Video Overview

No items found.

Video Review

No items found.



Gardens are composable, sufficiently decentralized, & self-improving DAOs, limited only by your collective imagination - from the @1hiveorg ecosystem 🐝

Overall Tool Rating:

No items found.

Source of reviews:

These reviews come from the ELI5 DAO. Members tested this tool during a two or three month epoch and provided feedback on their experience. To find out more about ELI5 DAO visit their website:

Summary of Epoch Reviews

How did ELI5 reviewers describe this tool?

Reviewers describe Aragon as a platform for creating and managing DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations). Users can easily set up these organizations, mint digital tokens, and establish voting or governance rules. Additionally, Aragon provides tools for managing the shared resources or treasury of the DAO, making it a comprehensive solution for decentralized community management.
It's a DAO membership, proposal, and treasury management tool that "just works." It's one of only a few fully built-out options for starting a DAO. It's genuinely decentralized with unique features such as ragequit, and once set up it's largely automated (does not require admin). It has a simple UI/UX. It's customizable and extensible (shamans).
It's THE place where teams and communities can come together to share ideas and work in a super user friendly way offering a superb user experience.
Samudai is a centralized hub for DAOs that put the most commonly utilized DAO tools and processes under the same dashboard. Its highly customizable thanks to the multiple integrations if offers via widgets.
The main idea shared across all Eli5 descriptions from all reviewers is that Colony is a tool that allows organizations to organize. Organize what?: payments & treasury, decision making, & reputation.

Average Acount Creation & Maintenance Rating

No items found.

Average Tutorial & User Guide Rating

No items found.

Average User Interface & Experience Rating

No items found.

What did ELI5 reviewers like about this tool?

UI/UX and Simplicity: Many reviewers praised Aragon's user interface (UI) and user experience (UX). They found it clean, intuitive, and simple, making the tool straightforward and easy to use. Comments such as "clean UI/UX," "good UI," "sleek and refined," and "very simple and understandable" were common.

Functionality: Reviewers appreciated the specific functionalities offered by Aragon, such as token minting on various platforms, creating proposals, transparent treasury management, and including withdrawal transactions once a proposal is approved.

Resources and Support: Aragon's support materials, including videos, the DAO Experts network, and a YouTube channel with helpful content were noted as valuable resources for users.

Flexibility and Customizability: Aragon was lauded for its adaptability. It allows users to create and customize their DAOs according to specific needs and governance structures. Moreover, its ability to work with different blockchain networks offers users flexibility in choosing the most suitable platform.

Transparency and Security: The platform's transparency, which offers clear records of decisions and transactions, was highlighted. This transparency boosts trust and accountability. Additionally, blockchain technology ensures security and resistance against fraud and tampering.

Accessibility: Aragon's user-friendly interface makes it accessible to a broad range of users, from those with technical expertise to beginners.

Community Engagement: The tool facilitates community participation and decision-making, promoting a sense of inclusivity among its users.

Overall, reviewers find Aragon to be a reliable and efficient tool for establishing and managing DAOs, emphasizing its ease of use, comprehensive features, and supportive resources.

ELI5ers loved that DAOhaus is customizable, modular, and no/low-code. The extension (shamans) allow for fine tuning of the platform to suite a DAOs needs. It offers true decentralization without need for admin after launch. The reviewers appreciated the unique Moloch philosophy and features such as ragequit and guild kick. It is easy to join a DAO on DAOhaus and many features were well-liked such as voting and non-voting shares, the proposal process (quorum, sponsorship, voting, grace period), and the built-in vote delegation. The platform offers many options for treasury management and the SAFE integration was welcomed. Overall the UI/UX simple and streamlined and the developer team behind the open-sourced platform was responsive and available to assist with issues.

The user experience is by far the most liked feature of Common Ground, followed by an having Mobile capabilities that also offer a great user experience. Almost all reviewers used similar words to describe the UI: clean, intuitive, and beautiful.

The one-stop-shop concept is very real with Samudai. A very intuitive navigation and high customization of the dashboard and platform in general makes Samudai a product that can be adopted by several different types of DAOs.

