Loomio
Mon 24 Apr 2017

Aragon: blockchain company platform: github issue Change of interface wording #41

S
Steve Public Seen by 513

Recently Aragon, a much anticipated blockchain decentralized platform, launched the their alpha version. The platform , hosted on the ethereum public blockchain, enables anyone to deploy an organization on the decentralized network. However, the wording used in the platform was raised as an issue since not all orgs use 'stocks', 'stock class' or 'shares'. I raised the issue on their slack/github channel since I felt that such an agnostic tech should be capable of being re-purposed for different organization types. disclosure; I dont work for nor am I affiliated with the developers. Im interested in using their platform for a coop type org.

I thought I'd create this channel here to discuss the suitability of the Aragon platform for an OpenCoop.

Please note that the Aragon.one platform is distinct from the Aragon Network. The Aragon Core, is open source decentralized app to run Blockchain organizations. The Aragon Network is optional common services to orgs using the core platform. Interesting times.

MR

Marc Rocas Tue 25 Apr 2017

I took the opportunity I had to talk with Jorge Izquierdo, from Aragon, to share with him this thread. He answered that he agrees with the content, and, in fact, this is exactly how it is going to work.

S

Steve Tue 25 Apr 2017

Yes, its instrumental to have proper language because it becomes a project framework . I am running an alpha instance and throwing game theory at it.. :smiley:

EDIT: if I'm not mistaken, Spain is renown for exemplary working coops . As far back as the early 80s

MR

Marc Rocas Thu 18 May 2017

FYI. https://twitter.com/aragonproject/status/864949900118822912
Aragon finished its ICO in 1 5minutes: $25M crowdfunded.
"AragonProject: Aragon token sale was finalized in less than 15 minutes.
Thanks to all contributors, we are extremely humbled by the confidence deposited 😍 ""

S

Steve Tue 30 May 2017

A very exciting project.. a coop formatted version will be of great benefit

DS

Danyl Strype Wed 31 May 2017

I commented the other day in a thread on Hylo about the CTA (Collaborative Technology Alliance) about the difficulties of registering an organisation (whether a public company, coop company, society, or trust/ foundation) that functions globally via the net, with participants in multiple state jurisdictions. Blockchain registration of organisations is a is a fascinating experiment. I look forward to seeing how it plays out.

SG

Simon Grant Mon 5 Jun 2017

Registering organisations seems to me quite parallel to residence of human beings. In both cases the state holds all the cards, and maybe there are parallels? Discussing this in more depth would be off topic, but does anyone here know a good place to hold that discussion? Or, a separate thread here?

S

Steve Sun 18 Jun 2017

@strypey and @asimong : Discussion of registration and legal jurisdiction is very relevant here: Aragon is but one implementation of a platform, but right now one of the most accessible.

Please note latest issue: SEC rulings on what constitutes a Security.. before you say coops are not securities, look that recent court ruling re.: http://www.coindesk.com/initial-coin-offering-ico-where-sec-might-stand/

The take away: The article was not specific to coops but rather about the ICO craze in Ethereum sphere. But even if a coop with transnational members is not a security, much due diligence is still required..

A while I posted an issue in Aragon developer github to offer users the choice of changing their platform terminology to suit cooperative functions. But is that enough? interesting times indeed.

DS

Danyl Strype Mon 19 Jun 2017

See also: 'Towards an Anarchist Money and Monetary System: An Interview with Nathan Cedric Tankus'. According to Tankus, digital property registration has been used throughout the Obama administration to fraudulently foreclose on and evict people from their homes. If we are to support to any kind of digital public records system, we must ensure it's a definite improvement on traditional, locally-controlled,paper-based systems. Otherwise we are in danger of being deployed as "usefui idiots" in support of systems that will be used to dispossess people. This applies to the registration of organisations, as well as registration of property.

On the other hand, blockchains and other technologies might make it possible to create fraud-proof global registration systems, replacing many of the current functions of states, and allowing sovereignty to be devolved to the municipal level. See Benjamin Barber's talk on 'Why Mayors Should Rule the World'.

EDIT: typo

S

Steve Mon 31 Jul 2017

Taking a step back, would it be more accurate to assert that decentralization is a red herring? Maybe localized closed systems, and walled gardens using context specific software to manage collaboration are the best approaches.

On the other hand Blockchain tech offers a backend that is censorship resistant.

Is there is a happy middle in there with proper adaptations of existing technologies. Aragon was cited has an example, an existing solution that can/should be configured to purpose.

GC

Greg Cassel Tue 1 Aug 2017

Taking a step back, would it be more accurate to assert that decentralization is a red herring? Maybe localized closed systems, and walled gardens using context specific software to manage collaboration are the best approaches.

These are complex issues with multiple complex (technical AND cultural) variables.

I'd say that systems with real "immune systems" are important, and some of those systems may be walled gardens from any specific viewpoint. For example, I sure as heck don't want to put my Loomio password in the public domain-- but I also wouldn't want every role for participation in every group activity to be openly available to the public.

Immune systems are important, AND sunlight is a disinfectant.

Each intentional network or community of people should IMO look closely at participation-types, rights and responsibilities.

SG

Simon Grant Wed 2 Aug 2017

@gregorycassel makes good points here, and maybe they belong as part of a wider discussion -- certainly not limited to this thread. There is certainly a balance needed between openness and privacy/security, particular with regards to personal information. Clarity about what is best open, and what is best private, is likely to contribute positively to this discussion and others.