Thank you.
Based on feedback here on Forum we will likely rename as “ATOM Orbital DAO” when we submit on-chain - open to other names if there are ideas, but so far people seem to like this one.
We share the vision of an ecosystem where decentralized initiatives flourish w/ many DAOs doing work on behalf of ATOM community, including multiple DAOs serving as grant administrators.
Minimalism refers to the practice of keeping the design and code as simple and uncluttered as possible, while still achieving the desired functionality. This can involve using minimal lines of code, simple and clear naming conventions, avoiding unnecessary features or complexities, and adhering to established design patterns and best practices. The goal is to make the code more readable, maintainable, precise, efficient, timeless, and to reduce likelihood of bugs and errors.
As adherents of minimalism on Hub, we generally believe that new ideas should be attempted first in other zones whenever possible, and this can be a guiding principle for grant applicants. Also, many of the projects funded by the Orbital DAO will be ecosystem initiatives that lie adjacent to the Hub.
If a project achieves community-wide support to be included in the canonical Cosmos Hub software stack, that would be the specific team’s prerogative to pursue an upgrade via governance, and that is not a course of action or decision that could be affected by the Orbital DAO.
When gov support for an upgrade exists, modern software release management process can keep the Hub community safe. Research on best practice for software release management as it relates to Cosmos blockchains could be a promising area for grant-funding w/ ecosystem-wide benefit.
As a precedent for change: Even Bitcoin has upgraded several times.
ICS1 (replicated security) goes live soon & we expect there will be low-hanging fruit for ATOM holders for new initiatives that build on top of it.
Other approaches to shared security can be funded if / as there is merit (it is still early days), for example, Mesh security is an exciting concept.
If there are other shared security ideas that you believe ought to be pursued, can you please share those ideas or point us to places where you’ve written about them previously?
The committee will help to foster an open ecosystem that is neutral and agnostic within the realm of IBC compatibility, guided by proposals and what developers choose to build with, and not inducing demand for any specific tech.
Assessing technical merit and value-add for ATOM holders is a goal of the program, and we intend to build this into internal workflows and Oversight reporting.
We are not trying to define a direction or constitution for the Hub, and we will operate in alignment with decisions of Hub governance.