The Next 2 Years: DAO Resolution Pt.1

Jupiter DAO
164

Draft looks fabulous, I’m excited for what’s Ahead!

1 Like
165

Decentralized doesn’t mean leaderless, and this framework proves it. Progressive independence > instant autonomy. Web3 needs more honest takes like this.

I genuinely prefer these high-level vision votes over budgeting processes that require mass voting. This is what moves us forward. LFG. :rocket:

166

I’m only half way thru reading yet, but this point tickles me:

This is your initial commitment:

So basically you’re reducing your commitment with this proposal? Why? @Kash
Even if it’s unused, this is like escaping your already made commitment.

Edit: I get that you want to transition to an independent funding which somehow involves the litterbox. This is ofc desirable. But I don’t get why you cut your yearly top-up plan to a once more for 2 years plan.

Altogether the draft sounds reasonable. But it’s like with lawmakers proposing new rules here, a lot of shiny bla bla rules just to hide the uncomfortable rules which actually matter.

Does this mean that the community / DAO will be able to create a vote (on a topic with momentum) all by itself? Or will the Team keep the last word?

I’ve read this many times, and I guess the Team knows exactly how many wallets voted.
So in this case I can only repeat what others said multiple times: “stop pretending”.
This doesn’t shed a good light on your intensions.

(for those who don’t know the actual numbers: It’s roughly 150,000 voters per vote.
I hate bloated marketing numbers)

Cheers! :sailboat:

167

“verified feedback” requires to send a custom tx, which most hardware wallets do not support. Maybe consider changing this. The message must not be on-chain…

Edit: Using the Ledger slider (memo tx) worked well, scusi.

168

The message is over 400k wallet are eligible to vote on a proposal because they stake jup but team can’t decide or vote on their behalf, 150k might be active according to what you said but over 400k wallet are eligible to vote, some might miss out base on thier personal decisions.

2 Likes
169

The claim is:

Not staking wallets nor eligible to vote.

There are detailed stats to every vote which can be easily accessed via catalytics.
.

2 Likes
170

My thoughts on the “The Next 2 Years” proposal from Jupiter DAO

Hey @Kash and everyone,

I’ve carefully read the “The Next 2 Years: DAO Resolution Pt.1” proposal and wanted to share my thoughts, openly, honestly, and in the spirit of community building.

Quick Summary

This proposal marks a key moment in the DAO’s evolution. Rather than rushing into full decentralization, the idea is to build toward independence progressively over the next 2 years, with support from the Jupiter team.

Key points:

  • Clarify roles between the DAO and the Team;
  • Make decision-making more effective and outcome-driven;
  • Refill the treasury with $10M USDC;
  • Establish sustainable funding and operational structures;
  • Activate community participation through grants and work groups, based on merit and public accountability.

What I appreciate

  • It’s a realistic and grounded proposal. It acknowledges what hasn’t worked and lays out a phased plan to improve.
  • I really value the clear separation of responsibilities between the Team and the DAO.
  • The focus on talent and “proof-of-work” is great, anyone can contribute, no matter their background.
  • There’s a strong emphasis on transparency and building structures that will benefit the broader Jupiter ecosystem.

About the current vote

The vote on this proposal isn’t about an immediate operational change. It’s more of a strategic signal of support, a way to show that stakers and the wider DAO community are aligned with the vision being presented.

And for that reason, I support it. It feels like a solid opportunity to strengthen the foundation for what we’re building together, a meaningful, functional, and forward-thinking DAO.

Fully committed to JUP

I remain fully committed to Jupiter and to the mission of the DAO. I believe in what’s being built and where we’re heading.

My own DAO proposal coming soon !

I’m currently working on a proposal that I’ll be presenting to the DAO very soon. I hope it reflects the same spirit of openness, support, and shared purpose that this phase represents. Looking forward to your feedback and collaboration when it’s ready!

My proposal is also a chance to see if the team is truly committed to helping the DAO evolve, not just in words, but in real action. If so, these next 2 years can be a powerful step forward for everyone.

