---
###### tags: `Universe Guide`
---

# Notes on Open-Source, Collectively-Owned Lore

### Overview

A braindump on a half-baked scheme to identify a new tool (?) for changing canonical lore.

### Application

#### RaidGuild

RaidGuild's meme driven development of our roadmap and in response to [a conversation happening right now](https://discord.com/channels/684227450204323876/915164434870173696/925379195884957716) where a cohort apprentice is inquiring about "the 10 year plan" for the guild.

#### DAOhaus

DAOhaus writing a constitution document to reflect their core principles in a manner that reflects the community-first ethos informing a building [techne](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techne) of integrity and regenerative cryptoeconomics.

#### GitcoinDAO

GitcoinDAO's *Metaverse Coordinators* group - via a commission to RaidGuild - to produce a comic book in their [Anon vs Moloch](https://store.gitcoin.co/products/ethereum-vs-moloch-comic-book) series that has expanded to included a foundational framework of a *Universe Guide* reminiscient of [the Cellarius Universe Guide produced by ConsenSys](https://bits.owocki.com/wbu8Y5d7).

### Goal

- To articulate the problem space in sufficient detail to entice the communities to get involved according to their interest, investment, and specialty.
- Initiate a proposal for bringing this non-technical+technical collab to EthDenver to hack on.

### Problem

- We have so many tools for simultaneous multiplayer collaboration in writing, design, project management, etc., but they are all Web 2.0.
- We utilize HackMD, GoogleDrive, Github, Notion, ClickUp, Discord, Figma, Miro, etc., for creating repositories and project management of complex concepts across teams, but these are dependent upon a core group of contributors for executing changes. The internal hierarchy of the tools defines roles that are subbordinate to others, administrative vs contributor privileges, implying a centralized hierarchy.
- Most importantly, none of these tools integrate into the Web3-DAO mechanics for [collective action taking.](https://twitter.com/tracheopteryx/status/1455582776401432580)

### Considerations

- [Vitalik's recent call to explore governance mechanisms beyond token-based voting.](https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/08/16/voting3.html)
- How to conceptualize actions of the DAO ecosystem as exercising subjective/creative freedoms within a network of collaborators, beyond the pure economic incentives.
- How to identify, propose, submit, review, vote upon, and merge **canonical changes of core community principles** to reflect the ever-changing membership of a DAO.

### Hypothesis - Towards Potential Solutions

- Every time a PR is made in a document it might trigger a governance event.
- If there are governance tokens minted to gate access to contributors, how will they interface with existing crypto markets to anticipate and avoid malicious actors mining the submission process for selfish gain, ie: to avoid the perverse incentives?
- The quality of content might be decided upon and defended collectively.
- More significantly, who and how do we decide the mutable and immutable elements? How is the [canon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_(fiction)) of a communities lore changed? Is it hard forked, soft forked, or designed to remain [infinitely composable](https://blog.aragon.org/what-is-composability/#:~:text=Composability%20is%20the%20general%20ability,connect%20to%20every%20other%20piece.)?
- If there are layers of canon, how is layer 0 created in anticipation of the supplemental layers in consideration of the [founders effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect) dilemma? How do the upper layers interact with the foundational layer and how are decisions made on each layer?

### Supplemental Research

- The evolution of DAOs very generally
- How decisions are made amongst the Ethereum core developers. Reference: [The Infinite Machine by Camila Russo](https://www.harpercollins.com/products/the-infinite-machine-camila-russo?variant=32123333836834)
- Case studies:
- The DAO hack and ontogenesis of Eth Classic?
- MakerDAO
- Yearn
- MC as a fork of MolochDAO
- HeroDAO (focused on comics)
- BoilerDAO (experiment in collective narrative by Boilerrat)
- GitcoinDAO's progressive decentralization work stream
- The excellent work that Spencer et al have contributed to documenting the internal workings of DAOhaus: CCO article, summoning of Uberhaus, etc.

### Economic Considerations

- Will revenue/profits be generated? How? If so, let's ensure that they flow back into the builders and any additional proceeds are funneled back into public goods development in a fair, equitable, sustainable, transparent way.
- If tokens are minted for contributors, to fork a document, etc., how are the sales handled?