Colony reputation-based system seems to be the #1 aspect that everyone liked. This goes hand by hand with the lazy consensus mechanism. In general, how Colony allows true contributors to a DAO to participate in a smooth fashion.

According to ELI5 reviewers, how could this tool be improved?

Proposal Types: There's a call for an increase in the types of proposals available. The current out-of-the-box offerings are perceived to be limited compared to other DAO governance platforms.

Integration & Customization: Several reviewers expressed concerns about the difficulty of expanding Aragon's functionality with outside integrations. They suggested more no-code or low-code options. Additionally, there were concerns about limited customization and the absence of specific integrations like Discourse, Snapshot, Charmverse, Discord, and Telegram.

Token Creation: A common criticism was the mandatory creation or import of a token to start using Aragon. Some reviewers noted this contradicts the documentation, which implies that token creation isn't always necessary. Additionally, there were legal concerns about whether every DAO started on Aragon might be inadvertently creating securities.

Technical Challenges & Bugs: Some users encountered bugs, such as disappearing governance proposals and difficulty viewing governance history. There were also challenges in getting the test net to work with specific tools.

Simplicity vs. Customizability: While beginners appreciate Aragon's simplicity, more experienced users feel it might be too simple, lacking advanced features and integrations. There's a sentiment that users might outgrow the platform as they become more familiar with Web3.

User Interface: Suggestions include further simplifying the user interface and enhancing user-friendliness. Also, there's a call for UI improvements, like viewing members by names or identifiers instead of just their addresses.

Compatibility & Integration: Reviewers suggested enhancing compatibility with various blockchain platforms and integrating with other DeFi protocols and tools for a more comprehensive ecosystem.

Features & Options: Some users felt that certain features, like utilizing an NFT for token gating and reputation options, needed to be included. The current version seems "scaled down" from previous offerings, lacking specific plugins and functionalities.

Finance Dashboards: Adding finance dashboards to give a holistic view of DAO finances was suggested for better decision-making.

In summary, while reviewers acknowledge Aragon's strengths, they believe there's room for enhancement in functionality, user experience, customizability, and integrations.

ELI5 reviewers shared that the UI was difficult to understand at times for the non-developer (i.e. date/time conversions). Other aspects such as locating proposal descriptions, understanding proposal steps was also difficult for on-technical users. On occasion we experienced odd behaviors in the sequence of events due to UI indicators changing for the entire history of proposals if the governance settings were changed, rather than updating only current and future information. This makes it difficult to understand the historical record of the DAO and sometimes caused confusion during the proposal pass/fail process. An open-source library of shamans would be helpful. Moloch language for common features is confusing and intimidating for new users; documentation in general could be improved, from summoning a DAO to navigating the interface. Allow for delegation of votes to multiple representatives. A DAO search or hub like created in V2 would be great to assist in learning about other DAOs.

Simplifying the sign-in process, and fixing minor glitches that forces the user to reconnect under some circumstances. Including notifications. Also, improving the use of GIFs and the processes and documentation involved in publishing articles & announcements.

Most reviewers are giving importance to improving the UI/UX more. Because Samudai can do so many things, the information put in front of you as end-user is a little overwhelming.

Part of the suggestions is offering users the ability to customize their dashboard according to their preferences. Also minor adjustments to the UI.

Another suggestion for improvement is more about adding more tools and capabilities to Samudai (although this talks about how users relly like what they saw, and will like to see more tools that they use in other DAOs to be added to Samudai).

i.e. Adding voting capabilities inside Samudai to allow for voting in Grants proposals.

Better notification & communication mechanisms. Cosmetic improvements to the UI, and enhancements to UX. Mobile support seems to be a very interesting point for many. It can still use a bit more simplicity in how information is presented to the user. From the numbers in a more human-readable format to the words used and even the font size.

ELI5er Reviews

Review #1
Review #2
Review #3
Review #4
Review #5
Review #6
Review #7
Review #8
Review #9
Review #10