@Rodrigues770471

3 Likes
171

Fantastic explanation for next 2 years of future plans for DAO. Very exciting & promising for the community!

2 Likes
172

Thanks Kash, really well laid and well put post. I guess one thing I’m also wondering, as has been mentioned a few times up the thread, is more geared around permanent mechanics for value accrual. I know the team have a roadmap for “value accrual mechanisms” but one thing I always wondered was why the litterbox trust was set up with a two year span - why is this not permanent? Wouldn’t that be a perfect spilt of how the protocol supports both the DAO and the team? I personally would like to see that as it’s a long term iron-clad method for supporting both.

173

solid draft, I like the direction we heading.

1 Like
174

The DAO, this is honestly a good draft of proposals, most of questions or concerned I want to pulled has been discussed in comments, love to see catdets minds rubbing​:light_blue_heart::ringed_planet:

2 Likes
175

thanks man!! was a lot of community input that went into this, appreciate you contributing!

2 Likes
176

thanks for the kind words!

to be honest it’s set up with a 2 year term in order to figure out what works, if its helpful, if it leads to the outcomes around boosting the ecosystem that we hoped.

will need to see in the future, too early to call the game, but it does seem like it could be a valuable asset for the DAO in the future (potentially!)

1 Like
177

well said, and I agree! Thanks for putting it more clearly than I might have in my own essay haha.

excited to see your proposal soon! make sure to tag me

1 Like
178

yeah i hear where you are coming from, i was just referring to all of the wallets that are potentially able to vote.

much like in America we say there are XXXm voters, even though far fewer than that actually end up voting each election.

If I had said there were “400k active voters” or something I can understand more why you’d feel like it was misleading, but I usually try to be pretty accurate and say that we have 400k or whatever total voters.

(i make mistakes though, so its possible i’ve said it wrong in one or two places over the last few months!)

1 Like
179

re: the original draft idea around budgeting - the reason things have changed is, well, things change! we’ve seen how much the DAO realistically will use, and having $10m (plus the 100m JUP) for the next two years should be plenty.

further, at the time we didn’t have things like the Litterbox Trust, nor did we have a sense that independent funding streams would be important in the long term.

in the initial post, we clearly say “aiming to” because we weren’t 100% sure what the world would look like in the future. now it is much clearer to us that for the DAO to indepdentn it cannot rely on the future manual actions of the team.

–
re: “shiny bla bla rules” - obviously I disagree, but it doesn’t sound like there’s a way to convince you here. we aren’t hiding anything, we’re being explicit!

re: community path to proposals - yes that is explicitly the goal! obviously will take time to get there and to identify proper guardrails, but that would be a great ingredient on the journey towards indepdenence for the DAO.

1 Like
180

hey richard, thanks for the comment! however, i must respectfully disagree.

a board of director’s primary job is oversight. that is not how we think about the DAO - the BOD should regularly review books, approve executive compensation, etc. That is not what the DAO will be doing if this proposal passes.

to add clarity here, $JUP tokens are not equity in the udnerlying busienss, which is fully and wholly owned by the Team. I know most teams would prefer to just avoid this question or pretend that the token is some kind of psuedo-equity, but I’d prefer to bite the bullet and be honest.

But just because it’s not equity, doesn’t mean that it can’t have clear alignment with the business, as it does with the Litterbox Trust! So indeed the idea must remain around how token holders can benefit, especially with the DAO as an acceleratant for the products, community, and ideas of JUpiter.

appreciate you richard!

1 Like
181

Appreciate the work that went into this proposal and everything the team is building.

That said, the scope here feels quite broad. Could you clearly specify exactly what this vote is approving? From my read, it seems like we’re being asked to greenlight a 2-year progressive decentralization plan, largely steered by the core team, without firm milestones or clear accountability paths.

My concern is that without sharper deliverables or checkpoints, we risk drifting further from true DAO sovereignty. Would love clarification here — it’s important we’re all aligned before signing off.

Thanks again for pushing the Jupiverse forward.

1 Like
182

This is an amazing proposal.

1 Like
183

I like the ideas here really cppl