►
Description
A new era of EOS is upon us with a wide constellation of contributors across the ENF, ClarionOS, sponsored working groups, and others within the EOS community. This roundtable discussion features the ENF's own Yves La Rose and Zack Gall are joined by Dan Larimer, the architect of EOSIO and CEO of ClarionOS.
Part 2 - https://youtu.be/1L-zm6rAFWc
Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpIp_EOtcyE
Timestamps
00:00:00 - DAO of DAOs
00:05:50 - Growing EOS Community
00:08:00 - Protocol DeFi and Locked Up Liquidity
00:10:45 - No Code DAO Model
00:13:00 - ENF Hedging Bets
00:16:50 - Eden 1.0 vs 2.0
00:19:00 - Bootstrapping Liquidity
00:22:50 - Grand Vision
00:28:00 - Dan Working Autonomously Alongside ENF
00:30:00 - ENF as Part of the DAO of DAOs
Everything EOS is the official media channel of the EOS Network Foundation (ENF). The EOS Network Foundation coordinates financial and non-financial support to encourage the growth and development of the EOS Network. We’re harnessing the power of decentralization to chart a coordinated future for the EOS Network as a force for positive global change.
Join the EOS Discord - https://discord.gg/eos-network
Follow Us on Twitter - https://twitter.com/EosNFoundation
B
So
you
know
we
built
eden
and
eden's
been
a
fantastic
experiment
in
democratic
governance,
and
I
think
a
lot
of
the
people
that
participated
in
it
have
really
enjoyed
the
fact
that
they
got
to
meet
other
people.
They
got
to
hear
ideas,
they
felt
heard
and
the
community
genuinely
put
up
quality
leaders
right.
B
We've
got
gray
mass
team
represented,
we've
got,
you
know,
violet
garden,
we've
got
eosb's
and
you
know
chris
barnes
who's
been
out
there
advocating
for
eos
and
governance,
and
all
that
pick
some
really
quality
people
out
of
100
plus
people
that
are
participating
and
they
had
fun
doing
it.
I
think
that
we
learned
a
lot
and
that
we
can
iterate,
and
so
eden
2.0
is,
is
what
my
team
is
designing.
B
B
To
directly
denominate
everything,
but
I'm
really
excited
about
the
the
white
paper.
I've
been
thinking
it
through
and
I've.
I've
concluded
that
I
want
to
release
a
video
that
explains
the
entire
process
and
I'm
going
to
release
the
video
before
the
white
paper,
because
I
think
the
white
paper
is
one
of
those
things
that
academics
wants
a
lot
of
precision
and
they
want
all
the
details
there
and
they're
going
to
reference
it
for
a
long
time
to
come.
A
video
is
probably
more
of
in
line
with
what
everyone
actually
wants
to
know.
B
So
I
am
a
big
fan
of
network
provided
defy
you
know,
that's
you
know
what
some
of
the
motivation
behind
my
changes
to
the
token
contract,
adding
built-in
support
for
bank
or
liquidity
between
things
is
because
I
know
that
if
you
have
a
lot
of
different
acts
running
on
a
chain,
they
all
have
their
own
token.
They
all
benefit
from
having
built-in
liquidity.
They
all
benefit
from
being
able
to
transact
on
a
a
fee
basis.
B
If
the
underlying
infrastructure
breaks
one
dac,
that's
going
to
be
a
problem,
all
right,
and
so
I
think
each
dac
needs
to
have
a
representative,
and
that
representative
comes
up
and
that
protocol
level
decisions
are
made
by
the
representatives
from
all
the
dacs
rather
than
all
the
people
individually
like
advocating
for
protocol
level
changes.
So
it's
the
democracy
of
democracy.
Each
stack
is
democratic.
B
A
B
B
If
you're
going
to
move
to
a
country
and
you're
going
to
build
a
business
and
buy
a
house
you're
going
to
want
to
know
that
you're
represented
in
that
country
and
they're
not
going
to
just
change
the
rules
and
validate
your
business
and
regulate
you
out
of
existence
and
that's
what
every
deck
has
so
when
I
say
deck
of
dax
or
dow
dows
or
democracy
of
democracies,
that's
what
I'm
saying
it's
like
saying:
the
united
states
is
a
democracy
of
states.
Each
state
gets
one
vote
within
each
state.
