Circa November 2018 Levi Samama and Shahar Larry published the Coalichain Whitepaper. Below is the first section of that whitepaper \[with minor edits] that deals with the context and background of governance of groups. Coalichain is dedicated to the idea of accountable and “liquid” governance of groups \[from a school’s PTA to countries]. It only stands to reason that the ideas developed and presented in a whitepaper for a web3 governance platform will be pertinent to any web3 DAO. We might publish other sections of the whitepaper here \[with or without modifications], as their relevance surfaces.

Stake-based governance is a terrible idea.

The “#. Governance -” set of papers describe the foundation for a new approach to governance. One that is designed with Orchestra DAO in mind, but that can be used by any other DAO or group. Since the task at hand is significant, and since we expect you to scrutinize our work, as you have done so very diligently in the past, we will do our best to be thorough and meticulous in securing our foundations. That means that we will start by laying out our assumptions, and only after delineate the specifics of Governance for DAOs. However, since we know that we humans are an impatient bunch, we will start with the bottom line here. 

Not all information is equal. It’s necessary that we agree on this. If by the end of this piece we do not, it’s probably not for you. You may believe that there is a God; you may think that capitalism is a superior economic system; you hopefully know that the earth is not flat. The first statement is a belief. The second is an opinion. The third is a fact. Perhaps a glossary for establishing a common language is where we should start.

All of our conscious actions emanate from two fundamental emotional drivers - Control and Belonging. Each of these two can be expressed as a want or a fear (angst); our need for control, or our fear of losing control, and our need for belonging, or our fear of being alone (alienation). 

Human understanding of economics isn’t great.

We’ve already introduced Orchestra in Orchestra — “The pretty obvious if you think about it accord”. We provided context and described the pain we want to address in An Indictment. The problem we are solving for is the insurmountable challenge web3 innovators and funders face when trying to promote and raise funds for / invest in new ventures. We stated our mission to help all interested parties in the Crypto/web3 innovation space to find each other on a level playing field. We talked about what Orchestra is and what its purpose is: “…a community of people working together towards a shared purpose…” which is “to drive high-impact, valuable, and sustainable web3 innovation.” We even philosophized about governance and emerging order as an engine for an orchestra that needs no conductor in Self Organizing Orchestra.

Tom and Joe bought two identical and adjacent plots of land. Tom is a well known mobster. Joe is just your regular…well…Joe. Anyway, Joe starts building a house on the plot. Tom is right behind him. Every time Joe builds something, Tom does the same. After a few months construction is done and the two houses stand side by side, identical in every way - from plumbing to shingles. A couple of years pass and Joe decides to sell the house. He puts up a “For Sale” sign with a price of 2 million dollars. Tom sees it and quickly also puts up a “For Sale” sign, only for 3 million dollars. Joe, confused, politely asks his mobster neighbor: “ Hey Tom, our houses are identical. you’ve copied every little detail from me. And now we’re selling and you are asking 50% more than me. How come?” Tom smiles and says, “yeah the houses are the same, but I don’t have a mobster for a neighbor…”

Imagine a class of NFTs that is subject to “decay” \[e.g., burnt]. Let’s call it “t½NFT”. The rationale for this new class of NFTs is the imitation of the physical world in which objects such as books or coins erode over time and become more scarce.