[PROPOSAL] Request for ICF funding the Cosmos Hub DAO, Decentralist DAO


Better discourse for better organization management and conflict management (through smart contracts).


The community is asking what the NWV’s plans are.

The one thing we can all get behind is the need for fund for alternative control and governance structures. So while ATOM2.0 proposes one such treasury DAO with charter, we hereby propose an alternative DAO, let’s call it the Decentralists Cosmos Hub DAO.

This Decentralists Cosmos Hub DAO contains categories that discuss the topics needed for Cosmos Hub improvement. Tokenomics, governance, development, security, interchain staking or ICS, incentive alignment, budgeting, etc are all categories that discuss the merits of proposals.

Within each category, multiple groups can compete to provide services as suggested by the category DAO. That way we can have competition among peer groups but constructive discourse and on-chain accountability to let the best groups and ideas win.

In another example, within the Cosmos Hub governance category, there would be multiple topics of discussion, and many individuals and teams proposing changes to the working constitution or plan document.

  • [/cosmoshub/README.md](proposed Cosmos Hub plan document)

TODO: Revise plan

Proposal A (deprecated)

We will define a suitable DAO framework.

  • suitable for DAO treasury management.
  • sub-DAO support with [membership/voting/RACI/treasury/etc] features.
  • moderated with transparent policy.

A synthesis of bottom-up permissionless DAO formation to top-down governance based “official” organization of components.

Rolled out in two phases:

Phase 1: Off-chain.

  • with existing communications infrastructure (e.g. Discord).
  • with increasingly complete organizational/moderation/administration docs.
  • with the goal to enable phase 2

Phase 2: All DAOs all the way.

  • our own (developed for Cosmos) interfaces evolve to enable structured conversations and granular control.
  • ensures that important conversations can happen on-chain without manipulation from private interests.
  • the Cosmos stack becomes the base stack for community self-governance.
  • competition among DAO stacks too.

Proposal B



the structure of checks and balances

Some draft points

  • The top level DAO can modify “official” groups that apply to be managed by the top level DAO.
  • Anyone can create group/team DAOs permissionlessly.
  • All DAO discussions must abide by common (global) code of conduct policies. This is needed to prevent spam, trolling, and misinformaation.

TODO: define group vs team DAOs.


… main descriptive document that guides users

Some draft points

  • Anyone can create a “group” represented as a DAO to discuss particular topics.
  • Each group shall have roles like “moderators”, “scribes”.
  • Each group “discussion” shall be structured into “categories”.
  • Each “issue” can have proposals or bids from multiple “teams”.
  • Teams are also represented as DAOs.

Example: we create the “Security” group to discuss issues around security. An issue is raised regarding a particular issue.

Multiple competing security teams propose solutions or their analysis of the situation.

The group decides to pay for a particular bid/contract, and so payment goes from its treasury to the winning team’s account. The contract is recorded in the books and reviewed in the future for holding winning bidders accountable.

The group’s moderators help productive conversation without spam or drama. The group’s scribe posts daily or weekly updates of discussions.

At first, this group ran on donations, but later it gets funding from the Decentralists DAO, which has an ongoing contract with the Cosmos Hub community pool.

Initial Categories

… of Cosmos Hub work

split atom2.0, but also other needed improvements

  • Larger Community Pool
  • Tokenomics
  • Funding for Developers/Members Through Pool
  • Governance Fixes
  • Interchain Security (ICS)
  • Killer Applications of ICS
  • Security
  • New Member Discovery
  • IBC Improvements
  • Educational Constitution
  • Communication (meta)
  • Governance Discussions & Planning
  • Constitutional Convention
  • and more


Cosmonauts ask 82 NoWithVeto voters what is next. The Decentralists in response demonstrates open and structured governance discourse.

Code of Conduct

Applies everywhere on-chain and off-chain

Each group can have their own specific policies too but global policies apply.

TODO: role of moderators for each group.

NOTE: It is the role of Cosmonauts to fork the Decentralists DAO if the code of conduct policy isn’t working for them. It is the duty of the Decentralists to offer products that can so be forked.

Pinned somewhere should say,

To the Decentralists,

This information will be pinned and brought to the forefront of the basis for
communications within these channels. We’d like to encourage transparent,
polite and grounded discourse so we will propose some guidelines here so that
anyone interested in contributing to the Cosmos Hub will feel comfortable
exchanging viewpoints and ideas. Let’s aim for the efforts here to lead a
successful conversation and agreeable proposals and technical updates for the


- Be mindful of the community, anyone that has found their way here is a
  contributor to the idea building that will be necessary to have consensus.

- Keep conversations in good faith, stay consistent and provide sources when

- No ad hominem, personal attacks, mudslinging, toxic attitudes or smear
  campaigns will be tolerated.

- Remember to bring contributions, opinions and feedback to the table.

Thank you for agreeing to contribute to the growth of the Cosmos community by
actively participating and following these guidelines in the Decentralist

TODO: Link to Decentralists DAO code of conduct policy doc.

Cosmonaut Decentralists Forum.

TODO: Link to Cosmonaut Decentralists Forum. NOTE: Proposed “Cosmonaut” definition in ATOM ONE.


  • TODO


Souce: GitHub - decentralists/DAO: the DAO of the Decentralists

1 Like

in this scenario i guess the “top level DAO” is run by Jesus ?

Basically the “NWV”'s plan is to propose a new DAO to rule SubDAOs which don’t exist yet, have no plans yet etc.

the “Decentralists DAO” is a joke. a cult. nothing serious in there.

9 months later, no forum, no thoughtful and brainstormed definitions and goals made public,

a void.

How much Atoms AiB & Ignite own? Can’t they fund this initiative?
They’re the github owners right?

Or maybe the Atom tokens they own have just 3 purposes:

  • voting power and political influence
  • build Gnoland
  • initiate lawsuits


Why as soon as we need to build something together for the hub AiB is nowhere close to providing a single dollar.



I appreciate you taking the time to engage with this proposal draft. Your frustrations are heard and I am aware of the divided perspectives.

This post was submitted as a draft, hence expected appropriate pushback such as your comment. The only “joke,” is the attitude towards the potential of the early Decentralist DAO.

I commend you and your support for opposing DAO’s, but again, this post was submitted as a “draft,” in hopes to engage the community to hear their sentiment. Sincerely, thank you again for voicing your opinion, as I too, am learning as I go.

In response to your last comment, I assume AiB is appropriately prioritizing their focus towards developing the much needed and censorship resistant, Gnoland.

I can only imagine the amount of effort, bandwidth it requires to attempt to build/provide a space in the digital wild-wild-west for people who are against a potential, authoritarian new world order.

Despite opposers of the Atom One vision being so gung ho about building/breaking FAST (via the infant, initially non-blockchain built usecase coding language known as Wasm), i’d expect - at the least, to show some more respect towards AiB’s willingness to take on this feat.

Again, thank you and bless you for your engagement with this post, Tom.

Cheers to growing, together.

Honestly, the idea of funding a hub DAO with NON community pool money is a bit cringe.

  1. The ICF, etc, are already sort of doing that in various direct and indirect ways
  2. A real hub dao should by 0 price accept money from centralized organizations, no matter their interest in a direct form (one thing is the legal entities doing their job, another is corrupting for the sake of corrupting)
  3. One of the most paradoxal props IMO
  4. I totally dig what you are trying to solve, I just dont see the reason to go backwards. The whole hub is a DAO already. Lets focus on enriching the CP with liquid and income earned funds from (possibly AEZ, fees, investments of the hub into other projects as a hub, etc).