# PIP-37: Credentializing Reputation within the Existing DAO System \[CREDS\]

**URL:** <https://forum.pokt.network/t/pip-37-credentializing-reputation-within-the-existing-dao-system-creds/5144>\
**Category:** Improvements\
**Created:** [March 27, 2024, 10:04pm UTC](https://forum.pokt.network/t/pip-37-credentializing-reputation-within-the-existing-dao-system-creds/5144 "2024-03-27T22:04:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 43

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Dermot](https://forum.pokt.network/user_avatar/forum.pokt.network/dermot/32/1382_2.png) [@Dermot](https://forum.pokt.network/u/Dermot)\
**Post date:** [April 22, 2024, 5:41pm UTC](https://forum.pokt.network/t/pip-37-credentializing-reputation-within-the-existing-dao-system-creds/5144/43 "2024-04-22T17:41:09Z")

</div>

Hi @steve

Jumping in here, as I think there are a few points that need clearing up.

> [@steve](#):
>
> For accuracy, the current system does not exclude any group.

The current system does exclude different stakeholders. There is no point talking about theory if it is never turned into practice. The current system excludes non-represented groups such as gateways, and makes it very difficult, if not close to impossible for many other valuable contributors to have a say in POKT’s governance

> [@PGOV1 - Evolving Pocket’s Governance: Introducing 3D Governance](https://forum.pokt.network/t/pgov1-evolving-pocket-s-governance-introducing-3d-governance/4698/1):
>
> There is something wrong when the following active contributors do not have a vote:
> 
> - PoktNews
> - Liquify (v0 snapshots)
> - Nodefleet (v0 testnet)
> - Ritesh (design)
> - BigBoss (community protocol contributor)
> - Tokikuch (community protocol contributor)
> - AmishBatman (Node Pilot)
> - ethen (SendWallet)
> - msa (Economics)
> - All Community Hub organizers
> - 4 of 6 full-time core protocol developers
> - 33 of 37 current PNI employees

As well as many more valuable contributors since that post from Jack last summer such as Raid Guild, @creepto and many more

> [@steve](#):
>
> If we feel the steps are inappropriate for some groups, the current system and constitution allow us to add new voting paths that would better align for more groups.

> [@steve](#):
>
> This has been done in the past and does not require an overhaul of the existing system.

The current system doesn’t allow an easy way to manage updates, as it’s all incredibly manual. This is demonstrated by how few changes have been made in the last couple of years, how few new voters have joined the DAO, and how much overhead it places on Jack to keep it running.

I personally don’t understand how the status quo is viewed as desirable.

Surely, it’s better to have a new scalable system built on a fully verifiable digital rails, as opposed to a manual off-chain process that cannot be verified, as per the current system? The newly proposed Creds system is, by definition and design, much more transparent than the current system, as every credential issued is verifiable.

And the best thing about the new system is that it is modular and can be easily upgraded over time, something that history has shown is not true with the current system.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.pokt.network/t/pip-37-credentializing-reputation-within-the-existing-dao-system-creds/5144)._