PD Community Wallet

Solution 1

We run the community wallet under DAO principles without being legally and technically a DAO. What this means is that you would have complete control and independence of proposing and deciding on community-driven initiatives and on how to use the funds, but we would eventually execute the payments on our end.

Our proposal: We use snapshot.org for managing the community wallet and we set up votes through a simple mechanism of 1PD = 1Vote (other solutions can be also considered). The community will appoint a Community Wallet Committee (3 people) that will take care of selecting and managing the initiatives and of getting the community to vote on them. The community will elect (vote) the committee based on an initial application of candidates, and candidates will serve for a term of 3 months. The community will then decide on the amount of compensation for committee members, which will be paid monthly from the community wallet. Each committee member can be re-elected only once (for a maximum of 6 months total), thereby ensuring a healthy rotation and that there will be no professionalisation of the role.

Advantages:

• We can start operating immediately and support future and current initiatives, such as the metaverse merchandise by DigitalCoy & IggyKov.
• The community can propose, decide, and vote on initiatives independently.
• There is always the possibility to give unpaired legal DAO structure at a later stage once we have certainty on the scope and application from a legal perspective

Disadvantages:

• No financial rights are assigned to token holders (no payouts of the treasury).
• There will be a need for a trusted intermediary to execute transactions on the blockchain (unpaired LTD).
• There are limitations on engaging in contractual obligations with vendors, partners, etc.

Solution 2

We wait in order to establish a pure DAO from a technical and legal point of view. This could take at least a few months.

Advantages:

• Once established, the DAO should have a separate legal structure, which would allow us to enter into contractual obligations.
• We would potentially be able to assign financial rights to holders.
• The governance would not be through third parties but would instead be controlled exclusively by code.

Disadvantages:

• The possible outcomes are uncertain at this stage.
• Delays could occur in using the community wallet funds and in deploying initiatives.
• We would incur high legal costs by further exploring legal solutions.

Co-designing our approach

Solution 1, despite not being technically a DAO, complies perfectly with the spirit of PD and the vision that we had as well as the scope for the community wallet, which was basically to finance community-driven initiatives as opposed to make investments into unrelated projects and divide profits. We do, however, respect and understand different arguments and visions. Hence, we are putting this to a vote next week. If Solution 1 gets the most votes, then we will begin by setting up the snapshot.org space and start additional voting initiatives regarding the structure and committee needed in order to operate. If Solution 2 wins, then we will dig deeper with the community in the next weeks on investigating possible legal challenges and options.