Democracy with DAO
If the consensus formation of a DAO is derived from a governance token, it is merely one of the historical principles and does not lead to the realization of democracy. However, I would like to provide some counterarguments to the preconception that "if the consensus formation of a DAO is derived from a governance token, it is just a market principle and there is no novelty that can be applied to democracy, and there has not yet been an example that successfully achieves one person, one vote without corruption."
1. IdenaNetwork enables the realization of one person, one vote while maintaining anonymity. By using Idena, it is possible to achieve One person, one vote while remaining anonymous. This is made possible through a protocol that resists collusion, acquisition, and other attacks, and realizes one person, one vote. 2. I have spent a considerable amount of time interacting with the community to refine the methods of destroying IdenaNetwork, and personally, I believe it has a satisfactory level of security. (By the way, the only drawback is the inconvenience of answering The Problem of Common Sense, which is the hassle of Proof of Personhood (PoP).) 3. From here on, I assume the existence of a foundation that allows for one person, one vote.
5. Whether the deliberation of the DAO will be subject to the tyranny of the majority is a matter of education, media, and the design of deliberation platforms. I have provided a detailed explanation using formal logic in the following Logical Security Analysis.