. . . and education 
2 Likes
I really love this draft and I think that it shows a bright future for the DAO.
I am just curious about this part when it says that the litterbox trust funds will drive more growth of the ecosystem. Can you please explain in which ways that this can happen?
I see a few possibilities but right now, they aren’t inovative, like using it for ASR, Jupuary or funding new WGs.. I would love to see a new way to grown the ecosystem using those funds
3 Likes
appreciate your support!
yes i think those are potentially options for Litterbox Trust usage (probably not Jupuary just due to scale, but idk for sure). there are other potential options like DAO investments, more growth initiatives, etc - but not sure what specifically it’ll look like.
the good news is that we have two years to figure it out, together!
2 Likes
appreciate your support!!
that idea is super fun - i love the idea of having a self-serve and independent way for people to prove their impact and get rewarded accordingly.
the devil is in the details, of course (how to avoid gaming, how to have consistent standards, who does the evaluation, etc) but definitely down to explore this more!
if you have specific ideas on what the Quests would be and how we could evaluate performance - post about it and tag me!
1 Like
so the next version will not include specifics on JUP utility, as that isn’t the point of this document and ultimately JUP utility must be created by the team (since it would involve team products, etc).
but definitely can add more info into the proposal about the role the DAO plays here - in my mind, the DAO and the Team are aligned by the token, so it is actually the job of both entities (in different ways) to create value for all holders.
The team does so by building a great product suite, a killer business, and demonstrating high levels of integrity. the DAO does so by expanding the community, driving more usage of jupiter products, and producing value-adding ideas and WGs.
1 Like
i hear where you’re coming from, but respectfully disagree.
the truth is, I’m hard pressed to actually think of a true “DAO”. There are approximately zero DAOs that are actually decentralized, autonomous, or organized.
Right now, the Jupiter DAO is at least decentralized (many different token holders, regular participation in governance) and is increasingly getting organized (indeed, that’s a major reason why the Team should remain involved to set up the structures of organization).
i agree that the DAO will not be fully autonomous in the short-term, but having to change the name now, and then change it back later, will make things both more confusing for the general market, and give in to a level of exactitude that frankly is not met by nearly any other DAO in existence.
1 Like
We will do this together for sure!
Thanks for the reply!
@Kash would love a response to both of my earlier comments/questions.
1 Like
Yesterday, I was fully ready to agree with this point but decided to chew on it a little more. I decided it was best to start by defining a DAO and this is what most caught my eye:
“DAOs are characterized by a lack of central authority, where decision-making is distributed among community members, typically token holders who cast votes. All votes and activities within a DAO are recorded on a blockchain, ensuring transparency and immutability.”
It was then that I realized that DAOs aren’t binary - black or white - but exist on a spectrum (as with most things in life).
IMO, the JUP DAO fulfill that criteria and is worthy of calling itself a DAO, though, I’m sure there will be some that attempt to refute this by calling the Jupiter team a “central authority”. Personally I disagree with the characterization of “centralized command”.
However, I acknowledge that many have a narrower, idealized definition which will continue to make this somewhat of a pain point.
4 Likes
Always here to support good decisions! 
2 Likes
Solid draft @Kash
Here are some other suggestions:
-
DAO Impact Dashboard:
Create a public, real-time dashboard showing KPIs for DAO-funded initiatives (users reached, ROI, code delivered, etc.), holding grantees accountable and informing future funding decisions. -
Jupiter Missions (Gamified Adoption):
Introduce task-based missions (e.g., trade, refer, vote, write a proposal) with XP or badges. These could be used for future airdrops, roles, or perks. -
JUP Loyalty Tiers:
Introduce a tiered staking system for $JUP holders that grants different benefits (fee discounts, early access, governance weight, etc.) based on duration/amount staked. -
Treasury Yield Strategies:
Put a portion of the DAO treasury into low-risk yield strategies (e.g., restaking protocols, liquid staking) to sustain operations and reduce reliance on top-ups. -
Contributor Reputation System:
Build an on-chain or off-chain rep system that tracks contributions, voting history, and proposal outcomes to surface high-trust contributors for leadership roles or auto-whitelisting.
