Two-layer governance

Re https://firefly.social/post/x/2018205196568944653

I actually don't think it's complicated.

IMO the future of onchain mechanism design is mostly going to fit into one pattern:

[something that looks like a prediction market] -> [something that looks like a capture-resistant, non-financialized preference-setting gadget]

In other words:

• One layer that is maximally open and maximizes accountability (it's a market, anyone can buy and sell, if you make good decisions you win money if you make bad decisions you lose money)
• One layer that is decentralized and pluralistic, and that maximizes space for intrinsic motivation. This cannot be token-based, because token owners are not pluralistic, and anyone can buy in and get 51% of them. Votes here should be anonymous, ideally MACI'd to reduce risk of collusion.

The prediction market is the correct way to do a "decentralized executive", because the most logical primitive for "accountability" in a permissionless concept is exactly that.

Though sometimes you will want to keep it simple, and do a centralized executive at that layer instead:

[replaceable centralized executive] -> [something that looks like a capture-resistant, non-financialized preference-setting gadget]

Thinking in these two layers explicitly: (i) what is doing your execution, (ii) what is doing your preference-setting and is judging the executor(s), is best.