---
# System prepended metadata

title: DAOs vs. Multi-Sig - Blog Post

---

---
tags:Rangers, Posts
---

# DAOs vs. Multi-Sig - Blog Post

**NOTES from War Camp:**

"Multi-Sig with Rage Quit"

small group coordinates really well - but includes flexibility - 

impossible to rug-pull

## Pros & Cons

### DAO
    
- implicitly permissioned via shares
-  metatransactions?
- future ability to yield farm with locked funds
- tributes force new members to at least value-align with rest of dao since they now have skin in the game.
- joining and tributing is seamless

#### Pros


#### Cons

### Multi-Sig

- explicitly permissioned via votes on configs
    - configuration can be brittle and the multisig can possible be borked if signer turnover is a significant aspect of use. Conversely, the wallet could be under-permissioned (too few signers) and  malicious plurality might take off with funds if not enought people are paying attention
- current ability to yield farm with locked funds
- no explicit aspect of "skin in the game when becoming a signer"
- joining and tributing is not seamless and not trustless
#### Pros
- great for small teams that need to move fast 2-of-m or 3-of-m (db)
- no voting periods can make governance fast(db)
#### Cons
- no 'votes' a small team of directors are trusted to execute the will of the majority, through off chain polling
- meteor strike could take out signers
- required forum of m-of-n votes can be hard to reach, expensive and much overhead (db)
- 1 vote per person - weighted voting can be good in meritocracy and plutocracy (db) 

### Multisig with benefits 
light weight dao with no quorum


