The SOVRYN Constitution/The Declaration of SOVRYNTY

An interesting point was made in the call today about the sovryns philosophy. I thought be a good idea to start this thread so we dont forget about it. I personally think setting certain values and making them clear to the community would be very helpful and important to remind ourselves what being part of Sovryn really means.

What made me excited about Sovryn was the non-KYC aspect being non-exclusive and open to everybody. I am not a good writer so i wont go on. But maybe as a community we all have our say in this thread on what we want sovryn to be and its values. And make a declaration of sovrynty. Just an idea.


Good idea! Thanks for following up on this.

Some values that attracted me to Sovryn:

  • Recognition of bitcoin as the best money and most solid foundation to build on
  • Commitment to non-custodial and permissionless access to finance
  • Protection of financial freedom and privacy

These are ideals and we may not live up to them perfectly all the time and in every way but I believe if we continue to follow these as our north star values we will succeed in building a community and product ecosystem worthy of the name “Sovryn”.


Agree with everything you said light.

I think this will also be a good marketing trick to bring users by saying that Sovryn DAO has its own constitution. Something clear, simple and easy to read.

But i would argue if the Sovryn DAO lives up to its ethos as permissionless finance, non-exclusive, and helps bring financial sovrynty to the masses. Then the Sovryn Constitution maybe remembered in history in the same light as “1215 Magna Carter” or “1776 US declaration of independence”.

Even if its just for a fun marketing trick, the sovryn constitution could still be a very important document for the years to come.

Ultimately, I just want be Sovryn lol.


It would be great to write our constitution into a block on the bitcoin blockchain.

Maybe when Sovryn leaves alpha? This would be a cool signal.

Some values i see in Sovryn:

-Bitcoin is the best monetary asset and will improve the world in many ways.
-A fair and decentralized financial system thats based on code and not corrupt middlemen.
-Protection of individual rights and privacy.
-Not your keys, not your bitcoin.
-Well, sovrynity, obviously.


Maybe an NFT artist could create a Sovryn Constituition NFT and Sovryn users receive the NFT when they choose to sign the constitution. Just an idea.

1 Like

What resonated with me on Sovryn:

  • Open access to financial services through bitcoin, the most secure and unforgeable digital asset in existence
  • Participative economy and gathering of sovereign intellectuals
  • Privacy and inclusion
  • Pushing the limits of Web3 user interface & experience


  • Every human can and should have access to financial services
  • We are responsible for our own actions, and take ownership over our choices
  • We believe in “The Commons”, a free and open space for individual constructive expressions
  • A fair exchange is profitable for all parties involved

This is a really interesting phenomenon to me, to think about how value driven evolution works in DAO vs a modern company. A company driven by “image values” vs foundational values will engage people very differently and very different degree of success, one will cause a gap in views while the other causes unity and resilience.

Companies that grow realizes they need to set up clear values to lead their current people and attract the right people for their purpose/cause often turn away from or even lack their own core values and instead turn to brainstorm with their teams to come up with values. Resulting in mixed vague set of values that don’t really say anything but mostly confuses the organisation as the individuals in it sees the gap between the companies actions(the leaders decisions) and their set values (which will happen when the values are a vague mix of a group of people and when the leader actually has a different set of internal values than the values that came up in the brainstorming of the group) -Meaning we all have our own internal vision of what those values mean to us.

If the leader instead turned inwardly and looked at the foundational values within him that moves them emotionally to put in the effort to build towards a vision, to keep fighting for what they think is right when there are obstacles, to keep working when the going gets tough, those are the values that will drive the decisions and engage the like minded driven people.
(Think Steve Jobs here; a very clear vision from one man who attracted like minded people with similar value who made it possible, but he and the company always stayed with his foundational values)

Now @yago isn’t “The founder” but he does an amazing job at expressing the vision and values of Sovryn. And as he does so he speaks from his own values which moves him emotionally and which moves us emotionally - triggering our values that are similar to his and Sovryn’s foundational values, attracting us and new people to the project’s vision.

This is where it’s fascinating to me, the difference between a company and a DAO, or maybe I’m concluding the similarities instead. How do we as humans gather around a set of values and work towards a vision when there is no “clear leader”? Even though this is a DAO the vision and foundational value that has moved people so far came from someone or some people.

What I want to point out with this is my belief that if there is a constitution to be written it should be written by the core team or as close to the source as possible and from their foundational values to make sure it is a intact as possible to the values that moved peopel to come together and to keep attracting the like minded people who collectively will drive decisions through a similar lense of values. It’s their values that causes them to be moved and to push forward and keep working, and it’s these values that causes us to be moved and wanting to be part of it.

This has obviously already happened to this point, creating the community and DAO that is Sovryn. But there is a point where the organisation will try to set values(Here we are) to clearly communicate their value and it will either go forward by brainstorming and creating vague semi agreeable statements or it will root itself in the emotional and foundational values that started the journey - that has moved people to come together so far.

