proposed restructuring of Dao’s

A recent post concerning Harmony’s future was raised, and I think the problems were not articulated well. Describing problems clearly and coming up with solutions is the only way we can solve the Dao and grant issues. This proposal attempts to describe major problems in the harmony community Daos and possible solutions.


I’ll be doing three paragraphs in each sub-topic describing the problem, possible solutions, and weaknesses of each possible solution.

Table of contents

  1. DAOs

a) Dao organization

b) Dao incentives

c) Dao’s mandate



Branches are extensions of stems, twigs are extensions of branches; this concept, known as mandelbrot fractals (Shea Gunther, 2020), seems to be quite prevalent in lots of things around nature. How it relates to Daos is that we can use only one Dao to get the core problems every Dao in harmony is facing, thats why I am planning to use harmony Africa Dao as an example (not because its the worst Dao – actually I think they have pulled a miracle accomplishing most of its mandates during the first term) , its because just like stems are a good representation of branches one in-depth analysis of one Dao would help establish a better general framework to access and judge the perfomance of Dao’s. I am a non-paid member of the Africa Dao team and am not vying for any position (now or soon) Hence, I don’t think I have a conflict of interest.

a) Dao organization


We currently have elections in our Dao. I pointed issues sometimes back to having one person become a governor in multiple Daos and showed how it was risky and would lead to huge inefficiencies in accomplishing Dao mandates (Antony Kim, 2022). @Sam replied and said Daos are not jobs and should not be treated as such. He also stated that one person can be a governor in other daos (he made it seem like one person could be a governor in infinite daos). He also said that individuals should be paid for their contributions in Daos and that the primary role of governors is to sign multi-sig transactions. I had assumed Daos were organizations with mandates and the governors were elected to ensure the mandates of the Daos were accomplished with the help of community members. Hence, if a governor was not helping accomplish the Dao mandates, the community members could call him/her out. I stopped trying to contribute my time to the Dao (the reason I am contributing to this discussion is because I am an investor-bought at $0.3 level) because it would mean I would always have to rely on my governors’ goodwill to accomplish the Dao mandates. Also, if the governors are not performing as per the Dao mandates, I have no right to call them out. The most important thing was that I didn’t have the yardstick to measure the governors’ performance. If my governors decided going on a vacation was good for the Dao, I would have to accept it.


If a Dao governor position is not a job, then they should not be paid. If their primary role is signing multi-sig transactions and not accomplishing the mandates of the Daos, then who is going to ensure the goals of the Daos are accomplished? I propose we implement a general charter in relation to Daos. That they should fund Daos if;

  • one person can only be a governor in one Dao at a time- to give them time to ensure dao mandates are met.

  • have clear mandates and milestones –

  • All governors are responsible of making sure the mandates of the Daos are accomplished.

  • All mandates should focus on long term profit making for the community – for investors sake.

  • If one wants to become a governor of more than one Dao – he/she should have been a governor of a self-sustained DAO.

  • Community members shold have atleast twoAMA meetings with all the governors before any Dao is funded.


there are extra-ordinary individuals who can be governors in multiple Daos and still ensure they help in delivering of the Dao mandates and adding this additional guidelines would sideline them but they are outliers haha and Daos are meant for normal people like me.

a) Dao incentive


the main reason I pointed out having one governor in one Dao is because people sooner or later will want to become governors in multiple Daos. $75/hr is a lot and becoming a governor in other Daos will be a way to earn extra income – I dont know about you but I have always got advice of having multiple sources of income( yes I am trying to be funny) . I noticed that all governors from Nigeria Dao also wants to be governors in Africa Dao ( not that I think they are in it for the income) but I expect they should be trying to over deliver on the nigeria Dao team instead of wanting governor positions in other Daos.


apart from capping one person one Governor position , we need to restructure how Dao’s – how about paying the Governors after all the mandates they have writtern are accomplished? - we an introduce a lock feature on governors payroll – after all a governors position is not a job, then lets make it a contractual aggreement between community members and governors.( talking of incentives , it took a day and some wine to write this up if you want to send some ONEs here is my address – one1qudf96zleuwtgngvuemz53twghhrcdsjzdapcl)


some governors might undergo tyranny from their community members because they are expected to ensure Dao mandates are met , I think its the price of leadership and will make the governors stronger in their future endevours( pun intended)

c) Dao mandates


Dao mandates have been overlapping, personally as an investor I had been annoyed by blu3 Dao

