Wonderland Current State of Affairs Addressing the Issues that Matter
We are where we are. Regardless of the drama that put us in the position we find ourselves in, we must continue to move forward. The Dao must organize itself now and narrow its focus on the issues that matter. We must understand the scope of the topics we find ourselves discussing. From observing the discord and the forums I can comfortably say that the two major issues most people connect with have to do with the governance process and the current design of the protocol (regarding what is, as it is).
The governance framework is an important topic for everyone here investing their time and money in Wonderland. It defines the capacity and ability to which the Dao can effectively govern itself. The goal of designing a framework for a self-governing entity is to create a foundational structure that works. What is currently in place for Wonderland accomplishes this goal. Ultimately, the members of a Dao must adhere to the system that binds it. If this philosophy is not honored than the system relies on its members to define it. If the system relies on its members to define it, there are flaws within it. My central point being that any type of adjustment or revision to the governance process must not be implemented because of any type of reactionary or presumed concern. If the current design showcases obvious flaws, regardless of the circumstance, then that is a fundamental issue worth addressing.
My ideas for improving a governance system revolve around the ideal of making as many people as happy as possible. Purposeful contributions should be rewarded to reinforce participation and meaningful cooperation. Every voice truly does matter, the Dao is only as strong as its community allows it to be. Autonomous decision making should be fully self-sustaining by means of the underlying design alone, while the role of the participating body should be to enforce that the system is held true to its values and purposes. I could go on for pages about Dao governance frameworks, but that is not my point here. The only area of focus I would consider being worthy of relevant discussion lies within the transitionary phases of a proposal and the steps required to put a collectively backed idea into action. Although for the most part I believe these issues will solve themselves naturally as the Dao grows in its understanding of how the process of self-governance works, and to what extent we may reasonably operate within it.
My second major topic for discussion is the status of the protocol. The main conflict being that it is not ideal for the underlying vision(s) of this project. It appears to me Wonderland is currently a project half dismantled and half reinvented. What we must work with is an anomalous blueprint. We have the option to either focus on reinventing the whole foundation of the project or to realign its future with both its original vision and improve upon what has already been well established(as was intended).
For the sake of maintaining the integrity of the project it is vital to make whatever transition agreed upon transparent to both the loyal holders who have been here since the beginning and the outsiders looking in without a clue to the history of Wonderland. What is the vision? The original gitbook documents tell a very different story than what the website displays. If the docs don’t align to the vision and future of this project anymore, they must be changed to do so. If the website lacks the clarity of the full picture, changes must be made to reflect the purpose for recourse. To not be thorough is to be elusive. Remain mindful of the full picture. We must use every resource at our disposal to make this decision. What we have are the gitbook docs, the website, the forums, official posts on 3rd party sites, the discord, and of course and most importantly each other.
I will have another post in due time proposing what I believe to be the best path forward(or I will happily share my view in the comments if others beat me to it), but the purpose of this is simply to promote discussion on the matter of reestablishing direction from the ground up.