Skip to main content

Collective Choice Arrangements

Design Note: Those directly affected by contribution rules must have a meaningful role in creating, updating, and approving them. This principle ensures governance is not top-down but participatory, giving contributors, community reps, and elders an active voice in shaping the system.

In Matou DAO, this means that contributors influence how rewards are calculated, what types of contributions are recognized, and how verification processes work. Communities influence strategic alignment, and elders ensure cultural integrity. Rules are therefore co-created by all houses rather than imposed by a small elite.

Relevance to Contribution Systems:

  • Legitimacy: People are more likely to respect and follow rules they helped create.
  • Adaptability: Rules evolve as new contribution types emerge (e.g., AI support, cultural activities).
  • Diversity of perspectives: Contributors know operational realities, communities know strategic needs, elders know cultural boundaries — collective rule-making brings these insights together.
  • Prevents capture: No single group (e.g., technical experts) can dominate the system.
  • Innovation: Rules improve continuously as feedback from lived practice is incorporated.

Matou DAO Implementation:

Membership:

  • All DAO members (COM, CTR, Elders) can propose changes to contribution rules.
  • New members are invited to feedback sessions during onboarding to highlight pain points in the current contribution process.
  • Governance stewards document and circulate proposals so contributors at all levels can engage.

Activity:

  • Proposals to change contribution rules (e.g., UTIL reward rates, verification steps) are submitted like any other DAO proposal and enter the governance workflow.
  • Contributor House votes on operational aspects (e.g., review processes, CTR weighting).
  • Community House votes on strategic aspects (e.g., prioritizing categories of contributions).
  • Elders Council reviews for cultural alignment before implementation.

Technical:

  • Proposal Registry (on-chain) records every rule-change proposal, with metadata showing proposer, reviewers, decisions, and outcomes.
  • Version-controlled rule sets stored in smart contracts so the history of rule evolution is transparent and auditable.
  • Dashboards show active proposals to change rules, allowing contributors to track and participate.

Cultural:

  • All proposed changes undergo tikanga review by the Elders Council.
  • Hui (community meetings) provide forums for discussion before formal voting, ensuring proposals reflect community values.

Operational:

  • Regular rule review cycles (e.g., every 6 months) where contributors can submit feedback.
  • Stewards run consultation rounds with both community and contributor groups before finalizing proposals.
  • Governance stewards provide impact analysis of proposed changes, including effects on contributors, treasury, and cultural safeguards.