Section 1: Inclusivity and Equality
The Polkadot DAO is dedicated to creating an inclusive space, where everyone regardless of age, gender, race, or nationality is welcomed.
What’s the point of this when you have no a-priori idea of anyone’s identity in the first place? And not only that - unless people need to be KYC’d there’s little reason why they’d want to disclose their personal information to anyone anyway.
Last but not least there’s nothing you can do about Section 1-violating voters or even those who brigade them on external sites.
Repeatedly violating the community’s ethical standards may result in restrictions on governance participation via community voting.
Is voter censorship feature already in place or not yet? Who would decide and how could they possibly keep up if deliberately flooded with requests?
If a wallet gets censored and the owner simply recycles funds through a DEX, who would have the means to actually stop the address owner from undermining governance?
I think it raises some very valid concerns.
But it’s only logical, since the kind of an undertaking is defined by core people.
It’s as if Apple had only Wozniak, no Jobs.
If only hardcore engineers are leading, then obviously business concerns are discarded.
And it’s fine as long as there is enough money to finance their ideas (however some more stress-testing of the system by out-of-model real-world cases is important too).
And anyway no matter how good the tech is, you can’t just give it to people and assume they will use it.
You have to impose it.
It’s said, but it’s true.
The alternative to not imposing the tech and it collecting dust is that some people would take it and use it for things much, much worse than which we shunned away from.