Governance Scope – What can the community decide?

Pretty much every aspect of LogIQ could come under DAO governance once decentralized:

• Economic Parameters: Token inflation rate, reward pool sizes, validator staking requirements, fees charged to requesters – all these could be proposed and voted on. This ensures the economic model can adjust to real conditions (for instance, if the token supply needs to increase to reward more users, or decrease to control inflation, etc.).

• Platform Policies: The community can set the rules for content and conduct. For example, decide on policies for what tasks are allowed (ensuring ethical boundaries), how to handle sensitive data, or penalties for misconduct. Rather than a centralized company writing the terms of service, the users collectively do so.

• Feature Roadmap: Token holders could prioritize development of new features. The core dev team might present options (e.g., “Build a mobile app” vs “Integrate VR support for certain tasks”) and the DAO can allocate funds or choose the order.

• Ecosystem Funding: The DAO treasury (collected from a portion of fees or initial allocations) can be used to fund grants or partnerships. For instance, if someone wants to build an extension or a new AI tool for LogIQ, they can request funding. Or the DAO can sponsor events/hackathons to spread the word.

• Validator/Role Elections: The DAO might periodically vote on appointing or confirming high-level protocol roles. For example, if a “Chief Ethics Officer” role is created to oversee the ethical standards of tasks (just as a scenario), that person might be elected by the community.

• Dispute Resolution: While day-to-day disputes are handled by validators as mentioned, the DAO could serve as a final court of appeal. If someone feels they were wrongly penalized or a platform decision was unjust, they could petition the DAO, which could vote to overturn a decision or compensate the user if needed. This is the ultimate check on power.

• Upgrades and Forks: If the platform software or smart contracts need upgrades, the DAO approves them. In extreme cases, if there’s a philosophical split, the community can fork the platform (though that’s a last resort scenario common to decentralized projects).