Which features ship, which bugs get fixed, and when migration risk is worth taking.
Slide 1
1 / 10
A systems view of crypto coordination
Onchain Governance and DAOs
How internet-native organizations make decisions about software upgrades, treasury spending, incentives, and power distribution without relying on a single company.
DAOs are best understood as coordination infrastructure: code, capital, and community bound together by governance.
Governance is the mechanism that helps the system adapt over time.
Arbitrum
Uniswap
Rootstock
Optimism
NEAR
ZKsync
Scroll
Slide 2
2 / 10
Governance decides what the protocol becomes
How treasury capital gets allocated across grants, incentives, and operations.
Who can propose, who can veto, who gets rewarded, and how capture is constrained.
Governance is the control plane for an onchain system.
Slide 3
3 / 10
What is a DAO, really?
- It is an organization that uses shared rules, onchain execution, and open participation to coordinate resources.
- In DAOs, proposals are voted onchain, and decisions are shaped through coordination.
- The interesting engineering problem is how to split authority across those layers without losing legitimacy or speed.
Most DAO failures happen at the seams between these layers.
Slide 4
4 / 10
How a governance decision usually flows
01 signal
A problem appears: growth stalls, revenue is weak, incentives are misaligned, or an upgrade is needed.
02 debate
Discussion happens in public forums, research threads, delegate chats, and community calls.
03 design
A proposal turns values into concrete parameters: budgets, thresholds, contracts, deadlines, and KPIs.
04 vote
Tokenholders or delegates vote, often with quorum requirements, veto windows, or offchain signaling first.
05 execute
Successful proposals trigger transactions, treasury transfers, upgrades, or program launches.
Think RFCs + elections + treasury ops, all in public.
Slide 5
5 / 10
Why put governance onchain at all?
credible neutrality
Rules can outlive the founding team
Onchain execution reduces dependence on private trust and makes important decisions legible to outsiders.
composability
Governance becomes programmable
Voting power, treasuries, rewards, and permissions can plug into other applications and analysis tools.
global coordination
Participation is internet-native
Contributors, delegates, and tokenholders can coordinate across borders.
The promise is neutrality. The reality is a design problem.
Slide 6
6 / 10
Common failure modes
- Structurelessness: informal elites emerge when the DAO pretends it has no hierarchy.
- Plutocracy: capital concentration can overwhelm broad community legitimacy.
- Low-signal participation: votes and comments get optimized for appearances instead of protocol outcomes.
- Execution gap: the DAO approves ideas but lacks operators, working groups, or accountability to ship them.
A DAO cannot choose between having structure and not having structure. It can only choose whether the structure is formal and accountable, or informal and opaque.
This is the key lesson behind tyranny of structurelessness in DAOs.
Decentralization without design usually just hides power instead of distributing it.
Slide 7
7 / 10
Patterns that make DAOs more functional
Foundations, councils, and scoped mandates
These create responsibility, continuity, and legal-operational interfaces.
Representative decision-making
Delegates concentrate attention, context, and public accountability.
Autonomous execution teams
Small teams with clear remits help the DAO move from debate to shipping.
The best governance systems are usually hybrids.
Slide 8
8 / 10
What this looks like in live protocol DAOs
Governance and value capture
Questions around fee switches, deployments, licensing, and treasury strategy show that decentralization still needs strategic judgment.
Delegates as operators
Contributor onboarding, incentive design, and public rationale writing matter because the voting body needs context and talent pipelines.
Program design and oversight
Reward systems, councils, and governance upgrades shape how the DAO balances experimentation with accountability.
Same primitives, different choices about legitimacy and control.
Slide 9
9 / 10
Why this matters for CS students
- DAOs expose a hard systems problem: how humans and software co-govern the same stack.
- There is room to build better voting systems, delegation UX, governance analytics, treasury tooling, and identity or reputation primitives.
- The field rewards people who can bridge code, mechanism design, and communication.
Interesting research and product directions
- attack-resistant voting and delegation
- reputation systems and anti-sybil design
- governance simulation and token mechanics testing
- researching new governance primitives
DAO governance is a live lab for distributed systems plus political economy.
Slide 10
10 / 10
Closing thought
DAOs are not trying to remove governance.
They are trying to re-architect governance so that decision-making can be more open, programmable, and resilient than the institutions that came before.
The open question is not whether DAOs will be perfect. It is whether we can design them to be more accountable than the alternatives.
Questions?
rika / Axia Network