Fixing it with Pascal coin; Part 2: Community involvement and management.

over 3 years ago

You probably missed out on the first part of this ongoing series, that’s fine, I’ve got you Catch up here. Jimmy still got me on shill mode and for real, I’ve got a lot to talk about, so let’s get to it already without further ado.

A couple of cryptocurrency projects throw the word ‘decentralized’ around their governance model, with the concept of DAOs and ‘community led’ projects springing up around new projects and existing projects, decentralization is usually presented as an administrative and technological strategy which shifts the power of decision making and decision to the majority and makes for a perfect consensus system of governance.

Its exciting what this concept promises, right? But yes, it all glitters but sometimes it is not what it appears to be. Most cryptocurrency which throw decentralization around their procedures are still stuck in the cage of centralization and what the present as ‘perfect decentralization’ is just an edited and ‘shinny centralization’. The team still rules and decisions are made by the very few. Cryptocurrency projects have struggled to achieve the kind of decentralization the boast of, both administratively and technologically. Majority of blockchain and cryptocurrency projects have been labeled ‘scam’ primarily due to obscure moves by the development, promotion and management team. While most of these projects have defeated this negative tag and have stood up as ‘genuine’, the scar still remains and the cause of the initial ‘scam’ name tag is still left untreated however people have only come to believe in these projects because the development and promotion team have successfully proved beyond doubts that they are ‘here to stay’ and not actually because they have satisfied the people’s crave for transparency in financial transactions and decision making hence sending genuine community involvement to the mud.

As a matter of fact, most cryptocurrency projects have done a far better job achieving the technical aspect of decentralization than they have done in their administrative areas. A couple of common practices mitigates community involvement and limits the extent to which the community can contribute to the decision-making process in a project which portrays itself as decentralized in all aspect, this includes:

Obscurity in funds management

Once members of a cryptocurrency community learn about a transfer of a substantial amount of the coins they support to another wallet, many questions arise as regards the reason for such transfer and the effect it will have on the project and its token. Regardless of how genuine the project has proved to be, the question of ‘an exit scam’ will always rise at the wake of an unexplained huge fund transfers. This have caused some level of volatility in crypto prices as the coin holders panic-sell in response to transfers of this sort. This has affected the crypto space so much and is implicated in the questionable stability of crypto prices.

Centralized decision on employment, staff remuneration and work time.

Decentralized? If yes, then the community should also have a say about who works for them and should also be part of the decision about how much these staff are paid for their services and how much work they also do for the community. This is an ideal example of decentralization and open source decision making. While many crypto projects core teams have earnestly worked towards achieving this, they still fall short at times. Hopefully more effort is made to improve on this aspect and to get the people more involved in all-round decisions making of cryptocurrency projects, this is the only way it will truly attain its tag of decentralized and the people’s currency, devoid of censorship, third party influences and centralized governance.

Limited space for contributions.

Just a quick follow up to the aforementioned point, cryptocurrency projects also sets limits of the number of contributions they get from the community members, either in form of financial advice or technical advice, this have raised issues of negligence in cryptocurrency communities and more questions arise as regards the level of decentralization and how open the blockchain technology and cryptocurrency really is, while some neglected contributions would have really been disastrous to the project, many neglected contributions would have also been greatly beneficial to the project. Rejection/negligence of advice or contributions from the community should be diplomatic and shouldn’t raise concerns about hierarchy and stratification in the community.

’Closed channels’ and stratification in Crypto communities.

While closed channels enables the team to make closed door decisions and also helps to ensure organized contributions, it still doesn’t go well with the goal of all-round decentralization. True decentralization comes with complete transparency especially when the decision to made concerns the whole community, this gives everyone the opportunity to decide what happens in the community as it truly concerns everyone. Though decentralization is a bit different from democracy, they do share a similarity in involving the whole community members in almost every aspect of management and governance.

You could easily relate at least on of these issues with most cryptocurrency communities you have been a part of, right? Don’t worry, just whisper the “yes!” to my ear. In a truly decentralized community, the administrative team is elected by the community and they are always answerable to the community, this is a common meeting point of democracy and decentralization. Certainly, you have many ideas you hope to bring up and share with the community and the administrational team. For sure you wish you could be more involved in the cryptocurrency you love than just being a trader or token holder whose faith is decided by the ‘team’. If yes, then you should probably take a look at Pascal coin’s decentralization model.

Pascal coin’s community management model.

Developing a truly decentralized blockchain with a functional consensus algorithm isn’t the only route to perfect decentralization, if this was the case, then most contemporary cryptocurrency projects should qualify as ‘decentralized’, but that has never.

Pascal coin presents a completely decentralized community management model and puts the community and its members at the helm of every decision…at least where it concerns the core aspects of the projects. From statements of issues and suggestions of solutions to decisions on how to solve these problems and which solution to implement from an array of options. Pascal coin’s ‘community-driven’ decision model spans across every part of the project including:

Decision making.

All plans and proposals are subject to community polls. The core team or the community member making a proposal takes the task of giving an explicit explanation of what they intend to do, this includes the schedules (for time bound proposals) and the financial requirements. Every proposal is open to scrutiny by all members of the community and the highest vote option wins, this process is open and unrestricted.

Contributions and proposals by community members.

The Pascal Coin blockchain is an open source blockchain, hence everyone is welcome to build on the blockchain, but it doesn’t end here! The community is also decentralized and ‘open source’ (to contributions!). Members of the community who come up with idea(s) which they wish to execute in the community or on the blockchain itself presents these ideas to the community in the normal form of proposal, hence he includes every relevant details of his idea and how he hopes to actualize this. The community votes for or against this. And just as every other proposal, the highest vote wins. Voting is carefully watched to check manipulation and censorship.

Transparency in management of funds.

Every penny of expenditure is open to scrutiny by the community members, all expenditures and available funds are carefully recorded on a portable document form which is accessible by every member of the community and even the crowd outside the community, the team is always available to answer questions as regards this, the community members are also enlightened about all expenditure and as a matter of fact, these expenditures are/were approved by the community!

Cutting it short, The community is the heart of the project. In a perfect scenario, this the adoptable decentralization model in cryptocurrency community management. Alright, I get it, many projects work better in centralization. But if the word ‘decentralized’ must be thrown around a project, then the community should also be more involved in the project.