Last Friday’s community call uncovered some phenomenal insight and generated some amazing discussion about the PoolTogether DAOs mission, organization and alignment, best captured, I think by this tweet:
I am starting this thread in the hopes that we can continue the conversation started on the last community call, so that we can properly capture those tailwinds.
The way I see it, there are some very large questions that we as a community need to answer. This thread is my attempt to get alignment around the first question. The DAO vs. the protocol and what is success.
QUESTION 1: WHAT IS OUR ONE PRIMARY METRIC
PoolTogether needs that one key metric. But there is a problem, PoolTogether is a protocol and not a startup. As has been suggested, protocols should not have revenues or P&L’s attached to them. Rather, the strengths of protocols should be measured in the ecosystem of applications, companies and users that integrate with the protocol to provide incremental services to its end users.
However, from at least what I have seen, the primary metric that the community seems to be rallying around is TVL. The problem with TVL is that does not properly capture a robust system of applications, companies and users. Instead, I would suggest the number of applications built on top of the protocol as the primary success metric.
If we use this, it obviously changes the conversation on growth, targets and objectives. But again, I am only providing a suggestion. I would very much love to hear the communities perspective on this.
Sub Point- Protocol vs. DAO
I have also had some side conversations about the difference between the PoolTogether Protocol vs. the PoolTogether DAO.
The insinuation here is that the PoolTogether DAO was formed with the purpose of driving maximum usage of the PoolTogether protocol. This subtle, but significant distinction skirts the challenge of a protocol needing to operate without a P&L or defined revenue model, as the DAO can generate profit, build applications or even invest in alternative DAOs or companies that use the protocol.
The DAO’s key metric can be TVL, or number of depositors or some other metric. The DAO can also make investments with expected returns and SHOULD build a defined revenue model, even if that revenue model is currently not being realized (ie. we aren’t taking that revenue).
So, I ask the question is there s difference between the PoolTogether DAO and the protocol? If so, what is it’s mission and what should be the key metric of the PoolTogether DAO .
I believe once we start to get alignment around each, we can have an effective conversation about the future structure of the DAO/Protocol, the organization and what of the key opportunities outlined by @tim here, we should prioritize.