MAY 20189to build a new blockchain network or an application on top of ex-isting ones. They build libraries, MVPs, an ERC20 token, build up a community and successfully do an ICO.But what happens next? Who has the authority to call the shots on how the product is being devel-oped, or most importantly, wheth-er it is being developed as prom-ised? Under what circumstances are escape lanes (get-out/cessation clauses) triggered,and who can in-voke them? Who takes strategy and tactical decisions?To answer these questions, dif-ferent models of `on-chain' and `off-chain' governance models have been tried at the platform level (e.g. Ethe-reum, Tezos, Lisk), but it is hard to believe that anyone of these are suc-cessful yet. Interestingly, not much has been tried at the decentralized application (dApp) level. Just like identity management, dApps do re-alize the importance of governance but it is unfair to expect them to create their own governance frame-works, while they are still building their core business.Of the People, By the People and For the PeopleWithin a year of working in this space, I realized that just like Gov-ernments, blockchain networks that are of the people, by the people and for the people, shall not perish from the earth. Rest will capsize.The real intent behind this tech ­ to create community-driv-en networks that can truly solve the world's biggest problems, will only be achieved if there are no formal institutions controlling the mechanisms of change, but just the people.Governance ­ A Critical ComponentIdeally all possible actions of a blockchain network can be coded in a smart contract, but reality is much more complex, and survival is only for networks that can:1. Adapt to unforeseen environment changes, and 2. Manage decentralized resources efficiently If blockchain networks are anal-ogous to a new road highway, then governance can be seen as the rails and dividers all along the way -- people realize it's importance only when things go wrong.But Governance isn't StraightforwardI believe the lack of governance frameworks, along with scalabili-ty and security, is perhaps one of the biggest barriers to mainstream blockchain adoption. It is also one of the most controversial issues since it is hard to create a `one size fits all' governance model. Moreover, different types of decisions within Blockchains require different types of consensus at different layers.As more people embrace the de-centralized bandwagon, it becomes tougher to gather layered mass opinion using existing platforms. Blockchain platforms and dApps to-day use platforms like Github, Slack, Telegram to interact with the com-munity. While great for communica-tion, these platforms are inefficient in many ways as they lack 1) aligned incentive structures, 2) reputation management, 3) financial stake locking mechanism and 4) different power structures for different ac-tors within the community.ConclusionHaving personally worked on the governance framework for Nex-us Mutual, I realized how crucial governance is for the success of a blockchain network.Over the past 6 months we've been building GovBlocks -- an open, permission-less protocol that pro-vides a layer of multi-factorial gov-ernance for blockchain networks. This brings together the best of on-chain & off-chain models that exist today by introducing a sliding-scale mechanism on which governance model can be configured based on the requirement. If a model doesn't work in the long run, the commu-nity can get together to change and deploy a new model, all through the GovBlocks protocol. As more people embrace the decentralized bandwagon, it becomes tougher to gather layered mass opinion using existing platforms
< Page 8 | Page 10 >