Just wanted to bring this up because this was a topic of discussion in the latest DAO Board meeting and would like to get some additional perspectives.
On Discourse, we technically have the ability to make comments anonymously. There have been a couple of concerns raised regarding how influential certain active DAO members are, to the point where they can really sway opinions once they voice theirs.
Does anyone believe that this is an issue that could undermine true decentralisation in our decision making process in this forum? A simple solution would be to make comments anonymous. This would theoretically prevent anyone from becoming an âauthority of truthâ in any discussion/proposal.
I would like to wait and get a couple of comments before I post my perspective so I donât influence the discussion from the start.
If a sufficient number of people share this concern I have outlined here, we can evaluate possible plug ins for discourse/move the discussion to a vote.
I generally do not like anonymous comments personally if they are used in a matter to be negative in nature. With that said, I totally see how it can be useful in situations where an individual does not want to overinfluence opinion one way or another but still offer a voice.
Presuming the comment being made is informed with a foundational understanding of the issue being raised, then something might be lost if it hinders potential collaboration. I have found some of the best long-term outcomes come from and working with people that disagree originally and work together to make something better. So I worry having them anonymous will lose this potential and also make it harder for the âownerâ of the initiative (the one that has invested time into a proposal because they believe in the idea) to be able to address concerns.
I hope these two grapes are helpful in this matter.
I can see this being fine line between informed authorities who are actively engaged and passionate on topics that reflect their expertise swaying opinion, vesus potentially strong willed blinkered views that may put others down and railroad things; but coming in fresh, with rose tinted glasses, I havent seen comments made in the more negative vein that have intentionally put anyone down, should it happen though it does need calling out ideally in dmâs before publicly.
An anonomous reply option does sound a good solution, or other way around I could see is if a topic/thread is likely to be a controverstial, sensitive or uncomfortable one to raise, having a specific option to make a whole thread anon could be beneficial.
I have already reached out to discourse support to see how/if this can be implemented. From what I have read, we could technically enable anonymous mode but from what I see its use and functionality is pretty limited for now. For example, from what I have read, Anonymous accounts do not maintain their permissions to private categories⌠This might be problematic for us. Will post here when I get a response.
In my opinion, even though I do see some advantages of this I feel the possible benefits do not outweigh its disadvantages.
Reputation is becoming a central part of decentralised governance, and for good reason. Active members here, commenting and taking part in decision making are effectively becoming thought leaders, which imo is definitely not a bad thing. On the contrary, as DAO governance matures, reputation becomes an implicit, yet effective, systemâA critical piece of community infrastructure.
Giving the ability to members to comment anonymously eliminates that notion along with the ability to put opinions into better context.
Encourages mistrust. Allowing anonymity is like providing an easy way for members to avoid subsequent discussions and some responsibility for their comments imo.
with that being said I understand the benefits and so I am exploring what ever avenue there is for implementation.
What @DyNite suggested can be ideal where as @Durden said, it would not a complete overkill but could potentially make DAO members more confortable sharing their perspectives.
Though here is the discourse limitation I was talking about
I think giving the prople the option to do anonymus comments should be the way, this way the person is not that afraid to talk and getting judget by this beliefs and opinions.
I think having the option will make people more likely to comment and contribute to conversations. It will also make some peoples comment less likely to influence their own personal decision .
Iâm for going anonymous,
especially since your wallet has to be allowed to view and type so its not like weâll get randoms inside,
also that people might not be comfortable truly speaking their mind
There are some things that Discourse can do for us in regards to anonymity, in general, itâs not the way Discourse is meant to be used though. Weâre exploring some possibilities here. Right now, a good middle ground could be a section where anonymous posting is enabled automatically. Kind of an open suggestion box for constructive criticism.
Since we are tracked by the wallet address, I think not only the comments but the entire thread should be anonymous and thus no one can influence responses or conflicts ! It will be pure civilised brainstorming and decision making process . I vote yes to the entire thread and not only the comments.
I like the option of anonymous comments if thatâs possible. Generally I prefer to be open, but I think there could be occasional use for someone sharing thoughts anonymously.
I understand that anonymous discourse does allow for opinions be more honored, but I do see more value in identifying individuals to see what their opinions are to help build more constructive feedback/motivations.
But i will say that unfiltered discourse can help project someones true feelings/opinions where they wouldnât say it behind their avatar/identity⌠and at the same time could make those opinions way more harsh and unwarranted.
In my opinion, anonymous comments do more harm than good.
1ă Even though statements from influential members may influence the opinions of other DAO members, the ideas they come up with in most cases are beneficial and lead us to the right path. This is what makes them influential.
2ă Even if influential members may come up with ideas that are unfavorable for the community, we have other influential members who will correct him, there are many capable and thoughtful members in our community.
3ă Anonymous comments can lead to irresponsible or even malicious comments.
I must admit I am a bit shocked and may be alone in this opinion, totally understanding the opposing views, but I am strongly against anonymity in this DAO.
The ability to discuss, formulate or submit proposals, reply, and vote are vastly different concepts. Any consideration about anonymity for discussions or proposals is not a trivial question. Voting may be the only function where anonymity can be desirable.
Grape DAO is unique in that it attributes value and weight to the merits of peoples contributions and participation. Obfuscating communications in a setting like Discord or Discourse, and more specifically on discussions or proposals is counter-intuitive.
If comments were anonymous, that becomes more difficult. Anonymity presents a whole range of attack vectors and considerations in discussions that would otherwise not arise.
Fear has no place here. I love everyone who disagrees with me, if they have the same level of good intent that I do. Discussions that donât assign or ascribe accountability or reciprocity ultimately cause confusion, or worse, induce a level of suspicion reducing the value of those comments to justifiably be disregarded or ignored for lack of transparency or ability to explain, understand, and traverse a thought in its entirety.
Freedom to articulate and convey opinions has been a cornerstone of this DAO and a key reason tools like these are used to enable thoughtful debate. The key being thoughtful and collaborative. We can agree, disagree, or agree to disagree, but what we canât do is hide behind a vale of secrecy when we all represent this entire Community, a Treasury with funds to be allocated or managed on their behalf, and entrust the responsibility to each other to do this TOGETHER.
I havenât followed this discussion and the case for anonymity (need to catch up), but I agree with what you say here. Iâm against anonymity in this instance.
Yeah, I donât really get the logic here. If someone has âtoo muchâ social influence the response should be that they can get voted down not tried to be hamstrung.
If I was in an anonymous discussion I could simply tweet in conjunction with my advocacy in order to work around any influence limits that would be put on my voice.
I donât have any interest in doing so but this just seems to be a mis-framing of a problem.
Should the problem be framed as âinfluence is winning over reason in the forums?â
If so then it behooves all of us to be more logical both in our discourse and opinions versus being easily influenced by social precedent.