B
It's
a
democracy
of
counties
and
within
each
county,
it's
a
democracy
of
towns
and
with
each
town,
it's
a
democracy
of
people
right.
That's
that's
a
fractal
approach
to
governance.
It
keeps
decisions
made
as
local
as
possible.
You
build
consensus,
you
bubble
it
up
and
then
that
whole
community
expresses
the
consensus
to
the
next
level
up
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
This
is
the
direction
I'm
taking
and
I'm
really
really
excited
about
eden.
2.0.
B
You
can
have
an
outsized
influence
on
the
local
community
and
you
get
an
outsized
percentage
of
the
rewards
of
that
community
growing
right.
If
you
make
a
difference
in
your
town
and
your
town
grows,
you
reach
profit,
but
your
entire
state
benefits
the
whole
country
benefits
from
from
that
town
growing,
but
the
people
in
the
town
should
benefit
the
most
and
the
farther
away
you
are
from
where
the
change
was
the
the
less
the
benefit
should
go.
B
If
you
have
a
federal
government,
that's
trying
to
reap
all
the
profits
of
someone
trying
to
contribute
to
their
town
you're,
not
going
to
have
the
growth
that
you
need
for
for
the
town
you're
not
going
to
have
the
economic
incentive.
It's
like
trying
to
tell
an
entrepreneur,
you're
gonna
work
for
salary,
and
you
don't
get
to
reap
any
equity.
B
You
know
you
don't
see
the
outsize
growth
of
your
contributions
when,
when
all
you
do
is
get
paid
for
the
job
and
you
don't
get
exposure
to
the
upside
of
your
specific
actions
and
that's
why
you
need
a
fractal
structure.
That's
why
you
need
many
tokens
so
that
you
motivate
more
total
contributions
and
they
all
bubble
up
to
result
in
the
entire
ecosystem
growing.
A
That's
really
what
has
me
the
most
excited
and
I
think
communicating
that
to
the
eos
community,
so
even
people
who
aren't
necessarily
interested
in
the
governance
aspects
of
the
deck
of
dax,
the
d5
aspects
of
it
are,
are
going
to
be
quite
innovative
so
like
with
the
protocol
and
liquidity,
for
example,
the
the
more
dax
there
are,
the
more
bets
it's
kind
of
like
being
a
vc,
and
you
make
a
bunch
of
small
bets
into
hundreds
of
companies.
You
only
need
a
couple
unicorns
and,
and
you
you
win
as
a
vc.
A
So
that's
essentially
what
eos
could
potentially
do
with
this
model,
and
let
me
stipulate
that
the
block
producers
would
have
the
ultimate
say
on
if
anything's
being
done
with
an
inflation
distribution
into
the
dac
of
dax
model,
that
you've
presented
some
graphics
for
already
and
you'll
continue
to.
But
if
you
imagine
a
liquidity
pool
where
one
eos
equals
one
dan
dak
token
they're,
both
being
fed
in
from
inflation
and
then
the
dan
token
goes
10x.
A
That
would
essentially
create
a
scenario
where
a
bunch
of
eos-
that's
not
necessarily
coming
from
inflation,
is
getting
locked
up
into
that
liquidity
pool
because
now
there's
only
one
tenth
of
a
damn
token
in
the
relay,
but
then
there's
10
eos
tokens
in
the
relay,
even
though
the
protocol
only
contributed
one
eos
in
this
situation,
so
any
of
these
dax
if
their
value
were
to
go
up,
it's
going
to
result
in
a
lot
of
eos
getting
locked
up
by
the
protocol.
So
that's
something
people
need
to
understand.
A
A
A
B
And
why
do
they
do
this
on
eos,
not
somewhere
else,
because
eos
has
built-in
liquidity
for
their
token,
because
eos
has
tools
that
allow
them
to
do
it
without
having
to
write
a
single
line
of
code
and
and
that
dex
aspect
of
things
is
why
people
say
well,
I'm
gonna
build
it
here.
If
I
build
it
on
ethereum,
I'm
gonna
have
to
write
code,
I'm
gonna
have
to
manage
contracts,
I'm
gonna
have
to
figure
out
how
to
get
liquidity
over
there.
B
It's
not
baked
in,
and
the
incentives
aren't
there
for
collab
collaboration
between
communities
and
you
go
to
other
chains,
and
they
have
to
do
these
different
things.
These
other
chains
won't
have
the
governance
model
that
allows
subjective
consensus.
