[Community Discussion] Achievements & Problems & Further Plan

I generally agree with you, but disagree with this particular sentence. imho NEAR has no goals related to sustainability of DAOs, that is, the only thing that matters is providing value to the ecosystem; NF goal is to give out all their tokens, so, in the long term, (when funds from NF do not exist) doesn’t really matter if a specific DAO continues do exist or not, as long as the ecosystem is alive and well, with billions of users and of entities building on top of it.

What might exist is the assumption that sustainable DAOs will be able to continue existing after funds cease to exist, and are therefore ‘more interesting’ to fund for the moment.

What also might exist is a secondary assumption that DAOs that look to become sustainable are ‘more serious’ and do not want to live of funds. This is probably a useful way of looking at it (and that is why I agree with you that we should look at sustainability), but it’s not the only metric, otherwise zero entities would remain. Since there is no user base for web3 on a larger scale, and certainly not on NEAR (for example the NFT market moves only 4000$ a day), we all need to add other metrics to the discussion.

Also imho, if you fund a DAO that has a proven revenue model outside of web3 and no intentions of applying that model on web3 (for example using NEAR tokens instead of fiat) you are only dissipating $ from web3 into non-web3, i.e. money from NF to pay for non-N-related projects. I disagree that that is good for our community, at least as a core activity. A certain amount of funds going into non-web3 is normal, as long as it builds community, for example, and is a small % of the total.

If you have a DAO that can stand on its own, and plus bring their model and implement it on web3 and NEAR Protocol, well, that’s just awesome! More of that and we all grow, because that is bringing users, use-cases, etc.

9 Likes

@Romanus i totally agree with you, new Daos should be giving an opportunity to grow, build and prove themselves. As much as i can see here these new daos are really making good efforts and contributions as regards to their objectives, checking from their social media engagements and contributions here in the ecosystem i think new daos should be well considered aswell.

7 Likes

This effort only makes sense if the goal is to on-board much more people and many more DAOs, agree with you.

4 Likes

Hello @Paul and @frnvpr
continuing here, I’d like to give 2 more points about this, that could help us thinking more collaborative and less competitive

How can we create different mecanisms to change the game? Is it possible?
I think that Creatives DAO, in power of this information about how DAOs are growing, could create special projects building bridges interDAOs, in order to help them growing together. Like a meta-curation, or something alike…
So the DAOs with highest tiers could be stimulated to create proposals, or projects to other DAOs that need support in growing - It can work in a win-win game, as the hole community could grow together but in their own time, and having support for this.
It can work in a sustainable way, and also help us seeing each other to get inspired in creating collective and collaborative projects… does it make sense?
something in this direction:

and also about the categories, think it’s a good start,

maybe we can create a sheet mapping all DAOs, so we can understand better these categories, and also include interdisciplinary as a category… just thinking here…

at last, about education, it’s a little difficult for me to separate art and education sometimes. I think that there are points of intersection that Creatives DAO could be aware, and this is something we can build together

Keep reading all here. Thank you for this incredible and productive discussion

11 Likes

this might be a solution, just wondering if ‘art’ is interdisciplinary enough. Lookiing at the categories, my impression is that

  • music is ± easy to understand and has many DAOs under its umbrella.
  • Film is ± easy to understand, but has few DAOs under its umbrella; maybe it should be film + audiovisual? Or even photography.
  • Culture is, for me, the hardest, because In my professional life I consider culture to be really different from art, and therefore I am just not sure how to categorize it. I am assuming most DAOs that look for integration of various Peoples from around the world would fall in this category, and that’s why I tagged @adrianseneca , but I may be completely wrong about this.
  • Art includes many disciplines, like painting, sculpture, architecture (historically), literature, music, cinema, and theater, and we can add photography, VR, generative art, sound-art, performance art and many others. Let’s say we remove music from this list (its own category), cinema (its own category=film), it’s still a big field. How much of the DAOs are here represented? A large %? If yes, then re-working the categories might be useful.

