LIP-0006: Sunsetting LunarDAO I

Proposals
#1

title: LIP-0006
LIP category & type: governance
contact: zero
date: 2024-08-26
status: proposal
vote date: TBA

Summary

LunarDAO is sunsetting LunarDAO I and will summon a new DAO (LunarDAO II) also with Moloch V3 architecture. This DAO will raise funds for DarkFi R&D, by buying an NFT.

Problem

There are a few existing problems with the current DAO setup.

The gas fees on Ethereum mainnet are high and most members do not actively participate in governance.

If we would remain in the current setup, new members who join the existing DAO are exposed to past investments. This is why the option of creating sub-DAOs have been chosen a parts for LunarDAO next move.

Solution

We will summon a new DAO, LunarDAO II and everyone can join on the same conditions, by offering a tribute which will turn into shares for governance in the new DAO, these will also represent a share of the NFT.

We want to sunset LunarDAO I and move towards new adventures.

The solution is to call to all LunarDAO I members to RageQuit and ensure that the ones who don’t do in time will not be exposed with their funds to malicious proposals. This can be done by changing the
quorum to 100% which effectively turns LunarDAO I into an escrow holding participants tokens. Every member has no other option than to RageQuit from LunarDAO I, keep their FIRN token to support the project, earn fees and possibly use ETH to join LunarDAO II or other future ventures of LunarDAO.

#2

What do you mean gas fees are high? It’s like at 1-3 gwei since blobs?

It’s kinda the first argument you make and I think it’s worth challenging.

Otherwise, I know y’all want to do an NFT sale and there’s probably no other way to do ot other than by rebooting. Just call a spade a spade more directly.

Or what do you think? I’d like to hear more.

#3

From some discussions we’ve had on irc, were previously mentioning the gas fees

I think this originally started the convo for the idea for a different chain, it doesnt seem to be a huge issue currently, not sure how fees will look in the future or if it stays in this low gwei range

There were also some headaches with trying to keep multiple DAOs live. If I can remember correctly. its not as simple as just pointing LD1 to LD2

The RQ mechanism makes it easier for everyone to get out, close up shop, and begin anew

There have been discussions about trying to build an LD treasury in a few different places, but nothing has come of it yet

#4

I’ll gladly rage quit and pop into a new one.

I saw Firn was helping ZachXBT by freezing an attackers funds etc. I like Firn, it has to be clear that there is trust involved in certain ways.

I was told about Ghosty Cash, a mixer that goes through Monero swaps to break links between addresses - also an interesting way.

Would LunarDAO be open to somehow anonymously hosting a TC frontend. It seems to be the one with the largest anonymity set after all.

#5

What governance? There hasn’t been an onchain proposal in over a year. Moving to an L2 with a centralized sequencer isn’t the wei.

Isn’t that the point of an investment DAO? Future contributions should not only be based on a valuation of share/loot price, but the contributors should also be aligned with LD’s investment thesis.

It actually is pretty much that simple. With moloch it’s easy to create shared treasuries between DAOs and sub-DAO systems.

#6

Saw the Firn fund freezing, I dont know much on what the internals were besides the X announcement, maybe @Grav can give some insight here

We never discussed a TC front end, though we did discuss the zk.money fork Investment Proposal: zk-money fork

You made an appearance in the thread too

If there’s interest in the TC front-end, bring up in a new thread or come swing by the community discussion on Monday’s, theres a few more people there that you can bounce ideas off of

#7

@namic check out this discussion, this touches on your point about an investment dao, if it goes over X amount raised (which is 500k USD in this case)