I just joined the forum and excited to share my thoughts.
Your piece of work is a quality educational boost that triggers new opportunities in action research in cryptoeconomics as much as organizational design. Thank you very much for sharing it.
With the potential of Cryptoeconomics as new rhizome in politcs to revitilize it, I read your content with inspiring drive. It is an invitation to be part of the change by getting involved with critical thinking. To contribute and enhance your direction as best as I can, I will be wearing the lenses of a UX Researcher and Service Designer: a granular and bird view. The soil of my pathway is in the spine of your intent: raise awareness about potential limititations as opportunities to investigate what are the problems that cryptoeconomics can solve at scale for humanity. Below, they are my attempts to expand horizons and amplify your work.
Zoom in and Zoom out through the lense of the community
A particular solid section is ‘The cryptoeconimic explosion’ where you outline the governance examples as result of your unstructured interviews and the application of attitudinal research. The learning that you offer is deep, accessible and easy-to-read. However, I wonder if you had the chance to gain data from the community, based on their expectations and needs towards the given governance mechanism. For example, in the 1Hive context, what are the feelings and motivation in the rewards system that foster or stifle collective interests? This might shape further the argument of self-determination as limitation. Another example, design a possible series of quantitative questions to investigate about trust and confidence in the reward system. A mixed method research methods in DAOs might bring forward the awareness of how and if this can be a service to a better governance.
Disclaimer: Yes, I am working on this and I would be happy to collaborate with you further. Here it is and example on my research in 2019 in Berlin.
How might we enable cryptoecomics with heuristics?
The thought-provoking duality - or evolution - with homosapiens versus cryptosapiens leads to think of heuristics.
The relentless wave of DLT is going towards to disrupt the financial world as we know it. If we assume that cryptoeconomics aims to empower a systemic change, success should not be determined by only economic or power metrics - proof-of-stake / work. How does the cryptoeconomics algorithm align with heuristic design? Do we need to expand or rivisit the UX principles? Inclusivity and accessibility must be - maybe - at the forefront as understand how to include all participants.
How about cryptoeconomics as new gear for regenerative platform?
At cultural level, it means to set up cultural practices based on regenerative principles for developers as much as for platform designers and shapers. At systemic level, cryptoeconomics unlocks new ways of designing a platform with non extractive effect without - hopefully - negative externalities as the opposite of sharing-economy that only reinforced monopolies. Good case studies of regeneration are here: https://www.r3-0.org/plus-maverick-thinking/#case . And crypto, with decentralized governance platforms, must consider at the core this mantra: ‘The end of winner-takes-all.’ Read more how here
Confidence and…empathy machine: echoes from Blade Runner!
CBDCs is another example of a positive crack in a new financial settings. I interpret this as empathy step towards institutions. I doubt institutions will disappear. They are not androids to be killed ! We do need to create bridges with institutions with a new Rick Deckard! DAOs are going to reduce their negative effect and nurture the ‘confidence machine’. In the DAO world, a small step forward happened formally in Wyoming ad they acknowledged in Wyoming as LLC.
About the Bitcoin environmental impact, here I share a link with her arguable - potentially compelling - point about the issue: https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-energy/
Final point and call to action
The training zone mentioned in the end made me think of should have fractal approach where adaptation, patience and continuous adjustment and empathy are the mantra to learn. These traits can accomodate the interdisciplinary nature of cryptoeconomics and therefore the upcoming future in governance. Ultimately, your work is a signal to embrace experimentation and realign the level of ambition to the envisioned transformation backed up by adoption’s evidence.
As a cycle of input, I see the potential in your piece to empirically dare with even further call to actions. The readers might be already stimulated to act, however, I share what you, we and all, might want to articulte further.
Training zone: yes, we do need to unlearn, be aware of old habits and replace them with structured experimentation. ‘The bigger world’ needs a motivational access to knead with the various community of Gitcoin, Klero and more. A structured experimentation could fuel DLT as social design to realign econimic incentives as driver for collective impact. As it matches my current mission, your research is an important nugde to believe in action research within a collaborative context. A combination of data-driven collaborative analysis and observational action could underlay causes enabling future predictions about personal, organizational and societal change.
Hope this review with input might help to expand the impact of your work.
Thank you again,