(Deprecated) HSP-006: House of Stake - Mission, Vision & Values

House of Stake Proposals
21

I support the MVV.

I also like the clear stance that AI should help people, not take over decision making. Which is also an indication that the direction of HoS will stay people driven.

Overall, it aligns with the kind of inclusive and balanced community we need in the eco system .

A job weldone

2 Likes
22

I voted in favor of this proposal.

Having an community edified MVV is needed for our next steps of building this DAO and provides the foundation of what we stand for. I agree with some other comments that we should revisit this in the future, but my recommendation is to allow the community find it’s voice and then review if these MVV’s are still relevant after at least a year from now. As the community grows, so will the voices, experiences and opinions of this community and having the flexibility to review on a semi-regular basis (maybe in a CCC in the future) to ensure that all it’s points are still important to the community.

1 Like
23

We are aligned with most of the proposed texts as we appreciate all the works done by @HackHumanity team and community members who have contributed to the MVV through co-creation workshops. However, we believe the Vision and Mission are missing a critical component for its purpose; “what to govern?” We believe they have focused too much on “how” (mainly too much on the AI usage), which would make them obsolete in a few years. We believe the Mission and Vision should include “what”, which should be NEAR Protocols, therefore we vote against this proposal at its “sensing” phase.

24

Personally, I found very interesting and important the part that concerns the “Adaptive Governance and Experimentation with Safety”! Why? Because it means creating a system that is flexible and open to try new ideas but in a way that also protects the community and the network. I believe that it can balance the innovation with caution, allowing the governance model to learn, adjust and evolve as circumstances change!

4 Likes
25

I’m comfortable voting FOR after joining the community call to further refine some the suggestions. This is an evolving agreement that we can iterate on over time - this version is a solid start.

3 Likes
26

I don’t agree with the vision, my personal vision is a fast and reliable blockchain for user adoption and DeFi. Not proposing this to be the general vision of everyone, but I don’t feel like everyone needs to have the same vision, we’re all different people with different values and goals on near, NF has chosen endorsed delegates who are builders, traders, businesses, people interested in defi, ai, etc., pretty sure they wanted all communities to be represented, not just AI.

I don’t agree with the mission, why in the world would the community be AI-augmented, we already have 40 million active agents (“users”) which didn’t help one bit, get this out of my screen. My mission is $NEAR price, trading volume, DeFi TVL.

I don’t agree with the following points of values:

  • 1: With and for the community, augmented by community-aligned AI. What “community” is this? Intear community is token traders who probably don’t want to be augmented by AI. Hot community wants TGE. Pumpopoly community wants yield on their virtual real estate. Does house of stake have its own community? Only a very small one, governance people interested in governance things, who don’t account for even 0.0001% of all active near users. There is no “the community” in 2025, blockchains are big networks, and even if there was, it would probably not want to be augmented
  • 6: Some stakeholders are completely talentless people who can’t do anything useful, I think “All stakeholders — large and small — must have meaningful ways to engage in governance” is just mockery of skill. Imagine some random guy who joins near and asks how he can contribute, despite being bad at absolutely everything, but owns 3.5 NEAR. If you refuse, he claims that you don’t respect this value. If that’s not what you were expecting, please rephrase this before the actual non-sensing HSP. All values definitions can be used against you
  • 8: Get AI out of it, humans who run AI should be fully responsible for their use of AI, as if it’s their own work. If someone runs a wild AI that does something stupid, the human who is running that AI should be treated as someone who did something stupid
  • 9: I don’t really understand what you meant, grammar is hard, but I refuse to acknowledge AI as a powerful enabler, if I’m reading that right

Overall, I feel like AI is mentioned 20 times more than it should’ve been. I get that near foundation desperately wants to have AI everywhere, but near is not an ecosystem where AI is valued as much by “the community” as NF, I’m not aware of any AI projects in the ecosystem that have more than let’s say 5 DAU, other than maybe near ai’s official private chat, which only launched this month, and maybe LNC which gives points for use of their free AI and is not really a commercial project.

2 Likes
27

Staying active like this is such a strong motivation — love the dedication and energy

1 Like