Who Should Control DUSK’s Future?

I keep going back and forth on this one.

A core team making the big decisions has its advantages. Things move faster, and there’s less chance of a good idea getting stuck in endless discussion.

But what happens when the network gets bigger?

At that point, decisions about treasury funds, grants, development and ecosystem priorities start affecting a much wider group of people.

I’d want the community to have a real voice in those decisions.

Not because community voting is automatically better. It isn’t. A vote can still produce a bad outcome, especially when people are voting without understanding the proposal.

What matters to me is what comes out the other side.

Was the money spent well?

Did the proposal actually help DUSK?

Could people question it openly?

That’s the kind of governance I’d pay attention to.

Not how decentralized it sounds, but whether the decisions actually make the network better.

If you had a vote, what would you want the DUSK community to decide?

#dusk @Dusk $DUSK $COTI $TRUMP