When I first heard of DAOs, I pictured an ecosystem where anyone with the required token could access ideas, pitch them and contribute to the collective growth of that ecosystem. A digital democracy, right? Then I stumbled onto some DAOs that fell flat on the promise, and it was a big letdown. DAOs promise a utopia where all stakeholders (token holders) shape projects through open and democratic on-chain governance. Yet, too often, that promise is unkept — in many “DAOs”, creating & passing proposals are a privilege for an inner circle, usually whales, rather than the community.
Enter Realms on Solana, the solution to the shortcomings of DAOs in governance. With Realms tools and platform, anyone (with governance tokens) can propose, vote and drive impactful decisions in the DAO of their choice. For this track, I spotlight Realms-based DAOs like Marinade and Bonk, which go beyond basic governance to offer tangible value — perks, work opportunities, and community impact. The highlighted DAOs are the Solana DAO scene at its best: decentralized, dynamic, and worth exploring.
But before that, let me show three real-life examples of DAOs that missed the mark one way or the other. 
For this section, I dug into credible sources, including community feedback on X (FKA Twitter), forums, and articles to provide two examples of these issues.
Exhibit A: SushiSwap DAO
Groans and sighs…
I know, what’s an Ethereum DAO doing in an article based on Realms’ Solana DAOs? I added it because even though it isn’t one of the earliest examples, it is a solid example of how quickly DAO governance can go wrong. SushiSwap is a DEX forked from Uniswap in 2020, and it transitioned to a DAO to govern its protocol and treasury using SUSHI tokens for voting.
Complaints & Evidence of Restricted Governance:
- Centralized Control by Core Team: In September 2020, the founder, Chef Nomi, pulled $14 million in ETH from the protocol’s funds, citing the move as his salary payment, which sparked community outrage. After much backlash, he returned the funds, exposing how much power a single entity held in the organization despite the DAO label.
- Proposal Restrictions: Post-incident, governance shifted to a multi-sig wallet controlled by a small group of Sushi core developers. Regular SUSHI holders complained on X and Reddit about needing to “lobby” these gatekeepers, with some saying, “SUSHI governance is a joke — unless you’re in the clique, your voice is mute.”
Today, while SushiSwap DEX still operates, its DAO has been criticized as a “centralized DAO” where token holders have voting rights but little influence over proposals, which favour whale wallets with 10–1M SUSHIPOWAH (voting power based on tokens held). After checking Snapshot and Sushi governance websites, I noticed the trend. A good example is this proposal, where two whales reached a 99+% quorum.
Now, let’s bring it home to Solana.
Frankly, specific and well-documented cases of Solana DAOs with these exact issues are not as widespread as those of DAOs on Ethereum. Solana’s DAO scene is younger, but I identified instances based on community feedback, X posts, governance records and articles where users raised such concerns.
Exhibit B: Solend DAO
Solend is a Solana lending protocol governed by their DAO and SLND tokens. On 19th June 2022, Solend DAO proposed SLND1 to take over a whale’s collateralized account to avoid on-chain liquidation and execute the liquidation themselves over the counter.
Here are the details of the whale’s position and the potential risk it posed at the time of the proposal:
- 5.7M SOL deposited ($170M)
- 108M USDC and USDT borrowed
- 25% of TVL
- 95% of SOL deposits (Main Pool)
- 88% of USDC borrows (Main Pool)
Mr Whale hadn’t paid the debt and left the $SOL to be liquidated automatically, which posed a risk to the protocol liquidity and overall market. The same proposal passed on 20th June in less than 6 hours of being live with 88% ‘YES’ votes coming from an unidentified whale with 1M+ voting power out of the 1.155M votes.
After the outrage, the Solend protocol proposed that SLND2 (which passed) overturn SLND1, but by then, regular token holders felt powerless and disengaged. Then, on Jun 21, the team launched a third proposal to change the lending parameters and impose lending limits to avoid the incident repeating itself.
Many other fiascos highlight DAOs where governance fell short from the onset or during the decentralized journey. I’m referring to DAOs like:
- Maker DAO: Another Ethereum DAO faced ongoing criticism for whale dominance, delegate control, and high barriers to proposing, leaving smaller MKR holders with little influence.
- Mango DAO: Solana-based DEX with a DAO governing its then $67M treasury, but its governance has been criticized for whale dominance and backroom deals, especially after a significant exploit ($114M) in 2022.
