Priority Leaderboard
Priorities anchored in practitioner experience (Harmonica sessions and workshops). Evidence from academic research grouped by stance: supporting, contrasting, or extending.
How scores are calculated
Practitioner-Anchored Scoring
Priorities are set by practitioners. The score reflects how strongly a priority is supported across practitioner sources.
Evidence from Knowledge Commons
Evidence is classified by stance: supporting, contrasting, or extending. Evidence does not affect the score -- it provides context for deliberation.
Recalculating scores...
1
Improve participation, onboarding, accessibility, and reduce governance overload
0.40
Governance systems are asking too much of participants: too much reading, too many proposals, too much ambiguity, and too few clear pathways for meaningful contribution. The result is fatigue, low turnout, and dependence on a small set of highly active actors.
2
Increase transparency, accountability, monitoring, and legibility of governance processes and real influence
0.27
Communities need better visibility into who holds power, how decisions are shaped, what gets implemented, and whether governance outcomes match stated goals. Transparency must cover both formal votes and informal influence.
3
Strengthen governance security, manipulation resistance, anti-bribery protections, and emergency response
0.19
Governance systems remain vulnerable to bribery, coercion, flash-loan attacks, hidden code changes, malicious proposals, opaque privileged roles, and emergency centralization. Security must include both technical safeguards and institutional controls.
4
Advance research, measurement, impact evaluation, and shared metrics for governance and funding systems
0.17
5
Improve public goods, grants, retro funding, treasury allocation, and sustainable contributor compensation
0.17
6
Develop sustainable governance infrastructure, standards, interoperability, and knowledge management
0.17
7
Strengthen voting, delegation, representation, and decision-making mechanisms beyond simple token voting
0.17
One-token-one-vote is too blunt for complex governance. Different decisions require different aggregation methods, and better representation is needed to balance expertise, legitimacy, and fairness.
8
Strengthen legal, constitutional, dispute resolution, and compliance frameworks while preserving decentralization
0.16
9
Support inclusive, pluralistic, multilingual, culturally grounded, and community-centered governance models
0.16
10
Align governance mechanisms and process design to decision context, stakes, expertise, and operational efficiency
0.16
11
Reduce concentration of power and governance capture through fair, decentralized, and accountable governance design
0.15
A recurring governance failure is that a small number of token holders, delegates, insiders, or affiliated actors can dominate outcomes despite nominally decentralized structures.
12
Build resilient governance structures with clear roles, checks and balances, scoped authority, and effective delegation
0.14
13
Use AI and algorithmic tools to augment governance with human oversight, robustness, and value alignment
0.12
14
Support open-source, maintainer, and public infrastructure sustainability
0.07
15
Practitioner-driven governance reform
0.00
Evidence 1
"Governance needs to be informed by those doing the work"
16
Coordination of funding mechanisms
0.00
Evidence 2 1 1 1
"We need better coordination between grants programs"
"Workshop group identified funding silos as key issue"
"CAMF proposes a new architecture for crypto funding"
src
CAMF Paper
"However centralized coordination risks capture"
"Quadratic funding adds a novel dimension"
src
QF Analysis
New priorities discovered in knowledge commons
These priorities were not raised by practitioners but emerged from academic research.
+
Smart contract governance automation
from evidence
+
Cross-chain treasury management
from evidence