Building
to
achieve
public
goods,
and
so
by
creating
those
tools,
it's
like
an
exchange,
subsidizing
or
an
exchange
starting
it
up.
B
B
C
Now,
from
enfs
dan's
got
an
idea:
dan's
got
an
application
that
he
just
described
to
you
that
may
in
theory
work,
but
it
may
not
work
in
reality.
The
enf
is
hedging
the
bets
right.
So
it's
supportive
of
that
vision.
The
anf
likes
that
vision,
but
it's
going
to
take
a
while
it's
going
to
take
time
you're,
even
if
tomorrow,
that
was
live,
there's
not
necessarily
demand
for
that
product
tomorrow.
In
the
meantime,
the
enf
doesn't
stop
doing
what
it
is
doing
and
so,
for
example,
we
talked
about
d5.
C
We
talked
about
yield
the
enf,
just
I
guess-
dropped
some
alpha
yesterday
that
it's
also
exploring
a
yield
plus
that
group
is
forming.
So
in
the
meantime,
this
is
an
application
that
the
network
is
willing
to
support,
but
there
are
other
applications
or
other
use
cases
that
the
network
is
currently
supporting
and
will
continue
to
support
that
it
doesn't
even
know
that
it's
going
to
support
because
they're
not
there.
C
Mitigating
our
risks,
hedging,
on
dan's
idea,
hedge
dan,
in
a
way,
is
also
hedging
on
eos
hedging,
on
the
enf
ideas
and
everybody's
hedging
on
each
other,
and
what
then
mentioned
with
the
dao
of
taos
or
the
communities
that
are
deformed.
It
also
goes
back
to.
Why
would
somebody
work
on
something
that
you
want
them
to
work
on
within
eden?
2.0,
each
community
would
be
able
to
work
on
what
they
believe
adds
value,
what
they're
passionate
about,
and
if
the
market
determines
that
that
has
value
that
rises.
C
If
the
market
determines
that
that
doesn't
have
value
that
doesn't
rise,
but
because
you're,
placing
so
many
bets
again
going
back
on
the
idea
that
one
of
them
may
hit
and
if
that
one
hits
these
are
tried
and
tested
methods.
The
more
bets
you
place
if
you
mitigate
risk
right,
so
it's
not
just
willy-nilly
again.
C
If
you
have
a
good
system
in
place,
the
more
bets
you
place,
the
higher
the
likelihood
of
having
one
hit
that
rises,
everybody
else
and
that's
how
you
upgrade
upgrade
upgrade,
and
if
you
create
a
system,
that's
able
to
do
this
efficiently
and
rapidly.
Then
your
upgrades
end
up
happening
way
more
frequently
than
they
would
have
if
you're
just
spending
the
time
waiting
around
for
one
thing
so
going
back
to
dan's
working
on
something.
C
I
agree
with
that
vision.
I
think
that's
an
awesome
vision.
I
think
that
there's
future
in
that,
but
it
will
take
time,
and
the
enf
also
wants
to
hedge
that
that
may
not
work
as
planned,
just
like
in
one
point
on
1.0
certain
things
work
learn
all
right.
There
might
be
an
eaton
3.0
continue
iterating.
That
can
happen,
while
other
things
are
happening
as
well,
they're,
not
mutually
exclusive,
and
that's
why
I
think
dan
and
I
share
common
vision,
while
also
maybe
not
agreeing
on
the
near-term
approach
or
the
medium-term
approach
or
the.
C
B
B
Just
I
I
assume,
there's
still
going
to
be
funding
from
the
enf,
because
it's
still
electing
leaders
and
those
leaders
have
funds,
and
they
are
you
know
each
pursuing
their
own
visions,
whether
it's
the
bees
or
or
anchor
wallet
or
whatnot,
so
they're,
it's.
It
is
successfully
funding
infrastructure
on
eos
as
it
is,
and
it
can
continue
to
to
operate
while
we're
building
the
2.0
just
for
some
general
timelines.
B
I
would
expect
that
the
2.0
will
be
armed
and
fully
operational
by
the
end
of
the
year,
but
it's
it's
a
big
effort,
it's
bigger
than
even
1.0
in
terms
of
what
we're
attempting
to
achieve
and
a
lot
of
what
we're
attempting
to
achieve
is
building.