For example:

  • Music and Theater
  • Film, Photography, generative-art and VR
  • Art (or maybe visual arts?)
  • Culture (crafts?)

A list like this removes Design and maybe some other relevant ‘creative’ activities from the equation, for example. I don’t consider Design art, but certainly the ecosystem would benefit from us using a ‘larger’ than normal filter. I’m also not sure how to split generative art and VR from the general art category, because most serious artists who work with those mediums will consider themselves ‘artists’, not ‘digital artists’, but maybe assuming the artificallity of these categories is something we have to do.

Maybe adding one category would be useful, like @ritamaria proposed:

  • Music and Theater
  • Film, Photography, generative-art and VR
  • Visual Arts
  • Culture
  • Interdisciplinary projects

or even

  • Music and Theater
  • Film, Photography, generative-art and VR
  • Visual Arts
  • Literature and Culture
  • Interdisciplinary projects

or even

  • Music and Theater
  • Film, Photography, generative-art and VR
  • Visual Arts
  • Culture
  • Literature and Interdisciplinary projects

or just adding 2 extra categories

  • Music and Theater
  • Film, Photography, generative-art and VR
  • Visual Arts
  • Culture
  • Literature and theory
  • Interdisciplinary projects

Caps can even be different considering one category might have 20 DAOs and another 5 DAOs.

Honestly, the community should try to arrive at the ‘best possible’ categorization so that the moderators can have something they can work with.

14 Likes

I find it interesting as well since we already have some DAOs doing interdisciplinary projects.

That’s definitely one of the purposes of this post, thank you for some examples here. Based on what already have on Creatives DAO & in relation to the number of DAOs in each group, I personally go for this:

10 Likes

Hi @Paul – Thank you for posting this.

Yesterday, our Creatives weekly talk on Telegram turned into an amazing 2-hour conversation with people from around the world sharing ideas to move forward. We had a really insightful, collaborative conversation as working artists and creatives.

I think it’s fair to say that the consensus was that we need a much better sense – in very concrete terms – of best practices and case studies from around the world to give truly strategic responses to this proposal here.

In order to plan for sustainability, we really need to know what’s working, what’s “selling”, and what is trending as investment needs.

Therefore we are having a 2-hour Zoom THINK TANK to support the overarching goals of the emerging NDC, NF funding, and ecosystem growth. (The call is this Thursday – 9am US Time – link below for more info)

PLEASE come to listen and share, and let us know if there are other people and DAOs from around the world that should attend, or please invite them. If the report you folks developed for your meeting with the mods would support this call, please let us know.

Thank you!

8 Likes

Thank you @sarahkornfeld, however, in my humble opinion - Creatives DAO should not be affiliated with NDC. We should implement our own processes, guidelines and a plan, this is the goal of this proposal.

It’s good to see here such a huge community engagement, ideas, observations and constructive criticism, moreover, much more is welcomed, as feedback left here will be used to fine tune the proposal.

6 Likes

While I agree with checking what already works on other ecosystems and aplying that, I also agree that affiliating this with the NDC and adding unecessary layers to this discussion might have the opposite effect of what is intended.

That does not mean, however, that currents mods should overlook any contributions coming from the zoom meeting @sarahkornfeld is preparing - that seems a lovely idea.

For example, this current discussion should not be super worried with ‘best practices’ in terms of moderating - that can be discussed in the NDC context and then applied here. It should, however, be super focused on the governance model to apply to the Creatives DAO - something the NDC is not interested at the moment, since it is pursuing an altogether different model.

Imho there is less overlap than it might seem at first hand, at least for this stage of the discussion.

NDC might overtake all other forms of funding in the NEAR ecosystem, but until that happens, a model for the Creatives DAO has to be worked on.

5 Likes

Hi there @frnvpr and @Paul

Thanks for the support. We’re not meeting to discuss best practices for moderation, but the actual work itself.

At the end of the day, any organization needs to know what is working, growing and needs investment – if it’s Creatives DAO or Marketing DAO, or the NDC. That seems to be the priority – in other words, how can you segment or set growth plans without knowing what is happening and be able to communicate it clearly?

