DAO Governance

Replace token-weighted voting with game-theoretically optimal truth discovery.

The Problem with Token Voting

Most DAOs use token-weighted voting: 1 token = 1 vote. This creates well-documented problems:

• Plutocracy — whales dominate decisions
• Low participation — voter apathy (often <5% turnout)
• No skin in the game — voting is free, so uninformed voting costs nothing
• Binary choices — up/down vote loses nuance

How Yiling Solves This

Instead of voting on proposals, DAO members report their honest belief about whether a proposal will achieve its stated goal. The SKC mechanism ensures honesty is the dominant strategy because:

1. Every reporter posts a bond (skin in the game)
2. Cross-entropy scoring rewards accuracy, not majority position
3. Probabilistic stopping makes manipulation impossible

Proposal: "Should we allocate 500K to marketing?"
        ↓
Reframed: "Will allocating 500K to marketing increase TVL by >20%?"
        ↓
Agents report probability → SKC resolves → consensus emerges

Advantages Over Token Voting

Best For

• Subjective governance decisions ("Is this grant worth funding?")
• Parameter tuning ("Should we change the fee to 3%?")
• Treasury allocation decisions
• Protocol upgrade assessments