Gravity DAO

[usama9500]

Tell us about the community that you are nominating

Gravity DAO is a community that focuses on developing conflict management and trust creation, as public goods in web3 ecosystems.

What public goods does this community support or will they support in the future?

Conflict management, Trust creation, Mental health, Nonviolent communication, liberating structures, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Integral thinking, Shadow work, Inner Engineering.

Who are the people, DAOs and other organizations already part of this community?

We were born within the cultural build of the Token Engineering Commons, that is the first iteration of the Commons Stack framework. Right now we are becoming a service DAO with active outreach to the following communities: Aragon, Gitcoin, 1hive, VitaDAO, Giveth, LongTail Finance.

Why do you think this community needs a Commons?

The capacity to manage conflict is a common good because we all can benefit from less violent coordination and promotion of more comprehensive systems. We want to promote peace and compassion as cultural infrastructure for DAOs.

What other resources do you have that will make your Commons deployment a success?

We received initial funding from the TEC.
We are designing our landing page, we also have a gitcoin grant and twitter account, and we are providing our first service to a client DAO (Aragon)

Do you have an idea for the name of this Commons?

Gravity DAO

Submitted by [Discord handle or Twitter handle]

Discord: Juankbell#7458
Twitter: @bellcho

[graial]

Ah interesting, I was always curious what that gravity channel was about. So this is about developing conflict management and trust creation as public goods

Im going to try to frame my questions in reference to the assertion made in writing and on the video:
The capacity to manage conflict is a common good because we all can benefit from less violent coordination and promotion of more comprehensive systems.

So is the above definition a proposed replacement to the economic definition which classifies a good/service as a 'public good' if it is both non-excludable & non-rivalrous? Or are we treating them both as part of a single definition of Public Goods?

I noticed this spreadsheet or proposed or possible services in the channel.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fuNTwL2UfzD6ILHfKYJukbqqdAKQxiHE

These appear to be a mix or different personal/digital goods & services. In consideration of the Public Goods definition described above, would you suggest that all of these are public goods? Would you prioritize any of them?

Wikipedia states that Public Goods are often funded by a 'Lindahl Tax', is this how you would anticipate funding this capacity? If not, is this expected to be a volunteer activity or do you have an alternative funding mechanism in mind?

Cheers and good luck!

[JuankBell]

Hello everyone! thanks for your interest and comments, will share some links to update this nomination :)

Conflict management as a non excludable public good suffers from the tragedy of the commons, because there is no particular benefit of taking care and providing the shared resources, even being something we all make use of.
By making a commons around it, we want to develop a system with boundaries for the long term sustainability of the resources that need and develop the capacity to manage conflict, with special target on the web3 community.

Latest article: https://gravitydao.medium.com/gravity-conflict-management-and-trust-creation-in-web3-3afa66e43707

Third graviton training starting next week! 24th of may: https://forum.tecommons.org/t/third-graviton-training-study-plan/996 (develop competence around conflict management)

This is our planned roadmap:

[Jose5048]

What about Conflict Prevention as a priority, which would be a design led issue. And could there be an incentivisation mechanism which could make conflicts largely a non issue in the coming Web 3 scenario? Ambitious and idealistic but it could be worth striving for IMO and rather appropriate for Web3.

[laurenluz]

Hey @Jose5048! I'm not officially representing gravity DAO, but saw your comment and felt a desire to respond and wax philosophically.

I remember reading an article from Gravity once that said "Conflict arises when there is diversity". I think that normalizing conflict and having clear steps to take when it does arise naturally is a critical element to preventing conflict in the future. Conflict doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, and can actually be very positive... an opportunity for growth or change where it's needed.

[Jose5048]

"Conflict doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, and can actually be very positive... an opportunity for growth or change where it's needed." Absolutely true!!! Thanks for the response. Should have known better and in pure jest, I say we should not promote or incentivise healthy conflicts, as is happening now in a way in the Common Stacks Prize?

[graial]

How would you describe your target/ideal commoners and what would be the first steps they could take to become part of the commons?
Please try for an answer a little more sophisticated than join the discord