On
top
of
some
of
the
proposals
I
put
out
on
blog
posts
this
week
right
the
proposals
for
tokens
and
symbol
auctions
yeah.
I
want
to
create
lots
of
communities.
B
I
want
these
communities
to
be
able
to
create
tokens,
and
I
want
them
to
be
able
to
do
so
without
having
to
deploy
contracts
and
all
these,
and
then
they
need
a
liquidity
right,
and
so
I'm
attempting
to
get
the
es
network
to
upgrade
in
ways
that
benefits
all
dax.
Anyone
who
might
want
to
issue
a
token
anyone
who's
going
to
need
the
liquidity
to
benefit
from
the
same
infrastructure
that
I'm
attempting
to
build
for
eden,
2.0
communities
and
so
yeah,
and
I
can
release
that
code
earlier.
B
Then
I
can
release
the
final
full
governance
2.0
for
eden,
which
is
going
to
take
more
ui
development,
more
smart
contract
development,
but
all
these
things
are
part
of
a
grand
vision,
I'm
not
just
willy-nilly,
throwing
out
hey.
Let's
enhance
the
names,
hey,
let's
add
symbol
options.
Let's
do
this
thing,
what's
it
all
for
it's,
because
I'm
trying
to
bootstrap
defy
for
between
all
the
different
communities
of
all
the
edens.
B
C
All
right,
and
so
the
enf
recognizes
that
as
well,
going
back
to
yield
plus
some
people
just
want
to
have
a
reason
to
haul
that
token.
In
the
meantime,
some
people
want
to
contribute.
Some
people
want
to
be
active.
Some
people,
value
governance,
other
people
value
the
investment
side
of
things.
Other
people
value
the
the
application
side
of
things.
C
C
So
he
gave
you
a
little
bit
more
insight
on
what
his
grand
vision
is
right
and
if
he
waits
until
all
that
grand
vision
is
fleshed
out
before
releasing
a
paper
or
before
giving
the
community
a
chance
to
see
here's,
what
all
it
is,
then
people
will
complain
so
put
yourself
in
then
shoots.
He
can't
win
if
he
waits
until
all
that's
done,
then.
You're
gonna
complain
that
he,
you
weren't
part
of
the
process
and
that
you
didn't
get
a
chance
to
maybe
provide
feedback
on
that
ultimate
thing.
C
So
dan
chooses
to
release
little
snippets
of
what's
going
on
while
telling
you
what
he's
working
on
as
well.
But
then
you
complain
that
you
didn't
get
that
smaller
level
of
before.
Even
he
wrote
that
post
of
being
part
of
that
process.
So
he
does
that
in
telegram,
and
so
he
does
the
back
and
forth
with
you
in
telegram
and
he
tries
to
iterate
all
iterating
in
real
time
for
that
big
thing.
C
But
he
can't
win
because
no
matter
when
he
releases
that
information
whenever
whenever
he
attempts
to
start
gathering,
that
feedback
will
never
be
satisfactory
to
everybody
who
ultimately
just
wants
to
be
in
dan's
brain
and
just
seeing
it
as
it's
being
created
and
dan's
team.
And
that's
not
that's
not
possible
and
it's
the
same
thing
with
all
the
working
groups.
Some
people,
the
working
groups,
are
attempting
to
reach
out
to
as
many
people
as
possible,
but
they
will
fail.
C
They
will
not
be
able
to
reach
out
to
every
single
person
that
it's
not
possible
and
so
when,
even
when
they
release
their
bully
papers,
I
know
that
they're
going
to
get
the
same,
flack
that
in
some
cases
they're
giving
to
them
of
saying
why
you
know
hey.
I
wasn't
in
that
working
group.
I
didn't
get
a
chance
to
to
submit
feedback
or
and
such,
and
so
is
it
fair
complete
that
your
blue
paper
is
what's
going
to
happen.
C
No
at
some
point,
it's
good
enough
to
be
able
to
present
to
start
gathering
feedback
and
that
loop
is
continuous.
It's
continual,
so
dan's
got
a
vision
right
now
that
he
says
is
going
to
take
a
few
years,
maybe
to
change
the
final
final
final
of
everything
is
now
in
place
if
it
even
works
that
way.
In
the
meantime,
it's
going
to
be
a
continuous,
continuous,
continuous
iterative
process.
That
is
the
process.
That
is
what
I
guess
I
believe
is-
is
a
good
way
forward.
