KusDAO continues development as the network’s most Open & Transparent voting DAO on the mission to increase the Velocity & Volume of High Quality information in the ecosystem while onboarding new participants & varied perspectives into OpenGov.
KusDAO Developments:
Member takeover from Kus Broadcasting
Establishment of Multi-sig council & elections
Introduction of inter-dao referenda
Through these developments the DAO has introduced a new quorum rule of 15% participation on Polkadot & are working through minimum participation guidelines for membership!
Currently, members are pruned after 100 inactive votes.
At the time of posting, KusDAO has 102 Voting Members verified through our rigorous onboarding process.
While every “Decentralized Voice” offers different value to the ecosystem, KusDAO’s radically open strategy:
Puts transparency & accountability first
Fosters Discourse & Datapoints
Reveals Conflict of Interest & Bad Actors
Establishes public archive of vote & reasoning
During Cohort #3, we were also delighted to see KusDAO used as a public forum where spend proposers & the voters could openly debate, communicate & find consensus.
KusDAO has been a mixed bag. I applaud their ability to foster conversation in their discord, which is a clear positive for the ecosystem. However, unfortunately they are far from the open and inclusive platform they purport themselves to be. My criticism falls into three categories:
Member onboarding: This post refers to members being “verified through our rigorous” onboarding. In the discord I have been told new members have to pass a “smell test” – same meaning but more blunt. The explanation that this is to prevent sybil attacks makes sense on the surface, but in practice, this approach means that the inner circle decides on a case by case basis who gets admitted to the DAO. I am aware of several applicants who were not admitted (and no reasons provided), but seemingly it was because their applicants were new to Polkadot and had no relationship to existing DAO members. Now, KusDAO is of course well within their rights to decide who they want to admit and who they don’t, but in this case they should drop the language of being an open and inclusive forum for everyone to join.
The first of the four KusDAO rules here reads: “Treat proposers & members with respect”. Unfortunately I can attest that this is not always the case, and that I’ve been on the receiving end of verbal attacks on KusDAO (due to disagreements on individual proposals), that I would not wish upon anyone else. Now, I don’t mean to say we need a content moderation team, or that the KUS team is responsible for what individual members say on their discord. But I thought it’s worth highlighting that these issues here exist nonetheless.
Power Concentration: Jay is running the Kusamarian and AAG, which in combination is undoubtedly the most influential media outlet on Polkadot. They are well run programs, very informative and clearly a net positive for the ecosystem. However, they of course also have a heavy editorial line, for example by deciding who they give coverage to on their show, and who they don’t invite. Nothing of this is unsurprising. My main concern however is the amalgamation of their media dominance with this voting block in OpenGov. Media and politics are of course always intertwined in real life, but in the spirit of decentralisation, I think it would be preferable if these two were not run by the very same pople.
In conclusion, despite my criticism, I think KusDAO still deserves to become DV in cohort 4, as they set out to do a big task and that is not always easy. They should however sit out the next cohort, simply due to (explicit or implicit) term limits.
Admittedly Max was burned BAD by the KusDAO as he was by the wider OpenGov over his three attempts at ~ $1M in treasury funding.
All of Max’s discourse in KusDAO is 100% public as long as it remains undeleted. Anyone with a discord account can see for themselves by joining here and then searching for “max_hic”
How are you aware of these random people who came to the KusDAO and were denied access? They just randomly came to you to complain? It really sounds like you were trying to astroturf KusDAO with this admission.
@0xTaylor You are overcomplicating things. It’s actually quite easy. Just look at the people who made an intro in the introduction section, and then look at those who actually got admitted. All public information. There obviously is a discrepancy.
@ChrawnnaCorp I would disagree with the characterisation that I got “badly burned”. Yes, KusDAO voted NAY on my previous proposals, but to do so obviously is well within your rights. I do however still defend these proposals for an Investor Conference series, and maintain that getting Polkadot in front of some wealthy traditional investors around the globe would in fact have been an excellent use of treasury funds.
Now, some people see this differently, and they are well entitled to their opinion. While all my proposal for a Conference Series were ultimately rejected, it was always close (some at 49%/51%). The result is that this conference series is now simply not gonna happen. Nothing more, and nothing less. And if you knew me, you’d know that I’m not somebody who holds grudges for long. There are so many other and more important things that I am planning for Polkadot beyond this particular conference series.
What is true, is that some KusDAO members verbally attacked me on the discord server over my proposals in a way that goes beyond professional conduct. That is something that I would not wish upon anyone else.
KusDAO is a great community allowing members (Polkadot and/or Kusama governance) to join a community, discuss proposals and vote.
KusDAO is one of the entities fostering good OpenGov practices allowing proposers a chance to communicate to voters, address issues/concerns as well as get feedback.
While the DAO has some of its own delegations, being granted another DV opportunity would offer KusDAO community more relevance in their efforts and welcome more community members to understanding OpenGov and make better decisions for the network.
The fact that you don’t know who Xiaojie is, shows in what a (ChaoDAO) bubble you live. FYI, she’s the main spokesperson for Polkaworld, the community that just organised Gav’s JAM Tour in China. (and also a current DV applicant). It really should not be my job, pointing these things out to you. As for the other guy mentioned here (giantigerprawn) - yes, fair enough, they’ve got an incomplete social media profile, but I think their question “How do I get approved?” was a genuine one, as they are new, and simply didn’t know how to proceed, and there are no clear guidelines anywhere. Nobody in KusDAO was able provide them with a simple answer to this (pretty straightforward) question. And that’s what I have pointed out here, nothing more and nothing less.
I know she is part of Polkaworld. I was referring to Gianttigerprawn. Xiaojie was given access.
Who are these others applicants you knew of who were not admitted? You said above “I am aware of several applicants who were not admitted (and no reasons provided)”. It really comes off like you are making statements that are not based in any sort of reality.
Just look at all the people who made an application to join, and then compare it to the list of current voting members of KusDAO. There is a discrepancy, isn’t it? Again, I am not telling you how to run your own DAO, and I also don’t have time for that. Of course you are well within your rights to refuse entry based on your own best judgement. I’m just pointing out that you should drop the language that KusDAO is an open and inclusive DAO for everyone, but rather it is a membership-based organisation, whereby existing members decide on the admittance for future members. Again, this is not a criticism, just a factual observation.
lightgov.