- Parrot DAO: Solana-based lending and stablecoin platform faced significant backlash in 2023 over its governance decisions for a token buyback proposal that favored insiders and was unfair to retail investors.
Each fiasco has had many DAO die-hards like me asking: is “governance” just a buzzword for DAOs? Were these events reflective of all DAO governance or a characteristic of certain DAOs? Whatever the answer, it sure set a dangerous precedent, no matter how well-intentioned some proposals were.
Suffice me to say it’s not all gloom & doom. There are indeed DAOs that deliver value and align themselves with the community for each decision-making process. Governance and proposing change aren’t restricted to the “oligarchs” whales; they are collaborative and decentralized. They use Realms as their governance platform and embody the pure ethos of DAO decentralization — empowering all members. These DAOs are referred to as “Realms-based DAOs”, and I’ll be uncovering them below.
Realms-based DAOs: The Gold Standard of Governance
Realms isn’t just any run-of-the-mill DAO tool — it’s the beating heart of Solana’s decentralized organizations. Built on SPL governance, Realms is a no-code powerhouse that lets anyone spin up a DAO, manage treasuries, and decide matters onchain.
Key Features of Realms:
- No-Code DAO Creation: Anyone can set up a DAO without technical expertise using Realms’ intuitive web interface
- Open Proposal Access: Members with the minimum required tokens (or NFTs, in some cases) set by the creator can propose changes — no team approval is needed.
- Customizable Governance: Supports token-based voting, NFT voting, and hybrid models, catering to diverse communities
- Transparency: All proposals, votes, and treasury movements are logged onchain and accessible via Realms.today website
- Proposal and voting validation: Utilize Civic Pass to validate who can create a proposal or cast a vote.
- DAO Activity Notifications: Use Dialect to receive notifications of new proposals.
- Custom branding: DAOs can have their branding, color schemes and domain name.
Now, how do Realm-based DAOs differ from other so-called DAOs? I have some DAOs showcasing this critical difference.
Marinade DAO — Stake, Earn, and Steer the Future
Marinade is a liquid staking protocol on Solana, letting users stake SOL for mSOL while governing a $1.2B+ TVL protocol via its Realms DAO page. Membership perks? Stake SOL, claim mSOL and save on SOL using discounted staking pool fees.
Marinade DAO is owned by MNDE holders that lock their tokens in Realms to obtain veMNDE. In a previous vote, MNDE holders ratified this Constitution that highlights the goals of Marinade as a DAO.
Examples of proper Marinade governance decisions:
Bonk DAO — Meme Power Meets Real Impact
Bonk, a dog-themed meme coin turned Solana powerhouse, uses its DAO to manage token burns and community initiatives. Bonk turns meme energy into real governance — Hold 1M BONK to propose. Membership perks? BONK drops, NFT drops, and merch collabs included.
Bonk DAO members have a clear path: Buy BONK, join DAO via Realms, vote.
Examples of proper Bonk DAO governance decisions:
Other notable DAOs are:
- Realms Ecosystem DAO (R.E.D.): A Solana meta-DAO launched in 2024 with a $200k treasury. R.E.D. uses Realms to fund DAO initiatives transparently (e.g., sponsoring a Solana contentathon, Epicentral Labs grant — $10,000), showcasing collective decision-making and reinforcing Solana’s governance ecosystem with true decentralization.
- Pyth Network DAO: Solana-based Oracle network delivering real-time financial data to dApps. Its DAO excels in open governance, with proposals like the Approval of Community Council Election and Budget, CO-PIP-7 and many more.
Beyond the Basics — Why These DAOs Shine
The above examples don’t stop at “vote and propose.” Marinade’s a career launchpad — devs, writers, and marketers find gigs through its treasury. Bonk’s a cultural juggernaut, turning a joke into a movement with tangible rewards. R.E.D. incentivizes Solana governance and creators, while Pyth DAO focuses on advancing the protocol.
Members are in the driver’s seat, not just riding along. Compare that to the permissioned “DAOs” I highlighted earlier and those I’ve ditched — ones where I held tokens but couldn’t make decisions without the dev’s nod. Realms-based DAOs don’t work like that.
Conclusion: The DAO Scene Worth Joining
Realms-based DAOs are proof that DAOs can deliver. These aren’t passive organizations — they’re ecosystems where your input matters. So, yeah, I’m hooked. If you’re on Solana and not in a Realms DAO, what’s stopping you? Dive in, propose something wild, and see where it takes you. This governance does something — and it’s only possible on Solana!