I
would
I
would
imagine
that
dan
also
agrees.
C
B
B
B
I
want
to
get
it
a
little
bit
more
clear
because
otherwise
this
is
going
to
be
even
more
confusion
as
all
right
are
we
talking
about
dan's
vision
on
this
date
or
the
week
after
or
the
week
after
the
week
after
I
gotta
wait
until
the
rate
of
change
slows
down,
so
that
people
are
not
confused
and
they're
talking
past
each
other
and
like
well.
Some
people
read
the
first
paper
and
some
people
read
the
second.
B
B
So
I'm
just
pointing
out
that
by
being
aware
of
that,
if
you
see
something
you
like
speak
up,
we
need
more
people
to
say.
Yes,
I
like
that
direction
to
balance
out
the
perception
of
all
the
squeaky
wheels
that
are
going
to
say.
I
don't
like
that
direction
and
then
the
community
can
actually
get
a
better
sense
of
things
and
we
have
more
positive
experience,
because
if
all
people
see
is
the
dissent
all
right,
dan's
got
this
opinion.
Science
got
this
opinion.
Aaron's
got
this
opinion.
He's
got
this
opinion.
B
If
they
just
see
that
and
they
don't
see
all
the
hey.
Actually,
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
good
stuff
here
then
then,
that's
actually
toxic
to
the
community
as
well.
So
you
can
contribute
to
the
community.
You
can
contribute
to
the
success
of
eos
by
voicing
the
things
you
like.
Let's
try
to
be
a
a
culture
saying:
yes,
that's
great!
That
would
make
things
awesome
if
we
had
that.
C
Well,
there's
also
the
the
other
side
of
the
coin
as
well,
but
there's
some
people
that
no
matter
what
you
say,
it's
the
best
thing
since
since
sliced
bread
right,
and
so
it's
also
filtering
and
that's
the
role
of
vnf
as
well.
What
actually
has
value
and
what
actually
has
a
reasoning
behind
that
value?
What
actually
has
criticism
and
and
what
are
those
valid
criticisms
and,
what's
kind
of
at
the
extreme,
that
anything
that
dan
says
or
anything
the
enf
says
is
amazing.
C
Anything
that
dan
says
is
garbage
anything
that
encef
says
is
garbage,
there's
somewhere
in
between
and
and
that's
basically
the
filter
and
that
the
process
that
needs
to
occur.
The
line
that
we
talked
about
earlier.
That's
a
never-ending
thing.
Getting
better
at
that
and
and
being
in
this
position
to
even
be
able
to
be
in
that
position
is
something
that
we
now
have
to
deal
with,
because
we've
never
had
to
deal
with
before.
B
B
So
that
feeling
of
helplessness
is
what
cause
causes,
people
to
abandon
projects-
and
I
don't
I
want
to
be
here-
and
I
want
to
make
a
difference
and-
and
I
I
think
I
have
a
lot
of
value-
I
can
contribute
and
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
people
that
want
me
to
contribute
that
value
and
so
where
eos
is
today
compared
to
where
it
was
a
year
ago.
I
am
a
whole
lot
more
hopeful
that
the
ship
can
be
steered
in
a
positive
direction
in
a
timely
manner,
and
that
is
very,
very
bright.
C
From
my
point
of
view,
dan
in
bitshares
was
not
able
to
get
funded
by
the
network,
and
so
he
leaves
and
does
a
second
project
a
second
ico
and
then
within
that
project,
then
there's
the
disagreement
with
the
network
itself
as
well
as
then.
I
guess
the
entity
itself,
and
so
he
leads
creates
another
one.
We
have
the
same
thing
in.
B
C
C
But
how
can
I
essentially
enable
them
to
be
autonomous
and
to
be
able
to
be
down,
because
I
think
I
think
everybody
I
think,
there's
there's
somewhat
of
a
consensus
that
when
dan
is
able
to
be
autonomous,
is
when
dan
shines
when
dan
is
able
to
work
on
what
he's
passionate
about
that's
when
we
see
a
massive
inflow
of
community
members,
that's
when
we
see
value
being
created
right.
It
does
not
stop
other
people
from
also
doing
the
same
thing,
but
we're
here
in
part
because
of
dan
we're
in
eoz
because
he
created
eos.
C
So
how
can
we
recreate
that?
