kaal:claim:4529715-039

Big Green DAO's committee unanimity and closed membership make attacks unlikely, but these same protections come at the expense of the decentralized organization the founders were trying to create.

Source quote, verbatim

However, these principles really limit what a DAO is supposed to be so in a way it is secure, but also at the expense of the organization they were trying to create.

From

Wulf A. Kaal, Josh Bykowski, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO) – A Market Meta Analysis (2023), Appendix, Charity DAOs, The Big Green DAO, p. 131
https://ssrn.com/abstract=4529715 · source PDF

Cite as

Wulf A. Kaal, Josh Bykowski, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO) – A Market Meta Analysis (2023). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4529715

Holds when

vetted membership and unanimous committee approval

Classification

failuresupport: arguedfailure: security-by-recentralizationfamily: recentralization-driftdaodecentralizationconsensus-and-securitygovernance-design

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 2d71961e8c449afbeaf45ca4f53de8a575d45c77d6960b767d3d1d0874f296b5. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/7ea93f1479b34f1b...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4529715-039.md | sha256sum