RFC: What Is The PoolTogether DAO?

As @Leighton mentioned in How do we capture our tailwinds?

I have heard others say that we do actually have a ‘DAO’ but it is loosely defined. I think it is extremely important to have this conversation as a precursor to @Leighton’s 1,2 and three points above.

So, let’s get ultra-clear on what we have, what we need and how they ineract with eachother


  1. A protocol that is actively maintained by two parties:

      a. PT Inc.
      b. The PoolTogether community

Any changes made to the protocol must first be approved by POOL token holders before it is implemented. Compensation for any changes to the protocol are either self-funded (PT Inc.) or funded from the PoolTogether protocol treasury, via bounties.

  1. app.pooltogether.com

currently the only way that end users can deposit funds into the PoolTogether protocol

  1. The multi-delegator tool

An end-user application for one party to engage multiple end users

However, it does not make sense for 2 and 3 to be tools of the protocol. They are really the first set of applications built on top of the protocol.

  1. The POOL token- The only way to control the roadmap of the protocol.

The Pool token’s value is driven by how many applications (with their own revenue, customers and operations) use the protocol to deliver value to a different set of end-users. The more applications that use the protocol, the greater the significance over it’s roadmap.


We aren’t investing our efforts encouraging a robust community of applications. Instead, we seem to be focusing our efforts making it more attractive for an end user to deposit.


While app.pooltogether.com and the multi-delegator tool are both essential for the current state of the protocol, they aren’t as important for the future state of the protocol that has lots of apps integrated. Additionally, app.pooltogether.com is made for end users while the multi-delegator are made for partner DAOs or NFTS (D2D instead of B2B).

In truth, both of these applications can and will be wildly successful. However, the success of either of these applications should have a limited impact on POOL price UNLESS we commit to paying a percentage of revenue generated from operating either of these applications back to POOL token holders, which we are not currently interested in doing.


At a minimum, we need to identify the conflicting objectives at play here:

App.pooltogether.com: maximize individual depositors
Multi-delegator: maximize deposits by DAO/NFT treasuries
Pool Token: maximize applications using the protocol

Prioritizing one of these objectives ultimately means de-prioritizing the others. So if we can’t align on one of these objectives, perhaps we should divide the DAO into groups with specific responsibility for each of these applications.

Another consideration is spinning off these tools into sub-daos with a clear mandate to maximize usage of the tools in a self-sustaining way (create a revenue model that pays for sales, marketing, operations, product improvements, even if the revenue model is turned off and they are funded by the protocol to start with).


PoolTogether is in the perfect position to make a big bet on growth. But PoolTogether is spoiled for choice. There are too many great opportunities to take advantage of. However, if we chase all of them, we will experience small wins, but we wont have the money, the human capital nor the operational bandwidth to succeed at the scale the PoolTogether protocol deserves.

BUT if we align around one big bet, and put the power of the PoolTogether community, the resources of the treasury and the reputation of the protocol towards it, there is no way we fail.


I agree with @Leighton. The PoolTogether DAO needs to define what it is, what it wants to achieve, how it’s going to achieve success and who is going to help it do that. We need an open discussion to get there.

I have provided some thought starters and an analysis how I see it. I have done this without consulting anyone, but because I know PoolTogether is destined to be the DEFI leader that solves savings. @Leighton @Brendan and @chuckbergeron started something big. Its on us to help them realize their potential.



What is the PoolTogether DAO?

To me the DAO always was the sum of all formal working groups and people that contribute to the protocol (taking action governance, doing meaningful work, voting on proposals).

It is the group of people that take action in governance and govern the protocol with the POOL token as its governance token.

What protocol and governance mean in our context have been defined before:

What is missing?

What we lack is articulating and manifesting our Mission & Values (1 & 2), our structures and accountabilities. They are not undefined - they already exist. For structures and accountabilities, I think we can do more to get in sync.
A legal wrapper for the DAO is something that is missing, too. I believe @Leighton has done work in that direction.

I fully agree that now is the time to make a move and wrap some of these up!

The beauty of blockchain is that it actually doesn’t need the app. Users can deposit and withdraw via SmartContract - even if the website would go offline.

Right now users could also deposit via Orange Wallet, Atlantis World, and soon Zerion.

I believe Zapper and Coinbase could unlock lots of additional users, too, if they integrated PoolTogether deposits (and Prize Notifications).

Yes - 100%!

While I agree that mission and values are important, I actually think we are much closer to those than we think.

What, at least for me, is missing goes a little deeper:

  1. What is our key metric?
  2. What is our strategy to achieve that key metric?
  3. What is the optimal structure that we need to execute against that strategy?
    3i. What (if any) working groups are we missing?
    3ii. What (if any) working groups need to realign their desired outcomes?
  4. How much are we willing to invest to see that strategy realized (not just in compensation for team members, but also in execution of projects)?
  5. What are the OKRs/accountabilities/budgets of our organizational structure?

As I mentioned above, right now, it seems that we have ‘huge eyes and small stomachs’ meaning there are so many large opportunities we are chasing, all very good, but we don’t have the resources, nor bandwidth to support them all.

If we can align around one strategy, at least at first, then we can make our ‘big bet’ properly and set ourselves up for success.

Those are all legit questions - but it feels like we are trying to answer these in the other ongoing discussions already?