Would it be possible for you to share the research from the request you sent out to all those who have been funded and share it with the community here? Sure this would be very helpful to see how we are growing, and what people are doing.

At the end of the day, Rising DAO is here to research, and create content and media about the work of artists, creative technologists, and others here on the chain. So, our mandate is to listen, learn and share. This seems crucial right now, and it would be great to have any supportive information you have.

5 Likes

hello hello, happy to support (with my enthusiasm, since I’m not a moderator) any proposals that improve the ecosystem, and I have seen you invested in working towards better models, so it’s a pleasure to talk to you directly.

I am not sure that information is lacking, what seems to have changed is NF’s involvement. Contrary to the NDC, which aims to be the next iteration of large scale NF funding, the Creatives DAO has a much simpler model: it basically asks for a Grant from NF (or has an agreement of working as a Vertical, but it’s the same logic) and applies that in order to grow the Creatives ecosystem. The problem the current mods/NF are facing is not insufficient growth, is too much growth ‘outside’ of let’s say, regulation.

That is why (among other things, namely the NDC being the 4th or 5th iteration of an effort to establish a better funding channel in the wider ecosystem; so it is just a ‘possible next structure’, and not the actual structure the creatives DAO should follow) I think these are 2 different issues, even if there is knowledge to be shared among everyone, for sure.

Having so many people already involved with the NDC, and because it’s a ‘bigger picture issue’, I do believe that if current moderators get sucked into that conversation they will overlook the need, requested by NF, of restructuring the Creatives DAO funding model. NDC has no specific time frame (even if it’s needed for yesterday), in the sense that it is, from the start, a future-model. Creatives DAO is a current-model put on hold, which means its urgency is much more severe.

7 Likes

I think the issue here is really adding as much value, as much insight and as much forward thinking as possible.

Also, I think the NDC is more than an iteration of funding – it’s a fundamental evolution of governance and trust. So, I’m not sure why Creatives should be distant from it? Quite the opposite, we need to be very active in sharing what we have learned and what our value is (financially and on an innovation level).

Sorry if I am not understanding this point.

8 Likes

That is always the case and I agree.

I’ll try to make my point in a cleaner way, then.

  1. Everyone in the ecosystem should be looking at the NDC and collaborating there, individuals from DAOs in the creative ecosystem included.

  2. However, imho, the Creatives DAO moderators have a separate, and for them more urgent task, of delivering a working model until the 26th of October. That was requested by NF and every DAO in the creatives ecosystem is waiting for them to do so.

  3. That model should take into account opinions from interested parties, but should avoid unecessary complexity that will prevent them from succeeding (IF they feel that complexity is detrimental to the goal, ofc. I do feel that way).

  4. If the NDC works out the Creatives DAO might be swallowed, let’s say, but that is, atm, speculation.

extra

  1. NDC is a really complex model a long way from presenting a working model (my opinion). While one might feel that is the most important task right now, other segments of the ecosystem cannot stop and wait. I am sure people can work on both things at the same time, but I completely understand if moderators want to get this one thing right; plus, they are being paid to do it, contrary to what is happening in the NDC.

Having said that, ofc its the moderators prerrogative looking or not looking at speficic pools of ideas, and ofc each community member engages with whatever feels right for them. My point is specifically about my engagement (I also follow what is happening in the NDC) and the point @Paul made, which to me makes sense.

8 Likes
  1. Everyone in the ecosystem should be looking at the NDC and collaborating there, individuals from DAOs in the creative ecosystem included.

Absolutely

  1. However, imho, the Creatives DAO moderators have a separate, and for them more urgent task, of delivering a working model until the 26th of October. That was requested by NF and every DAO in the creatives ecosystem is waiting for them to do so.