Hope you can take the time to read this and provide feedback.
1 Like
Maybe It’s Time to Stop Pretending
Despite tons of feedback, questions, and concerns from active community members, it feels like the DAO resolution will march forward exactly as proposed. The team is hearing — sure. Reading — probably. Listening? That’s another story.
This resolution doesn’t just clarify structure. It builds a narrative. One that’s neatly tied up with phrases like “progressive decentralization” and “DAO maturity.” One where “baby DAO” gets two more years of parenting before it’s allowed to touch the stove or ask why it still has no allowance.
It’s clever. You build the definitions, you set the framework, and suddenly every criticism is out of scope. Don’t like that JUP has no real utility? Well, that’s not the DAO’s concern anymore. Don’t think the DAO is really decentralized? Not yet — just wait a few more years, kiddo. Asking about alignment between product success and token value? Pipe down, governance is your only perk.
And the stats say it all. Over 200,000 wallets hold or stake JUP. The foundational resolution for their supposed community governance? Barely 1,500 views. Most people have no idea what they’re voting on. The masses will vote for whatever has “growth,” “ecosystem,” and “future” sprinkled in. It’s not governance. It’s brand loyalty.
Let’s be honest: if JUP token had actual utility, this conversation would’ve gotten a lot more attention. But that was left out of the resolution — strategically. Because that opens doors to hard questions about price, value, and reward — questions that get in the way of neat resolutions and tidy power structures.
At this point, I don’t even think the team is being sinister. In fact, to my disappointment, they might be right. Maybe DAO — as a concept — just doesn’t work. Maybe handing keys to the treasury to a mass of token holders is a disaster waiting to happen. They’d vote to drain it, split it, burn it, whatever feels good in the moment. And maybe that’s human nature. Governance is messy. Power is risky. Transparency is exhausting.
Maybe all this fighting for meaning, purpose, structure — maybe it’s taken a toll on everyone. Maybe even Meow, who likely had good intentions, saw the writing on the wall and said, “Yeah, nah.” Can’t even blame him.
So, what are we left with?
JUP token is dumping? Don’t complain. Get to work. The team is shipping — building some of the best tools and platforms in the space. What is the DAO doing? One year in and still no structures, no revenue, no roadmap. Still a baby, remember? And when it grows up, it might be a teenager you wouldn’t trust with your car keys, let alone a multi-million-dollar treasury.
Maybe the real value of the DAO isn’t autonomy. Maybe it’s just being a great marketing department. Bought the token? Congrats. You’ve joined the team. Your job is to make JUP valuable by sheer force of belief, memes, and vibes. You don’t get a revenue stream, or yield, or control. You get a purpose: talk about JUP, sell the dream, and help grow the product. If you’re not building or boosting, you’re just holding and hoping. Or maybe whining in Discord until someone drops a Jupiter emoji and moves on.
So let’s stop pretending. Let’s rename this thing. Let’s stop calling it a DAO and just call it what it is: the Jupiter Community Growth Collective. A curated, branded engine for onboarding new users and spreading the gospel of Jupiter. It’s not a downgrade. It’s honesty. A relief, even.
As for me — Kash, team — don’t worry. You don’t need to reply. Consider this my final vent before the vote goes live. Soon, this resolution will pass, and my baby hands will be off the steering wheel. I’ll know my place in line. Thank you for entertaining my almost-grown-up essays. And thank you for letting me be a pain in your ass — one last time.
Yours truly,
@Ihateoranges 
(retired troublemaker, part-time existentialist, full-time meme holder)
6 Likes
Appreciate you chewing on it and sharing your thoughts — it’s refreshing to see genuine reflection.
I get the spectrum argument. Decentralization isn’t a switch you flip — it’s a process, a spectrum, sure. But we need to be real about where we actually sit on that spectrum, and what we’re calling a “DAO.”
Let me put it plainly: if 50% of the supply is “DAO-owned,” but the DAO can’t use it without team approval, does it really belong to the DAO?