(blue3 dao proposal , 2022) funding because it had huge mandates overlaps with H.E.R Dao ( and organizing meditation retreats). This great overlap of mandates means that more and more money is going to be spent on similar things. Due diligence should also be perfomed before funding approvals- I saw harmony regional Dao almost get funded and I was flabbergasted why harmony would fund mombasa Dao first instead of Kenya Dao (kenya dao , 2021). Mombasa is a very small place in kenya and we dont even have tech companies there. ( I am not a member of kenya harmony Dao and was not part of the original founding team)


if two Daos have overlapping mandates , then they should be combined or introduced as Sub- Daos in a previous funded Dao with similar mandate. Regional Daos should help in forming sub-region Daos e.g kenya harmony Dao should be the one helping forming mombasa Dao.


it will take time to increase the number of people participating in the eco-system . But we will have a solid foundation


Shea Gunther, 2020 , amazing fractals found in nature , 14 Amazing Fractals Found in Nature.

Antony kim , 2022, one person having two governors position, One person having two dao governors positions - #6 by dpagan-harmony

kenya dao , 2021, kenya dao proposal , Kenya Harmony DAO - #35 by MaryMaina4084

mombasa regional dao, 2022, mombasa regional dao proposal , Mombasa Harmony DAO - #4 by HarmonyUniverse

blue3 dao proposal , (2022), blu3 dao proposal , Blu3 DAO Funding Proposal - ETHDenver 2022


I think aspiring Decentralized Autonomous Organizations should have plans about decentralization and autonomy. Otherwise they are just organizations.

How does one become decentralized and remove all central points of failure?
Maye it can be solved on the organizational level, eg: if 50% of the members disappear, the other 50 percent should be able to run the DAO just fine.

The other problem is autonomy. I thought DAOs are based on “Code is Law” principles with smart contracts, yet the organizations here mostly rely on traditional organizational structure with board members controlling multisig wallets reliant on external funding.

I think the issues around funding are issues around autonomy, since the DAO should be able to support itself without external financial dependencies and it shouldn’t rely on members to sustain it, it’s the other way around. The DAO should create a fluid ecosystem around it where none of the participants have more influence than others.

My understanding of DAOs are based on code is law principles and the smart contract technologies are keys that unlock DAOs so DAOs should be something you cannot do without smart contracts and blockchain.

Another issue with DAOs is member consensus, pseudoDaos built with gnosisSafe have no consensus agreements built in, eg we don’t know if the members are on the same page, does the DAO have principles or rules everybody has to agree to?

If you have governors, there must be laws and there must be justice.

I developed a solution for this using handwritten contracts that are connected to blockchain, to make DAOs work just like traditional organizations, where the members would need to sign a document to enter the organization.

This would not be necessary with a DAO purely governed by code, however if the DAO lacks in the code is law aspects, there should be semantic law.


I’ll read in more details as very interesting.

In one simple sentence i think DAOs will need Tech, AI and ZPK to be truly decentralised

your responses are very nice thank you, i was proposing a general framework all Dao should operate under. For example its a general principle in our society not to engage in physical combat in our society unless under very special conditions(no amount of smart contract code can solve this) . following this rule allows for more beneficial interactions among society members, following the general Dao guidelines would allow for more beneficial interaction among the harmony community was my intention. this general rules would apply to all funded Daos regardless of their utility and functionality in the community

sure , i honestly think no amount of tech will solve some of Daos core problems e.g ambition and greed. its only through a general way of interaction we can solve this .

I think you are right. I have been working on the same subject, not on the principles, but on the mechanism that effectively delivers and allows accepting written contracts so DAO members can come to consensus on the DAO principles in the traditional way.
I always envisioned it could work on a per DAO basis.
I mean, creating a general guideline for all DAOs is more hard than working with one DAO at a time.
However I support your proposal. I think it’s a good idea.