RE: The World Is Changing: DAC Governance
We can’t hide behind the banner of “decentralization" because if one custodian or one member can be found, then they can be made responsible for the entire DAC.
I'm glad you have eventually talked to some lawyers to figure this out. Actually it is much worse than that. As administrators for the DAC you put yourself at risk. Not every state is benevolent in this world and some could possibly hold you ultimately responsible for the DAC regardless of how far you distance yourself from it using country based incorporation for the admin side. This would apply to Blockmaker too whose T & C would not be considered enforceable as the goal is the creation of transnational entity. Other countries would almost definitely say that they are only applicable to the country of origin.
I'm guessing this Swiss entity is going to be based in Zug. This will close as many doors as it will open.
The only bodies beyond governments that have ever manged to push through any form of transnational constitution have been unions. Although they may be far from perfect you may well learn something by speaking to some of them.
The DAC itself in its current form with no co-operative forms of legal protection would make it unwise for anyone except for political activists who do not worry about being extradited to take part. I know that I will be relinquishing my membership.
I think you may be mischaracterizing the process up to this point. We've worked hard with lawyers from the very beginning to create the current constitution which does outline the risks involved, and we've always planned to minimize those risks as much as possible with a service provider entity using the traditional corporate structure. The first iteration hoped to use a service provider in Anguilla as eosDAC Ltd, but they (from what little I understand as some of that was before I joined) had trouble getting access to effective banking which was one of the primary needs for an off-chain entity to begin with regarding traditional contractual relationships and fiat agreements. A service provider in Switzerland should hopefully solve that concern.
When you say "administering the DAC" what do you mean? The service company will have legal contracts with everyone who wants to do business with the entity. The DAC will have no agreements, other than with the service provider (ideally). The service provider will take recommendations from the custodians of the DAC, as any service provider does when they provide services. The service entity is responsible (and will have appropriate insurance in place) for the contracts they agree to and that is separate from the DAC. They certainly will have to contextualize those agreements based on the jurisdictions of the people involved. I've been following https://www.mattereum.com/ a bit, and I'm encouraged to know these challenges are being worked out.
I'm sorry to hear you will not be participating in this approach to decentralized, non-violent, on-chain governance. I really do think it's an important path forward for our species, and you do seem to be passionately involved in these discussions both here and on Discord. I think you have a lot to offer, including the recommendation to consider Union equivalents to what DACs are working to accomplish.