So
let
them
be
autonomous
with,
however,
by
having
accountability,
because
the
network
is
funding
in
part
down,
so
one
of
the
ways
that
we
decide
to
do
that
is
that
dan
proposes
something
and
if
he,
if
he
completes
that,
and
if
the
network
agrees
to
it,
they
potentially
refund
him
or
they
they
pay
him
back
for
that
right.
So
he
does
the
work
beforehand.
C
Now
that
doesn't
mean
that
anything
that
he
does
and
everything
that
he
does
gets
funded
by
the
network.
And
so
I
I
would
imagine
that
dan
also
wants
to
be
autonomous
at
some
point
where
it's
no
longer
the
chain
itself
funding
him,
but
that
he's
incentivized
to
build
on
that
product
and
the
enf
is
juggling
all
of
that.
While
how
can
we
enable
them?
C
Support
them
surround
them,
because
there
is
something
there
there's
clearly
something
there,
but
then
how
do
we
also
ensure
that
that
doesn't
impede
on
others
from
also
being
amplified,
leveraged,
supported
and
and
and
essentially
surrounded
and
helped,
so
that
they
can
also
do
the
same
thing?
And
that's
the
big
challenge
with
the
enf?
How
do
we
do
that?
C
Not
just
for
him
but
for
everybody
else,
so
that
everybody
feels
like
they've
got
a
place
and
they
want
to
build
on
the
os
they're
supported
to
build
on
eos,
and
how
do
we
then
eventually
make
the
enf
no
longer
the
entity
that
it
is
because
now
it's
part
of
potentially
death's
process
of
the
dow
thousand?
Maybe
the
enf
is
the
dow
of
daos,
because
this
doesn't
make
sense
for
me
to
to
be
benevolent
forever
in
the
sense
that,
if
I'm
no
longer
there
tomorrow,
if
I
get
hit
by
a
car
tomorrow,
all
this
crumbles.
C
So
we
need
to
figure
out
a
way
so
that
that
is
no
longer
the
case
in
in
the
future.
Again,
that's
where
dan
and
I
agree
on
the
vision
of
let's
work
towards
something
so
that
I
essentially
can
replace
myself,
because
if
not
it's
not
sustainable.
If
not
we're
going
to
hit
a
wall
at
some
point,
it
makes
no
sense,
but
it
we're
in
a
special
situation
where
it
does
make
sense
right
now.
How
do
we
improve
it?
Going
forward.
B
I'm
super
proud
that
the
bit
shares
community
that
the
steam
community
that
the
highest
community
and
now
the
eos
community
is
able
to
operate
and
advance
independently
they're
self-sustaining
organisms,
and
I
made
sure
that
bitshares
had
a
funding
mechanism
to
make
that
happen,
and
all
these
systems
had
some
kind
of
governance
in
them.
That
was
good
enough
to
allow
the
community
to
make
forward
progress,
and
you
know
that's
still
the
the
plan.
The
way
I
I'm
starting
to
think
about
leadership
and
governance
is
strong.
B
Communities
need
a
leader
and
people
follow
the
leader,
but
the
leader
cannot
have
political
power
and
I
don't
have
political
power.
I
can
only
lead
by
my
sheer
influence
and
my
ability
to
cast
the
vision
that
people
believe
in
and
then
the
community
can
can
support
and
adopt
the
ideas
or
not,
but
it's
that
check
and
balance
between
a
leader
and
a
political
process
that
protects
against.
Like
let's
say
I
go
rogue
right,
then
all
right,
I'm
I'm
out,
because
I
went
completely
rogue,
but
you
know,
if
you
think
about
twitter.
B
Everyone
started
sign
up,
they
start
using
it
and
then
the
ce
goes
rogue
and
start
centering.
Half
the
the
user
base
because
of
political
disagreements
that
twitter
required
a
strong
leader
to
come
into
being.
But
the
people
didn't
retain
the
political
power
to
say
no
you're
censoring,
because
political
control
and
leadership
were
tied
and
married
together.
B
I
think
that
a
network
that
can
honor
a
leader
and
follow
a
leader
yet
has
the
power
to
check
the
leader
whenever
they
you
know,
for
example
like
steam,
it,
the
leader,
sold
out
to
tron
someone,
they
didn't
believe
in
and
they
just
forked
and
started
a
whole
new
community.
They
had
the
power
to
put
check
on
the
leadership
and
maintain
the
community
and
the
same
thing
can
apply
here.