[Dao Discussion] Architectural Development and Visionary Alignment

                    `The Foreseeable Vision of Wonderland`

                              High level overview

To goal is to determine and address the best courses of action Wonderland should immediately take to better organize itself in preparation for the future. Wonderland has never really been on the same page with itself. From the beginning it seemed to be one thing after another, and consequently the community has not had the chance to consider crucial architectural factors thoroughly in the past. In this post I will outline my concerns and later on find paths to solutions for the key existing problems that prevent Wonderland’s forward progress. What the Dao structure lacks is hierarchical reinforcement.

The operational framework is not aligned to the visionary direction of Wonderland, so any type of change is needlessly difficult to implement as decision making lacks coherent flow. It is unreasonable to say Wonderland lacks the resources to be successful.

                               Current State of Affairs

Wonderland is trying to develop itself. The Dao governance framework and the protocols management models are and have been reliably improved or attended to with invested interest notably in the past. But to be realistic, Wonderland is not a successful protocol without a profitable design/roadmap and a lack of vision creates too much stagnation. Without a fundamentally agreed upon philosophy Wonderland’s ultimate purpose is best guessed by those attempting to build its future. In other words, we must define beneficial reasons to stick around otherwise Wonderland will be left behind. There is no current discussion towards contributor allocations beyond Yield Chads very recent WIP post. Due to this lack of attention, most of the contributed support comes from a position of good faith alone. This may work now, but it is no reliable approach to securing the right people and tools needed to perform standard operations.

The business model is half complete and redundant in nature. The economic and financial blueprints have been overlooked due to the collective focus towards investor access and creating a strong mode of governance. We are past due to discuss the broader framework and find a mutually acceptable vision that gives purpose to the builder’s ability to roadmap a strategy for construction. We have extensive reserves of capital that the current protocol is not able to maximize use of.

The Dao must agree upon how to achieve its undefined goals. What is not implicitly known is the opportunistic potential of circumstance. The sentiment of the broader crypto industry is not cut in stone yet either. So because of this, I find it most reasonable to use our resources towards internal development and visionary alignment to protect the long term brand. Wonderland’s value is ultimately determined by how it uses its resources to achieve its goals.

If we make fundamental protocol changes, all sides of relative influence and strategic reasoning should be made plain and clear before a mature decision is made with good intention. Thoroughness in economic, financial, and technical parameters must be collectively strived for and understood for any type of factual judgement to be collectively supported. If the Dao and/or community does not wish to participate in the advancement of defi, then it should be explicitly known as a social construct rather than a financial product.

I will make a second edition to this in a week or so to follow up on these concerns and expand towards solutions and proposed action that serve to further align development and operational affairs.

1 Like

I agree 100%. I’m waiting for the second edition to give my opinion on this.

come join me, we can share a week of tea sipping

wen part 2?
I’m very excited to read. :slight_smile:

1 Like