In this note, my flowing, abrupt thoughts as a result of reading the great article "Scaling Trust in DAOs: Trustware vs Socialware” by Orca Protocol and the resulting review article "Trustware vs Socialware: Which Is Better?" by @deeparocks in the context of the upcoming discussion "Scaling Trust in DAOs" announced by @Ukraine_DAO and @deeparocks on August 31 on Twitter Space⏰

DAO is the continuing and improving pursuit of humanity for the utmost possible justice, utility and harmony in self-organization and self-governmentis, and of course the blockchain capabilities that have appeared and opened up the daoverse and allow us to take a big step forward in this matter, especially in the context of "They can’t lie, cheat, steal or manipulate by breaking or bending the rules", which in fact is something that mankind could not cope with ever in history and this is a colossal breakthrough promising "decisive" changes, but nevertheless, in such a multifaceted topic of the evolution of self-organization and self-government, there are still so many areas where still of course human coordination and the human factor at the epicentre and “Socialware” is the backbone for now.

So what types of in-DAO operations and, accordingly, guarantees for them can be provided by “trustware” today, and which ones are not? Yes, we know that, for example, in finance and voting on-chain, we have already succeeded quite well in this, but we are also particularly interested in the issue of "trustware" in the context of organizing and coordinating workflow in the broad sense, without which no org is able to form, function and achieve the set goals. That is, we are not talking about the execution of payments as a workflow as a result of voting, but about the execution of work for which funds have been allocated or commands have been co-accepted. When we say #FutureOfWork, what do we mean? Yes, "trustware" can provide guarantees for the execution of transactions, but can it provide guarantees for a specific operational work task to be performed by a specific person within DAO? And here we come to the issue of reputation (after all, trust usually follows from reputation), which, when put on-chain, is probably the only "trustware" available today in the field of "workflows" within DAO, which of course does not guarantee 100% the execution of a particular task by a specific DAO participant (for a 100% guarantee, you should set the task not to a person, but to AI - someday it will be in the DAO too), but maximizes the probability of its completion. And in the context of the correct choice of the performer according to his reputation, and in the context of the fact that the performer values his\her reputation, and in the context of the fact that the performer also knows that as a reward his\her on-chain reputation will increase upon completion of the task. Which is also important, for example, in non-profit activities and volunteering in particular, where members do not expect financial rewards for their contributions, but reputation matters. That is, apparently, the reputation on-chain is a potentially effective mechanism for scaling trust in DAOs and the daoverse as a whole, of course, if we look at this issue from this angle in general (the article still has a slightly different issue-angle).

📌

In the context of just such an angle, I advise to read section 2.5 ("The Reputation System") in Colony’s whitepaper and, in general, to the extent possible, test the already working reputation functionality on Colony as an infrastructure for DAOs. In my opinion, this is indeed something that any dao-enthusiast should look into🔬And also of course, for reference, I'm adding here the legendary thread by Elad Verbin about “in-DAO execution” - yeah, we all love to manage processes and money, but someone has to work😺

And I would also like to share this opinion based on personal experience. When in 2011-2012 I started building a “DAO” but on web2, still having no idea about the blockchain, I realized that if I want to build the most utterly fair and harmonious org with equal co-ownership, with rational co-governance, with a focus on maximum utility and with a truly fair distribution of the results of the work of the community-team, I can always do it, no matter what technology is available or not for this now✨