Thinking about the Aragon Network and the jurisdiction service it will provide sparked a new idea.
Can the Aragon Network be used to provide Network-wide services that most DAOs will need? for example, think of a corporate website, instead of having it hosted on AWS, you can pay the Aragon Network a fee to host it for you as part of an Aragon Network service.
A DAO customer can simply publish a contract with some requirements for their website, and instead of judges you can have technical experts assigned to the contract for resolution, customer locks up what they are willing to pay for the hosting service as collateral, and that collateral is gradually released to the person/DAO doing the work based on uptime or on any other terms set on the contract. Refunds for downtime of the website could also be automatic (based on the uptime).
This will all tie up on the Aragon DAO dashboard so you can see all expenses related to the upkeep of the website and related work.
And on the technical expert side, this could even be a DAO running something like Espresso’s drive App:
There would be one backend per customer, and with some more development it could even be possible to share that single backend with a single customer/DAO.
Also, a percentage of the profits from the sales could be distributed over to ANT holders to further incentivize Aragon Network participation.
Of course this needs stuff to be developed but its just a conceptual idea right now
In this line of thinking you can keep adding services to the Aragon Network to make it more attractive for organizations to join the Network.
Absolutely, using the court mechanism for service based agreements makes a lot of sense. I think rather than having a portion of the amount in the agreement be moved from one to the other, it may make sense to instead have payment terms defined in the agreement such that the agreement is broken in the event of non-payment.
For example, if you have an agreement with a service provider to run a website at a cost of 100 dollars a month, you might put 100+dispute fee dollars in the agreement, but also make a 100 dollar payment each month to the provider, if you fail to make the payment the provider can create a dispute. On the flipside the provider may wish to provide some amount of funds as assurance for the terms of the agreement, perhaps a similar amount so that if the site goes down the customer has the ability to raise a dispute and be compensated for that months service fee.
Are you saying that the technical end of the deal (the party actually doing the work) should put in some collateral as a guarantee that the service will work? In my opinion this would hinder adoption since its a lot more risk for the person/DAO doing the work because they could end up doing the work and still lose the collateral.
I don’t think its necessary, but its an option that could be provided by the service provider and might be helpful especially in instances where the service provider has not established a reputation/track record.