CIP - 209D - Representation via Annual Meeting

Draft Proposal to support civics in CityDAO and the U.S. that will lead to stable crypto regulation.

I again will throw out a proposal to get our governance under control. With the recent (second) Discord hack, I personally am considering a lawsuit just to be able to know what actually has happened. But alas, I dislike most lawyers and judges. Hoping politics here can prevail.

I am a lawyer, Presidential Candidate, and co-founder of

I propose a synchronous in person annual meeting for CityDAO that is global, where people who travel to nodes are compensated for travel and active participation. This is the norm for co-ops, like SporkDAO, and electric co-ops which litter the American landscape.

Good governance exists. It is time to follow me on the road to good governance.

I propose we use the $50,000 proposed for awarding victims, and instead give everyone hope of a CityDAO in the future led with competent structures to design against the fallen nature of man.

The funding would facilitate a venue in Denver this summer, for an annual meeting rewarding participants, and jumpstart any due diligence necessary to get several GPU clusters running in a structure on land owned by CityDAO, and powered by CityDAO power plant. The Denver forum would handle all technology costs for making the meeting synchronous around the world. We will operate for one 24 hour period sprint. I would be given legal authority by the DAO to secure the venue, notice the meeting, and draft the proposed rules for the meeting, and operate as the parliamentarian, or hire one if the budget allows. The rules will slightly augment Roberts Rules of Order. Additional CIPs can be proposed for additional node funding as I do not know, nor can I anticipate how many more nodes can or should be supported. I will of course dedicate some funding to use my time to help other node operators set up the event and co-ordinate.

I look forward to the debates.


1 Like

It seems somewhat contradictory to threaten a lawsuit while at the same time saying how you should be given $50,000 to plan an international meeting, compensating people for travel. I like the idea of a 24-hour sprint to work on governance. I wish you had been here in the DAO for the past year, instead of resurfacing suddenly with such an ominous threat.

If you want to know what happened, not only is all the information available, you could just ask us. I don’t know what you mean by the “fallen nature of man” but it creates a suggestion that humankind is somehow other than it “should” be in an alternate reality. I know from being here that we’re doing our best, and would love to talk about it. Maybe a conversation could precede a CIP so that we could discuss an international hybrid 24-hour sprint?


We are a decentralized digital city, let’s operate one. I love the idea of a 24 hour sprint, but let’s make the meeting decentralized and digital, which also has the added bonus of not costing $50k to secure a venue!

1 Like

Good comment! I would like to think we could do this without a face to face meeting, but I am still just a human. I have participated in thousands of meetings. They are universally better when the majority of the quorum participate in person. Would be nice if this could be avoided. Perhaps it could after we have well oiled governance. Or if we were all professional full-stack developers. But we have neither. We are a diverse global community. We need faces to names, for those who do not wish to remain completely anonymous, to be a city. Happy to try to do this for less. But, good governance is worth its weight in gold, imho.


My point is that with every hack, and misstep, leadership is risking a lawsuit against the DAO by people less forgiving than myself.

Frankly, the governance of this DAO is a shit-storm of self-interest and no structure. I have not been around for a year because of the permissions battle on Discord that had no solution other than the last Governance sprint I suggested, which was shut down by…

I do not fully trust you, David. Or Scott. Or anyone. Not even myself. That is why we have structures, to protect agains the lack of trust inherent in the human project. The line between good and evil runs through the heart of every man and woman.

There is nowhere to have this conversation I trust, other than here on Forum. Better to air the dirty laundry here than on X.

Please discuss the 24-hour governance sprint below, if you have thoughts!

1 Like

You walked away for a year and show up suddenly asking for $50K to plan a one-day meeting when you haven’t kept up with anything that’s been going on, or asked to have a chat with anyone who has been putting in the work. How would you know what’s going on with governance? This is incredibly egotistical behavior.


Not sudden. It’s after learning discord was dark and the website was broken during ETH Denver.

I know what’s going on because there is this thing called the public blockchain. Looking at Snapshot it doesn’t appear anything has changed in governance for the better since I was last involved. In my experience, all reasonable attempts at governance have been stymied by the back channel communications you suggest I should have used. No thanks.

I have been absent for a year because I have been dedicated to helping my Country fix its governance. I’m here to have conversations in public.

Thanks for the ad hominem attack. Please remember anytime you point a finger, you have three pointing back at yourself.

This guy has a big brain.

1 Like

I like @bubbles42’s idea of doing this online so we save $50K.

1 Like

I prefer having an in person component. I know of no organization well led by people who do not meet in person at least yearly. IMHO, faceless Discord calls hide truth instead of reveal it.

Doing a governance sprint online will still require money. But the ROI will be be lower, I argue. People still must be incentivized to participate, otherwise it will only be the same core group who has already risen to power. The participation, if rewarded, will have higher ROI if it is higher fidelity (in-person).

Governance costs money. Every other government and organization has this figured this out. We do not need to reinvent the wheel - but we should - but not by doing nothing.

The option is not $0 on governance or $50,000 on governance. But how much for what is reasonable? If someone has a better proposal with specifics, please post it.

1 Like