Why Decentralization

There is a lot of excitement about the potential for web3 to power a new model for the internet that places user control and ownership front and center.

There is strong resonance between some of DG’s core values / principles and those espoused by the web3 community. This post aims to highlight those connections.

Funding Platform

DG Values

DG Value	Web3 Concept

DG Value	Web3 Concept
We don’t want to be a centralized gatekeeper, any farmer org should be able to list themselves and any funder should be able to directly fund a farmer org	Some entity would publish and maintain the protocol which anyone could leverage to publish funding requests and fund project Most projects start out with a centralized entity leading the development (xyz Labs) and over time move towards a more decentralized model (a DAO). There is a conceptual model for progressive decentralization which we could leverage. There is some precedence for investment groups that are organized as DAOs. See the LAO for more detail.
We want farmers to have a role in the economics and governance of the funding platform. inclusive and democratic governance of the protocol / platform.	Web3 projects issue tokens which are akin to equity; token holders can participate in governance and have a claim on the earnings of the protocol. The entity which runs the platform can establish thresholds for how many tokens are available for different types of stakeholders (developers, farmers, funders, etc.). Note, some of this can be achieved through the operating agreement/ shareholding in a “traditional” org as well.
We want to draw lots capital to the funding platform and making loans easy to buy / trade / sell supports this	Easy to create fractional shares of financial assets Assets are programmable and composable which means third party developers can easily integrate funding platform assets into their own apps (eg, an e-commerce merchant can easily have a portion of product sales go towards supporting an FPO funding request)

Tech

No Web3

There has to be a database containing “deals” that DG control and operates
Only DG backend services could interact with these “deals”

With Web3

“Deals” are on the blockchain
Any organization could create applications and services that interact with those deals

Product

No Web3

DG could build a complete platform for different users: farmers, originators, and funders

With Web3

DG could build a complete platform that operates on “deals”.
Any other organization could build similar or new platforms that operate on the same primitives
Any one could build small parts of the platform or small set of tools that compliment the larger platforms

Examples:
- The deals could be transacted on small web app that a crowdfunding page created. In this crowdfunding page, whenever a sufficient funds are contributed to a deal, it is funded. The crowdfunding page talks directly to the blockchain.
- Someone create a secondary ownership marketplace for the “deals”. If the deals are about loans, whoever funded the loans could “resell” them. The mechanics of the resell if directly enabled by the blockchain. The operator of the marketplace does not need to work with DG. A “resell” could be seen as deal originators working with new funders for their existing projects.
- Another non-profit leverages the same data model and technology to build a different funding platforms.

Data Wallet

DG Value	Web3 Concept

DG Value	Web3 Concept
Farmers should “own” their down data and not be beholden to a provider that can mis-use or command extractive terms for managing their data	IPFS The upside is farmers have total control, downside is they need to handle the complexity of storing their own data / private keys, etc
Record once, use many. Data should be not stuck in a silo and farmers should be free to share with external stakeholders on their terms	Data portability

Tech

No Web3

DG could view and use the data

With Web3

DG cannot view the content of the data