I believe we are trying to support that process. Yet again, I have no insights into the content they collected. So, it would be helpful to see it. Also, the tiered system needs more data – because some people could be very productive year 1 and may ADD to the community and be worth investing into – so how did that number arrive? (Just one example)

  1. That model should take into account opinions from interested parties, but should avoid unecessary complexity that will prevent them from succeeding (IF they feel that complexity is detrimental to the goal, ofc. I do feel that way).

I still don’t understand why knowing what is being created, what is selling and where we need investment is complex? That’s key for marketing, planning and growth.

  1. If the NDC works out the Creatives DAO might be swallowed, let’s say, but that is, atm, speculation.

The blockchain is an ever-evolving system, and I think the word “swallowed” is a bit extreme – the NDC is a community-led process, so it’s not coming from anywhere but within. See what I mean?

3 Likes

This is the thinking behind the tiers – yet can you share the data that was collected from ALL the DAOS (describing their work)?

Thank you, @Paul!

2 Likes

It’s up to them, ultimately, and they have to see if they have the time for it all. Other than that, no discussion from me. I have stated that it’s positive if they are able to get info from the NDC discussions. :+1: But do you agree it’s a different process? If yes, than we are just talking in circles and we might agree on everything. If not, then we’ll just agree to disagree.

I see what you mean, and the word swallowed wasn’t supposed to be negative. imho it’s a good thing if NDC works out as intended and is able to ‘swallow’ other funding systems, then made obsolete or at least antiquated.

However, going back to the first point, the moderators have a specific job to do; if they are able to engage with different proposals and discussion groups, etc, good for them and good for us; if they are not able to process that much information and deliver a working model by the 26th that both respects the community needs and NF presented goals, than it’s theirs (and ours) failure.

if everyone here is able to work on both models, cross the info and opinions, etc, I think that would be absolutely phenomenal.

3 Likes

Thanks much!

We agree on the NDC – which is great. I I really appreciate your reponses.

I personally don’t think the creative community as a whole will fail in this context – it’s the mods role to provide a response, and we’re actively responding and asking for some specific information here. The moderators need to represent our ideas and questions, insights, and best practices to give an informed report. I hope they will provide support and that’s why we have set up a ZOOM call on Thursday which is coming from the community call we had yesterday.

Onward!

2 Likes

This proposal was created based on overall Mods experience in web3. What kind of data are you interested in? At the beginning of the proposal you can check the insight prepared based on the collected and what’s more important - available data.

Please be also aware that this proposal puts Creatives DAO as a public good, if we want to have a different direction of Creatives, we should have a separate topic - @Cryptonaut is working on the second proposal.

Next steps will be discussed directly with NF, once we’ll have fine tuned proposals.

5 Likes

Hey @Paul

Thanks much. We are trying to pull together:

  • Best practices regionally in the creative space
  • Legal learnings
  • NFT Innovation
  • Social innovation learnings

Different regions will have insights and timing for all their projects - past and future plans. We want to see how we can learn from each other, inform collaboration and build on our desire to grow all together.

So, the plans you’ve provided are being built from your insights. And, also, your team asked us to fill out an excel that explained more about what we were doing – numbers of councils, years here, etc. That’s what would be useful to see. We want to be sure our data is as informed as possible – So, if this is all the data then I still think we are missing some insights - PARTICULARLY if it’s for Public Good.

The effort here is to capture data and narrative around the project and growth around the world. Our thought is that those learnings could be VERY valuable for identifying not only trends in creative projects/products but also growth and plans for it.

Without this I don’t really understand how the mods are evaluating these plans (I do for Sahil because he’s looking at how we can self-sustain, and that’s built on actual financial models on-chain and off) yet, if we don’t know WHAT is “popping” regionally, sales of NFTs, funding, and external-investment, as well as community engagement how can we know what’s the right segments, or “gates” to set for funding?

Again, I REALLY don’t want to run us in a circle, though I just don’t see how we jump this phase. Though honestly, it seems we need a very comprehensive proposal for NF to evaluate, and these metrics don’t feel totally supported (at least to me, yet).

Best!

6 Likes

Can you ellaborate a bit more on this please?

1 Like