MichalJ

  • Sep 2, 2023
  • Joined May 16, 2023
  • Very nice initiative and a good step forward!

    Thinking of some dangers, how is the proposed setting robust against motivated attacks? Some services providing accounts to be associated with the Gitcoin Passport provide very low-quality verification of users (Discord, Google, Twitter, etc.), making Sybil resistance relatively limited. In that, I agree with jengajojo .

    With 800 voting wallets (last Klima DAO's votes), is the (currently) active community broad and big enough to defer such an attack? A quick calculation (with many assumptions) tells me that the vote of a community could be outweighed by a few (tens of) thousand $ in some extreme cases (massive exploit of associated accounts).

    Of course, since DAO votes happen off-chain, the likelihood of really bad outcomes is limited (barriers in the implementation) and I don’t see it likely that attackers would be members of the core team/large token holders (who have power now and showed no dishonesty) - so the risk is rather reputational (what will happen when the proposal is somewhere in the “grey zone” - not apparently dishonest but something not aligned with the Klima DAO's vision?). Perhaps it would be good to have also formal (not only informal) safeguards and not just a check-up after 6 months? jengajojo has nice suggestions, I believe.

    • It took me some time to get to the report, but I really like it. It is hard to comment on it since things I miss (e.g., a clear statement of what is the future state of decentralization we are heading to) are mentioned as the next steps. Perhaps - I would like to see more details related to "execution". For example, take 4.A (Governance) - what does it specifically mean that voting is legally binding (e.g., what are the consequences of not executing the vote)? Perhaps a link to more detail would help. Similarly in 4.D - the openness of the process is kind of clear to me (making pull requests) until it comes to code deployment (I am not a technology guy, so sorry for pontential misunderstanding in this area). In summary, it seems that those with executing power (i.e., gatekeepers) are in a much stronger position than the report acknowledges.

      However, take it only as an attempt to "find something" on the excellent report and contribute to it. Great job by the group!