I assumed that were referring to a direct integration where you would provide a proof and it would automatically grant membership. (Which would be really cool for some cases, but would also introduce a lot of technical complexity).
But it seems like you are just suggesting they prove that they actually own their social accounts and associate that with a specific address. I think this is a good idea to include in the process, though I think it might make more sense to use keybase. We could create a cooperative team/channel and users can request to be added there (solves a communication issue for the cooperative as well, and links an applicate to github/twitter at least). Linking forum/aragon chat accounts would be a bit trickier, but could be relatively easy to prove socially through DMs on keybase.
Is that not apparent by what was already mentioned in this thread and previous threads?
I don’t see as this Aragon Cooperative as completely mimicking a traditional cooperative business, but maybe it’s more like a “Collective” of individuals that participate in the Aragon ecosystem. They want to go beyond forum.aragon.org, aragon.chat, or github for collaboration – they want to use Aragon the platform to collaborate, signal, and use their collective intelligence to figure out how best to bring the vision to life.
Like I think the Survey app is a great tool, and it would be great to use it more, and get a combination of an ANT weighted signal, and also more of a “cooperative”/community signal. We will all gain better insights, especially if people choose to opt-in to the cooperative.
@Julian, as far as my experience in cooperatives: we use the tool Loomio.org and do all of our voting and discussion on there. We don’t just use Yes/No proposals, but also the polls and dot voting sometimes too. We also use their “check” feature where people can opt-in to working on some project for example.
I mean we talk to each other about all major decisions and typically come to consensus on what our plans are as a business, but our voting parameters are actually set to 34% quorum and 75% approval of those that participate. We have very rarely had a proposal pass that got a “no” vote.
I think being part of a cooperative business is really rewarding, you learn how to cooperate more and make sacrifices and think of the collective cause over your individual concerns.
But this is quite different than the Aragon Cooperative/(Collective?)…
That would be really cool! but my first version wasn’t that ambitious I just meant some way for people to prove they own their accounts, and when they try and register for the cooperative the first time a simple application request is created so that some reviewer can approve.
Keybase could work as well, but probably you will need to develop more tooling to arrive at the same level of integration Blockstack would provide today. Blockstack already has a discourse plugin, keybase doesn’t. Keybase does provide a dedicated communication channel which is nice and something not easily done with blockstack (unless you use a separate blockstack based app like Stealthy https://www.stealthy.im/ ).
Each solution has its tradeoffs so it will probably take additional research to arrive at which tools to use.
But why would that have to be?
All the issues you spell out make much sense - bridging the gap between discussion and action appears a highly useful initiative, and I agree you’ve pinpointed a gap (a chasm tbh).
So these ‘actants’ (still quietly pushing this terminology:) may on occasion signal ground-level activist intent in a more formal representation (than through transitory dialogue) – discussionary milestones
(kinda thinking aloud here)
Maybe I dindn’t exprese myselve very well Yalda, sorry about that, I totally understand and agree with the statement you share about cooperatives:
but having thought this cooperative proposal was meant to replace the current ANT governance model (now I understand it doesn’t), just wanted to explain why I wouldn’t fit with Aragon, as generally, a Cooperative is purposed to defend common rights and privileges over something (like Ostrom’s governance over the commons proposals), while an organization purposed to continuos development and positioning ourself as a reference in the raising governance SW industry, I think a meritocratic model, or even a (pseudo, or not) plutocratic model could fit better.
Having said so, and having clear that this Aragon Cooperative purpose
you can count on me to be part of this initiative!
Definitely, Early on it’s easy to know everyone who is a part of it, but as it grows, there would need to be a well thought out method for this.
We are doing something like this within Giveth, and I promise, as the idea sits an marinates, sooooo much stuff comes up that requires a lot of thought and documentation. For instance… on-boarding rules are one thing… but what about off boarding? Is there a way to be kicked out?
I’m really excited about the idea of the Aragon Coop and will definitely help make it happen.
Hey everyone, just read the thread so I’m late to the party! As I’m just getting started in really knowing Aragon my contribution will remain high level and maybe not technically sound.
My main feeling is that the Cooperative and the Bounty DAO should work closely together or even be a single app. This would be a great place for community members and contributors to meet, interact and grow.
As a community member, I have been learning about Aragon through different platforms: Aragon chat, forum, Github, Reddit, Twitter etc… overall the breadth of knowledge and "contact surface” with the project is quite large. This works well for motivated people with long term goals but is less appealing to the average community member who may want to do a smaller more punctual contribution.
In this regard, the Cooperative+Bounty DAO app would be the go-to place for community members to get their hands dirty on concrete focused bounty tasks/votes/discussions.
In the short term, I think the Cooperative outlined by @lkngtn is a great start. In the medium term maybe it makes sense to build a dedicated Cooperative+bounty DAO app. On the app community members could access their personal dashboard which would include features: community chat, voting & surveys, open bounty proposals, ongoing proposals, list of active members…
Here too I agree with these settings for launching the cooperative experiment quickly. For the longer term, however, shouldn’t it be easier to be ‘part’ of the community and get a “read access” to the Cooperative? In this case, committees and membership approval mechanisms would be used only later, to grant additional rights to people that are already members of the cooperative.
Eventually, the Cooperative+Bounty DAO may have a role to play as a point of contact for community members and contributors. This would help increase involvement, contributions and participation in the network’s governance process.
Overall super excited to see an Aragon Cooperative soon and to help make it happen if needed!
Super interesting thread ! thanks all
My humble view, as part of the 99.8% mass who follow and don’t vote. I deliberately delegated my vote to the wise people who are involved enough to have informed opinions. I don’t see a problem with that and I would not support a solution for a non existing problem (aka a problem that I don’t understand).
Decentralization <> Democracy. A self inflicted Despotism is cool too, if it is decentralized
Currently membership is via Keybase and Github, though we are aware this situation is perhaps not optimal - we also communicate as a group on Keybase - current membership is around 30’ish people.
After an initial flurry of excitement a couple of months ago, the coop has been a little quiet lately - we intend to change that over the next few months. Personally I think we have an important role to play - not only within the Aragon ecosystem but more widely as an active example to and across the ‘crypto-sphere’, that a human-centric approach to DAO governance is not an oxymoron.
We’re also interested in expanding cooperativism: this is very much a Cooperative DAO; and no one knows what they are as of yet - we get to find out (& perhaps fail but so what, even that would be useful in terms of knowledge, regarding contemporary approaches to governance).
But that’s what makes it interesting, we all have our own reasons and desires to take part and actively make this work.