Decentralized Governance

Decentralized governance is one of the main tools offered by Blockchain but unfortunately many projects do not contemplate it.

One of the main changes provoked by Blockchain will be the end of the logic of economic concentration (and therefore concentration of political and social) power. Large corporations have historically concentrated and increased their power by buying competitors that began to stand out. This logic has increased with the arrival of the information internet. Clear examples are Facebook buying Instagram, Oculus and Whatsapp; or Google buying YouTube, Waze, Dobleclick and Admov. The extrapolation of such concentration of power from the economy to the policy is clear, since many of these acquisitions contravene the philosophy of competition regulation. Its influence on the social sphere, on how we live and what we think, is worrisome; We are tremendously influenced by the results we find when we search for information on Google, or the posts that Facebook shows us. Not to mention the false news that can be filtered or not, or the publicity they allow or not. When Facebook bans the advertising of ICO´s (Initial Coin Offerings) it is probably an attempt to stop this wave of disruption they can not control and / or because they want less competition for their future cryptocurrency / token.

This logic is what Blockchain can change with the arrival of the DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations): if a gigantic corporation intends to control a cryptocurrency, users can propose a hard fork (bifurcation of the chain) to avoid being under the effective control of said corporation. In projects without a blockchain of their own, if the code is open source, this logic is also mostly maintained.

We defend the ideal of decentralized governance, but there are not yet projects that execute it effectively to use them as an example in order to make a definitive proposal. It is something so complex that we put it as the last milestone of the road map. Ethic Hub was born with the vision of becoming a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization), but in a first phase the team needs margin of confidence to take everyday decisions since we will be into an environment of total uncertainty, adapting a theoretical business model to a real framework. We hope within two years the project will be more stabilized so we will be able to consult more and more decisions to the community.

Governance focused on token holders leads to big investors trying to influence decisions in their own interest (not necessary the project’s interest ) and also to large corporations attempting a hostile takeover bid if the project starts to stand out. Users could propose a fork if the promoter of the OPA is not depositary of their trust, but in any case the project itself would be weakened. It is healthier to give governance to the community as a whole and not just to investors.

For all this, in Ethic Hub ecosystem, a decentralized crowdlending platform that connects unbanked farmers with investors anywhere in the world, we propose a GNZ token that grants governance rights and is generated according to the Reputation tokens of the borrowers and Local Nodes (project collectors), depending on contributions (team and collaborators) and depending on the borrowed tokens (investors). The balance between these three axes is difficult and achieving it will be part of the work prior to the effective implementation of decentralized governance.

By giving effective governance to users, the project will be stronger and more resistant to any kind of attack by third parties with interests different from those of the community.

If you like the way we think and act, please visit EthicHub.com. In february 2018 we are preselling our future tokens. Become part of our community and make your bet to change the financial system.