PASSED: Proposal for the "Power of Three" Circles

All good things come in 3’s.

" There are ideas which could stop all quarrels; such an idea is the law of three. ~ P. D. Ouspensky"

After reviewing other DAO’s and sociocratic models, I propose we structure our circles in accordance with the Law of Threes.

The Three Rings of Giveth:

The Giveth Community Circle
COMMUNITY… has always been the foundation of Giveth, the sum of all parts.
COMMUNICATION… is the purpose of the General Circle.
COMMONS… The Giveth Community Circle is the publicly accessible space.

This Circle is held down by the Communications team yet comprised of representatives from the other two Circles, as well as various working groups that may form. Here is where new contributors, project owners, campaign managers, collaborators, conspirateurs, and catalysts and really, all the cool cats come to play, learn, give and grow.

Working Groups:

  • Community: All are welcome to participate in Community Calls, to find the support they need and to share the gifts they have to offer.
  • Communications: Givethers (and new contributors) who are writing the official messaging, documentation, announcements, and coordinating the release of information to the public.
  • Conflict Resolution: A Circle for learning / working on Graviton and bringing more authentic relating, issue revelation, and tension alleviation.

The Giveth Platform (Product Development Circle)
DESIGN… the best user experience in a beautifully simple interface.
DEVELOP… innovative, feature-rich, safe and productive tools for transparency.
DELIVER… seamlessly connected products ( and TRACE) that work well together.

This Circle is the playground for designers, developers, systems engineers and programming students alike, and is where the Future of Giving is being built now. From GivethTRACE to and back again, we work with the Community Circle to get feedback from users, design a workflow that makes it easy for people to give, receive, trace and report progress.

Working Groups:

  • GivethTRACE: Has it’s own product manager and dev team, hosts their own calls and designates a liaison for all-dev channels, other working groups, and sync-up call participation to manage issues, solicit feedback, complete tasks and coordinate activities.
  • Has it’s own product manager and dev team, hosts their own calls and designates a liaison for all-dev channels, other working groups, and sync-up call participation to manage issues, solicit feedback, complete tasks and coordinate activities.
  • Operations & Design: Internal operational support activities such as what tools to use for which purposes and overall UI/UX strategy for unified presence.

The GIVernance Circle
GIVE… to the causes, projects, actions you care about.
GET… the tokens that GIVback to those who are GIVing forward for positive change.
GOVERN… project curation, product development, and a new economy based on altruism.

The GIVing Circle is home to Givethers, Unicorns, Givers, Cheezburgers - Everyone can be a Giver then choose how to use their GIV for the greater good. Giveth aims to be a donor-focused organization that GIVs back to those who use our platform to transparently and accountably support change in the world.

Working Groups:

  • DAO: GIV token holders are members of the Giveth DAO, where it’s easy to give, exciting to get GIV, and engaging in governance and the economy is good for Giver and Gitter alike.
  • GIVgarden: Collaboration with 1hive and dappnode to build out the GIV token economy.
  • Governance: Payments, funding allocation, operational protocols and other organizational decisions that require participation beyond just the DAO.

I really like this proposal because we do have a distinction between communications (and community) and developement/design which seems to be the natural working groups that have formed within Giveth. I also think it’s important that governance and the DAO have a circle.

I feel very strongly that circles should represent working groups to keep their purpose clear. Many people in Giveth wear many hats but really circles will define which hat you wear in a given context. Governance is another hat we all wear as DAO members, Governance is work like this where we build and debate the architecture of Giveth.

I would propose to avoid calling the Giveth community a “general circle”, that doesn’t help us define its mission and goals. I love that you added three alliteration words, it makes this a fun read but I think the wording is a bit of a stretch in some places and actually makes the proposal less clear. The descriptions below them are accurate and direct.


Love this! But while I love the power of 3, I don’t think we need to limit ourselves to 3 circles. The only change I would suggest to this is to split ‘Governance’ out of the Giveth Economy into its own circle, and also leave the door open for additional circles to be formed going forward.


OK I’m making a few modifications to reflect that while these are the Circles for operational flow and decision-making, there are working groups within each of the Circles, and ‘facilitator liaisons’ from each working group to their Circle and or to other Circles with overlapping support…

Important to note that none of these Circles are Bubbles - all are linked and overlapping with each other in some way - and each Circle does it’s own governance within it’s own decision-making power yet also must communicate to the Community and thus to Communications for collaboration and integration of Giveth as a whole.

1 Like

I like this proposal a lot, except for one crucial point (which definitely affects my vote):

I would strongly suggest we change the last circle to simply be called “Governance” rather than “Economy”. This would include the DAO and GIVgarden (using CV to pass and fund proposals) and other elements of governance… decision making via sociocracy, debate, etc. The working groups are all “governance” working groups under this category, and it’s missing the other parts of GIV.

Then the other parts of GIV (GIVmining, GIVdrop, GIVstream, GIVbacks) make more sense to be part of “platform” or “development”

Having “economy” without “governance” sounds like favouring the dollar over ethical decision making. Even though our governance system will use tokens, the tokens do not replace the governance.

I also agree with Mitch that we should not say “The General Circle”… Maybe instead?:

  • Community
  • Development
  • Governance

I agree with this suggestion (“GIVernance” works too!) and now that the circles have been clarified to include distinct working groups, I am in favor of this proposal! I have already created a proposal for the 4 circles in Aragon that I unfortunately cannot remove, but I will vote no on it and vote Yes on Dani’s proposal

3 Circles Proposal has passed on Aragon: Aragon

Have we implemented tags/organization to the forum yet where we can move this topic to complete/done/passed/etc? @WhyldWanderer