms needed to be prioritized.
At least on the first day, I felt the opposite of my group’s sentiment—that what I was designing could ultimately replace the entire grants program and dissolve a number of squads and committees related to it. I saw my idea as the solution to almost everything. So, I felt a bit rejected when the group started to align around a structure that seemed much more complex and almost bureaucratic to me.
I was in a group with @Zino, @HPrivakos, @ginoct, and @szjanko. I was a little disappointed that my group lacked representation from current Foundation members or original founders. Additionally, many of the ideas that came out of the different working groups were similar enough to make me think the concept had been shared among key people beforehand.
I started asking around about why there was so much similarity between groups regarding the idea of setting up an operational company. Initially, I felt we could have dedicated a working group to this concept alone before the event. It felt a bit like these discussions had happened without the community’s involvement.
One night at dinner, I asked @ginoct a few direct questions to understand how many people had been exposed to the proposed structure before the summit started. It seemed like the idea Gino presented in our group was his own, so I wanted to hear it from him.
Concerned I might come across as accusatory, I asked, “Gino, can I ask you some things that might seem confrontational but aren’t? I just really want to understand—how many people in the other groups knew about the operational company plan?”
Gino told me he had only shared it with @yemel, @maraoz, and the grant support squad (@Zino, @palewin, and @fifitango), and that it wasn’t fully fleshed out yet.
“How come you didn’t talk about this in my X space, and why didn’t we have any working groups to discuss this idea? It was a great idea, and I think a lot of the community would have supported it. But I also think people would be upset if they knew that key players were aware of the plan beforehand, while the rest of the community wasn’t.”
Gino explained that not everyone knew about it and that he wanted to get feedback from a few trusted people before sharing the idea with a larger audience. That made sense to me, and I’m not sure why my initial conclusion was that it was done to exclude people.
In hindsight, I think I made a mistake by sharing parts of my idea too early. This led to some misinterpretations in my working group, but also raised good questions that helped me identify problems and attempt to solve them. There’s always the chance that the smaller group Gino shared his idea with might not have liked it and could have helped improve it, which seems to have been the case.
Looking back, I believe getting feedback from a few others probably saved us valuable time at the summit by allowing us to start from a more developed point.
As I continued talking to my group over the next couple of days, I realized that although some form of my idea could work, it wouldn’t guarantee the platform’s sustainability. It wouldn’t inherently structure the DAO to eventually take over the work currently done by the Decentraland Foundation and the Protocol Squad.
At least for now, I don’t know if there’s a good way to drive consistent, well-planned improvements to the platform without some kind of “centralized” team to manage things once the Foundation hands over responsibility to the DAO. We need a structure that makes sense globally, and something entirely decentralized or overly experimental might be hard to manage effectively. The platform’s longevity must be our top priority.
One key takeaway from the discussions in Lisbon was this:
The decentralization of the protocol and the platform’s sustainability are more important than complete decentralization of work efforts and decision-making.
I’m unsure how difficult it will be to implement another radical change if the DAO ReGenesis ideas evolve into a successful proposal, but I did receive some support for my idea from a few people within the DAO and some of the founders I spoke to.
What I’m working on now has evolved significantly from where it began—initially a series of open-ended questions I posted in our private Discord channel for the summit on September 4th, the day before the event. I started to feel that these questions gave people the wrong impression, as where I ended up was so far from where I started. This realization has led me to do what I once found concerning at the summit—sharing the start of an idea with trusted, like-minded friends so that I have a more solid proposal to bring to the community for discussion. This includes people who attended the summit and some who didn’t.
I’m hesitant to reveal too much detail about what I’ll eventually propose, as I believe restructuring the DAO in a sustainable way should be our top priority. I’ve been shaping my idea to fit within the governance structure we agreed upon in Lisbon. The consensus we reached feels like a prerequisite for my idea’s success. We need to be prepared for the handoff, and under the current structure, we are undeniably unprepared.
So, today, I fully support the consensus we reached, as laid out in this forum topic.
It’s important to note that reaching a consensus wasn’t easy. There were minor disagreements about responsibilities within the structure. I don’t think anyone feels like they got everything they wanted. We all had to compromise to get to this consensus.
The group that came together at the ReGenesis summit has real potential to shape this platform into something great that benefits us all. There’s something special and unique about coming together in a physical space to share our cultures, learn each other’s languages, and understand our perspectives. It’s easy to take for granted how much our global community offers when we’re all online. We’re building something bigger than Decentraland, but Decentraland is still our home. I hope we can continue the spirit of positive and constructive collaboration we felt in Lisbon.
We’re off to a good start, but I’d like to see the community come together for more detailed conversations about these reforms. I agree with the sentiment that the VP structure could use more reform, but I believe that if we pair the ideas presented with some kind of merit-based incentives, we could put more power into the right hands and slowly see a shift in VP that comes with something even more valuable—ownership.
To the founders, DAO, and Foundation: Thank you for the opportunity to attend ReGenesis and for finding a way to include community members who felt they had something to contribute.
To the community: Thank you for the support and contributions to my X spaces leading up to the event, and for openly sharing your concerns. I did my best to represent the community and advocate for reforms that wouldn’t further alienate us. I look forward to discussing any questions or concerns in the Community Building Decentraland (CBD) space this Saturday. It’s important we find any blind spots that still exist.
Most importantly, thank you to those who put in the effort every day to make Decentraland something special for everyone. Your contributions do not go unnoticed, and I hope we will soon have more ways for the community and DAO to acknowledge and reward you for them.
Signed,
Unknower