What aspect of ApeCoin DAO did we get RIGHT (or WRONG) that other DAOs got WRONG (or RIGHT)?

General
1

With the DAO celebrating its 2nd Birthday, I pose this new Temp Check Poll to the community:

What aspect of ApeCoin DAO are we doing RIGHT that other DAOs are doing WRONG? On the flip side, what aspect of ApeCoin DAO are we doing WRONG that other DAOs are doing RIGHT?

I have a list of possible options for you:

Voting - This covers all aspects related to how we handle, conduct, implement, and perform voting, and includes how 1 Ape = 1 Vote.

Proposals - This covers the process and procedure for how writing, submitting, and give community members the ability to submit proposals, so long as they hold 1 APE.

Community - This covers aspects related to the number, quality, and distribution of our community members

Administration - This covers aspects related to how we have the APE Foundation and Stewards that facilitations the decentralized and community-led governance of ApeCoin DAO. This also covers how we handle elections.

Token - This covers aspects related to how we have, utilize, and/or are work with the ApeCoin ERC-20 token.

Branding - This covers aspects related to how we shape who we are as a DAO.

Marketing - This covers aspects related to how we promote our DAO

Products - This covers any product that is a result or was funded by ApeCoin DAO.

Other (Leave a comment) - This covers everything else that would otherwise not be covered by one of the above topics.

What do you think?

12 Likes
2

In my opinion I think it’s the Ape token, the price isn’t really encouraging especially for potential investors

3

Is this for what we got right or wrong?

4

The best funded DAO out there.

IMG_7594
IMG_7594913Ă—502 44.2 KB

5

We’re not getting it right

6

Yuga only dropping $APE to Yuga ecosystem holders was a massive mistake in hindsight. They wanted it to be a token to unite communities across the NFT ecosystem together, but gave them zero incentive to participate as they had no skin in the game.

After the price tanked over time, it’s going to be really hard to get other communities to buy-in at this point. Possible, but difficult. I think it’s also very important to always consider what is it that makes $APE unique enough to adopt, that other L2 tokens don’t have. That’s a big one.

1 Like
7

Not to forget that there’s a huge misunderstanding that $ape is for only Bored apes and mutants. Thats a huge barrier and despite making a difference, some people want Apecoin DAO to only work around bored apes. That creates the DAO limits

8

I agree, and a lot of the AIPs further perpetuate that. I mean it makes sense, but there needs to be very intentional focus on getting other communities involved. Providing them direct incentive to be involved.

2 Likes
9

I love the aspect of proposal
Giving members the opportunity to say their mind in spite of being positive or not

10

Hi Matt! What examples come to mind of DAOs that have been intentional about getting other communities involved, through incentives or otherwise?

11

I honestly don’t know if I’ve seen any large scale DAO function in a way that I’d deem to be long-term successful (outside of something like MakerDAO but that’s so different.)

Small scale DAOs like Boring Security and Rare Pizzas seems to be quite effective. I think small scale DAOs just work better because there’s so much less organizational complexity to manage. As DAOs become larger and larger, unless there is a very tightly defined scope to operate within, it feels like they start to fail from the sheer diversity of different ideas and directions that individuals want to push the DAO in. There is no sense of direction or clear leadership. This is the core issue with the ApeCoin DAO, IMO.

I would have said something like Nouns DAO, who have accomplished a lot of very interesting things, but even they ended up forking. Unsure what specifically caused the fracture that caused the split to happen. The Mocaverse DAO seems to be functioning well from the viewpoint of an outsider looking in, but actual members of that DAO can speak up here with a much better opinion than mine.

It may be best to just try to learn about which aspects of governance worked best for a variety of DAOs, then use those best elements together to try to create a bigger system. Hard though, as each ecosystem has differing members with differing ambitions. So what works for one, might actually harm another.

2 Likes
12

Very interesting. Seems to be a common issue with scaling, but maybe it’s also a matter of redefining what “successful” means for a self-governing DAO. Even “established” decentralised governance frameworks like holacracies have lots of limitations and not a lot of real world success cases.

I wonder if the key lies in addressing your observation on scope/lack of clear direction. It seems to me like the direction is sometimes set by what the DAO doesn’t want, rather than what it wants to pursue, which makes direction-setting a more tedious process of elimination rather than alignment.

13

The voting process is quite encouraging compared to other communities
Kudos to the everyone