### DAO Specifics

#### RaidGuild

- General ethos is YOLO! This has worked well up until now (and arguably still is). Meme-driven development workshops on the roadmap have been fun and exciting.
- The problem is the content generated is difficult to track, extract, and extrapolate for those that were not present during the ideation session.
- Effect seems to be a hazy influence upon those that participated, who then go out to spread the memes individually. *This is a perfect instance of Moloch living within language! We share in an experience and feel aligned on our core values, but then interpret them differently which breeds confusion and gradually misalignment due to the subjective nature of the amorphous definitions.*
- Alternatively, the document sits there and is never addressed again except through loose reference.
- New members are interested in interacting with a document that they can align with. RG members question the importance of this for their purposes, but are also increasingly interested in supporting internal education initiatives.
- We dogfood our own processes as a community of builders, so if anyone is going to build this functionality it's probably going to be RaidGuild! How might this interface with [Dekan's recent prompt to create a new RIP stream that's not just for internal RG improvements but focuses upon public goods initiatives](https://hackmd.io/@Dekan/SyqiL4LqY)?

#### DAOhaus
- e2t and TW have been rigorously discussing these concepts all week. The tools we use are not great for tracking the complexity of the problems, leading to low retention, low engagement, ideas too convoluted to discuss in meetings, changes that are too complex to unpack in the linear format of commenting or threads.
- How do we track the changes in collective contributions and ensure that the whole community can find a way to interact with the conversation as a united chorus of voices aligned behind a common cause?
- I believe [e2t's *Vision and Values* workshop in three parts](https://discord.com/channels/709210493549674598/918216537851199618/928404941146566746) will be invaluable and productive for drilling down into the specific core principles of the community. There's an opportunity to learn from the mechanics of the workshop that might inform the way the resulting document is ultimately written and maintained by the community. ie:
- After the document is served, how does the community remain involved in the continuous updating of the constitution as a living document that represents a living community?
- What are the mutable and immutable parts?
- Is the document forkable or composable?
- Who makes the decisions of what the core principles are? The founders? War Camp? DAOs of Uberhaus?
- The founders effect might be considered in the drafting in the document.

##### Note on the Hackathon Project
Considering the use cases of RaidGuild and DAOhaus and that these two communities share so many aligned values and members, this seems like an excellent impetus for the DAOs to collaborate in bringing this project to the EthDenver hackathon. TW volunteers. [We might recruit a smart contract dev, UI designer, and DAO specialist to contribute their skillz, among other potential roles.](https://hackmd.io/f06LM3Q6Tj6aNecNRf3QZg)

#### GitcoinDAO
- TW, plor, and DAO Jones are currently on a raid to produce the third comic book of the *Anon vs Moloch* series. Another deliverable of the project is to serve a foundational *Universe Guide* for open-source contributions as a legacy for future project teams.
- Kevin Owocki is preparing to release a publication on regenerative cryptoeconomics utilizing an ingenious scheme to open-source and decentralize the project.
- Edition 0 is written by Kevin to get the party started.
- 133 governance tokens will be sold, allowing 133 contributors an opportunity to fork the original content. Each token holder can create their own tokens or basically handle the content however they want. All proceeds go to the Gitcoin grants matching pool.
- The aspiration is that all of the forked content will coexist with edition 0 to organically expand the lore through the whole community. "All of the forks will compete with each other for legitimacy of telling the story of regenerative cryptoeconomics."
- This raises some interesting questions (that Kevin might have clarity on, but are wonderfully puzzling for me atm).
- How will the canon be updated, if at all? How will the layers/opinions/interpretations/forks of the canon reference back to edition 0?
- Will the community align behind the whole project or behind a single fork to form factions?
- Will the token be sold to the GitcoinDAO community? To a community of DeFi founders/influencers? Or on an open market where money/degen values might influence the governance of the project?
- Will edition 0 be released? As a legendary rarity version of the project followed by derivitatives? How will the relations be editions be received and maintained by the community?
- Is this hard forking, soft forking, or equivalent to Ethereum layer scaling that references down to a foundational layer? (Forgive my limited understanding of the Ethereum blockchain on this point, please correct me if I'm wrong).
- Will there be 133 layers on top of edition 0 that reference down to the core code base (in this sense a code of ethics or community values), so that contradictory core principles might be operating on other layers?
- Might changes to the canon be made destructively - not in a pejorative sense, but in changing the core principles themselves without maintaining the tracked procession of PRs and merges?
- All of this information will feed back into the *Universe Guide* for the project to form an open-source framework for producing collectively-owned IP that changes through Web3-DAO tooling.