Skip to main content

Clearly Defined Boundaries

Design Note: For any contribution system to function, there must be clarity around who is part of the system and what counts as a valid contribution. Boundaries serve two purposes:

  1. Membership boundary – defining who has the right to propose, complete, verify, and be rewarded for contributions.
  2. Activity boundary – defining what kinds of tasks or outputs are recognized as legitimate contributions.

Without clear boundaries, free-riding (outsiders claiming rewards without participating) and confusion (contributors unsure if their work qualifies) can undermine trust. In decentralized systems, boundaries are not physical but digital and procedural — anchored in identity systems, token logic, and transparent rules.

Relevance to Contribution Systems:

  • Prevents exploitation: Ensures rewards only flow to verified members of the DAO or TribalDAOs.
  • Clarifies eligibility: Contributors know upfront whether they are qualified to participate in a task.
  • Protects integrity: Reviewers and stewards can confidently assess work against agreed definitions of “contribution.”
  • Builds trust: When members see that contributions are fairly defined and consistently recognized, they are more likely to engage.
  • Supports scaling: Boundaries prevent chaos as the system grows, by making clear distinctions between inside/outside and valid/invalid tasks.

Matou DAO Implementation:

Membership Boundaries:

  • Require contributors to register with a Decentralized ID (DID) linked to their TribalDAO or Matou DAO profile.
  • Automate role assignment at registration: every new member becomes a Contributor and receives CTR potential, while Community Representatives (COM) and Elders have distinct onboarding pathways.
  • Introduce onboarding checkpoints (tutorials, orientation sessions) before new members can claim contributions, to ensure understanding of cultural values and system rules.

Activity Boundaries:

  • Maintain a Contribution Registry where only tasks tied to approved proposals can be created.
  • Require each contribution to include:
    • clear deliverables,
    • estimated time,
    • reward allocation,
    • cultural alignment notes.
  • Define excluded activities (e.g., tasks outside Matou’s scope, personal side projects, or unverified submissions) so contributors know what doesn’t count.

Technical Boundaries:

  • Smart contracts enforce that UTIL can only be minted through verified contributions, and CTR only through steward-reviewed tasks.
  • Dashboards show active contributors vs. non-contributors, making it easy to track participation.
  • Automated checks prevent double-claiming (two people trying to submit for the same task without approval).

Cultural Boundaries:

  • Elders Council reviews contribution categories to ensure they align with tikanga, whakapapa, and hau.
  • Some contributions (e.g., cultural preservation tasks) may require cultural validation in addition to technical verification.
  • Maintain a living glossary of contributions that defines categories (technical, cultural, governance, community engagement) and is reviewed annually with elder input.

Operational Practices:

  • Publish eligibility rules on the documentation site so members understand what is required.
  • Require community validation before new contribution types are added (e.g., a trial task must be tested and reviewed by peers before becoming a recurring category).
  • Encourage nested boundaries — TribalDAOs can have their own contribution categories, but they must map to Matou DAO’s core categories for integration.

This principle is part of the Matou Contribution Design Principles framework, which integrates Ostrom's commons governance principles with modern contribution system insights.