I challenge anyone here to try proposing two things:
- Burn $1 million of the DAO’s USDC.
- Burn 5 million $JUP from the tokens handed down to the DAO.
Spoiler: you can’t. There’s no protocol that lets a regular DAO member put up that vote. It won’t pass Core Working Groups without the team’s blessing. It won’t reach the forum. It won’t reach Snapshot. It won’t even reach the light of day.
So we can keep having theoretical debates about where on the “DAO spectrum” we land, but if your only power is to argue over the shape of the sandbox — while the actual keys are held elsewhere — then what exactly are we doing here?
It’s like we’ve been handed a coloring book labeled Decentralized Autonomy, but the crayons are locked in a drawer… and we’re told to feel empowered because we can still choose which page to look at.
Is this a DAO? Sure, technically. But practically? It’s a guided experience — more DAO-as-a-Service than DAO-as-a-System.
That’s not necessarily bad. But let’s call it what it is.
2 Likes
Hello Kash
Finally had the team to seat and better digest the proposal. Here are some things i believe could bring long term value and sustainability to the DAO.
- Progressive independence: i believe this will definitely diconflict those talent and protocol acquisition from the team as it is and should not be communitu diven. Therefore, having the DAO as an independent entity will really focus in other aspects than can further drive community talent, progresion of the protocol, and further alignment.
- As an independent entity while still be decentralized. It is also important to have a sense of herarchy and structure. Therefore, having a DWG (DAO Working Group), or perhaps the CWG could evolve to this. The purpose is to continue that transparency and interactive feedback to move initiatives forward with realistic expectations.
- I also like @lochie2001 idea from one of his posts to have a hybrid reward system (JUP & USDC). I believe this will alleviate some selling pressure and more people would feel encouraged to participate.
These are some ideas that come to mind.
3 Likes
The stakes are high, but so are the rewards. This is a draft, but a proposal version of the ideas contained in this draft will be voted on by the DAO.
what are the actual stakes involved? What are the actual rewards involved, what should I expect? We don’t need proposals of IDEAS but proposals of tangible actions, this only says ‘‘yeah we got stuff to do, we’ll figure it out in the next 2 years’’, the time for ideas was 1 year ago, where are the moves to make it actuality? For now it has been the same broth recipe repeated on loop but no clear sign of it on the plate, we still reading the cook book and figuring out ingredients it seems. Didn’t you guys had more than 1 year to figure out the purpose and formulate mechanics? What you did with the feedback given to you this year or so? Also this leaves me to think that still a lot of time will pass before some actual stuff will be done that beneficiate everyone and moves us forward, ya’ll still ‘‘learning’’ how the wheel turns…
If we are successful, we will have created tangible, unstoppable momentum for the entire Jupiter ecosystem. successful in what? You just stating to define terms and objectives, there’s no action or project actually involved in this draft that would create momentum as of now, this is hopeful talk based on zero plans.
4 Likes
long term holders are waiting some appreciation for loyalty and support..
2 Likes
Before the airdrop, the community was filled with highly dedicated contributors. However, recently, I’ve noticed a growing sense that rewards are being handed out left and right without proper oversight, leading to a decline in organizational strength.
For example, in the Jupiter Japan community, I believe Tikijiu has consistently been one of the best moderators from the early days until now. On the other hand, the newly launched Jupiter Japan community frankly doesn’t seem functional at all—in fact, it gives the impression of weak organizational structure.
Perhaps this is a natural consequence of Jupiter growing so large, but in order to maintain solid development and organizational integrity, I believe it’s important to actively gather feedback on various initiatives and assign key responsibilities to those who have shown real contributions and commitment.
4 Likes
let’s goooo, i like what im seeing here. good work
What do you mean the Japanese community doesn’t seem to function? Can you give any specific examples? And why only the Japanese one?
1 Like
I think the votes started by Jupiter dao is Good but there is lower reward time to time community is disappointed from this hope it you guys focus on vote allocation increase by userss
1 Like