I’m working with Berty , an open source, non-profit project whose goal is to enable secure, privacy-preserving and censorship-resistant p2p communications.
As we get closer to the public release of our protocol and our consumer app, the concern arises of protecting the core team and the project itself from potential pressures or attempts to damage the project.
Our general idea is to gradually decentralize the project so that critical processes (such as the release process) are controlled by a large community rather than a small number of people. Obviously, being open source provides some guarantee that if the core team is incapacitated, anyone can take over the code and keep on delivering new versions. But we sense that it’s not enough, and that a further level of decentralization might better protect Berty, using a combination of decentralized tech and decentralized governance mechanisms.
One essential element of this “decentralize to protect” strategy is a decentralized infrastructure for governance and organizational processes, hence this post and our interest in Aragon. We would like to understand better how we could use Aragon to that end in the future, not only for voting on releases but also for managing groups of stakeholders, triggering code building and automating other off-chain operations, leveraging a decentralized court, or at a later stage managing a fund for bounties.
Here is more information about the decentralization project in general, about the core processes of a minimal DAO, and about Berty as a protocol . We would love to engage with the Aragon team and community, and get some initial feedback about what we’re trying to achieve.