Those are my two cents, I do believe they are an important part of the conversation, and important to shine a light on, but I also personally hate to put responsibility on others to create something, which I basically did now saying the core team should write it.
Maybe they want to, maybe they should, maybe they shouldn’t and I’m not seeing something about DAO that will organically bring out a collective foundational value that doesn’t reflect the companies vague and opposing statements to their actions, who knows, but those are my thought :slight_smile:

Love the Idea and excited to see where it might be leading to :slight_smile:

But to also contribute to share what values I see in Sovryn and resonate with:
Freedom and Sovereignty.
Potential in people and education - what this means to me; Expanding of the people’s potential, removal of societal/state obstacles and uplifting their ownership of their own self and their future, ownership of their own destiny.
Unity - Open for everyone, non-judgmental non-exclusive, opening up a financial structure to anyone in the world to be part of.


This text from the Sovryn Blackpaper could serve as a beginning:

The Sovryn Mission:

Sovryn is creating an open, fair, and transparent financial system for the world. Bitcoin empowers individuals with monetary self-sovereignty by providing a decentralized and censorship-resistant form of digital currency. Sovryn enables people to expand upon the monetary freedom afforded by Bitcoin to achieve complete financial self-sovereignty.

Sovryn’s Key Principles:

  1. Censorship Resistance
    Sovryn cannot arbitrarily stop, or freeze transactions.
  2. Self Custody
    Sovryn cannot seize or control user funds.
  3. Transparency
    All Sovryn rules and code are open source and visible to all.
  4. Programmatic
    All Sovryn rules are enforced objectively and uniformly by code.
  5. Permissionless
    Participation is voluntary and open to all.
  6. Pseudonymous
    Sovryn preserves open access and privacy by allowing pseudonymous participation.
  7. Low Time Preference
    Sovryn incentivizes long-term commitment and thinking
  8. Game Theory Compatible
    Sovryn incentivizes positive-sum outcomes by requiring skin-in-the-game from participants, where economic rewards and punishments enforce desired outcomes.

So the Sovryn’s Key Principles almost govern how the platform is built and The Sovryn Constitution is pointing to the sovereign individuals that live by a set of tenets/ideals/moral compass.

Is the goal to draft a constitution framework where a Sovrynite can accept the constitution? Would there be a representative/symbolic action and representative token that one can receive? Or will this be more of a thread for feedback on what resonates with each other in the community. Some food for thought.

1 Like

I dont think we will enforce any ideas on anyone. Not trying to create a cult. Just some ideals and values the sovryn core community which are flexible and non-exlcusive to anyone. I thought it would be a fun project and also be a good marketing opportunity to take advantage of to bring more users to the dapp.

Just an idea Maybe be cool to give all Signatures of Sovryn Constitution an NFT in exchange.
One marketing trick could be Free NFT Built on Bitcoin for those who sign the Sovryn Constitution by a certain date. That might be a way to get bitcoiners and NFT fans to come to the SOVRYN dapp.

I like the idea by @Sacro write the SOVRYN constitution into a block of the bitcoin block.

@BenG Makes a good point probably best for core devs if they not busy to help make the constitution as they are team who are building Sovryn. But be nice to get community members input too.

@exiledsurfer Yeh that be a great introduction.


Just my two cents…

The Constitution can be asked to sign when someone decides to stake SOV. This will be similar to real world events like when an elected representatives swear an oath on the book of law, as in stakers have the duty to support and defend the core values.

That event can be turned into an NFT “Signing The Constitution”/ “Swearing the Oath”/ “?”. This NFT is then transferred to stakers wallet.

This process can be automated so whenever someone stakes they also get an NFT of this.

Is it too much? Don’t know for sure.

My take is that, by implementing people will have a sense of responsibility; as in the stakers will feel they are part of something big and they’re not just blindly staking to earn protocol revenue.


To take a systematic approach to the question of the core values of Sovryn, I think it’s key to start with asking what Sovryn is. For me, Sovryn, in its current form, is in the very first instance DeFi for bitcoiners.

It’s not DeFi built “on” Bitcoin. It’s built on RSK. It’s also not built “for” Bitcoin. Bitcoin is code, you don’t build things ‘for’ code, you build things for people. The relevant people here are bitcoiners.

DeFi for bitcoiners is DeFi that aims to exemplify those core virtues of Bitcoin that attract bitcoiners to believe and support bitcoinization (= the process of Bitcoin becoming the primary standard and bearer of monetary value, and the primary medium of exchange).

To be sure, bitcoiners are not Toxic Maxi’s. They are a wider and more loosely connected community believing in and supporting bitcoinization.

Given this background picture, we get a programmatic approach to fixing on the core values:

  • Core values: The core values of Sovryn should be continuous with the core values of Bitcoin, so that Sovryn can become an integral aspect of bitcoinization.

If that is right, and we ask what the core values of Sovryn should be, we Sovrynites cannot but study and reflect on Bitcoin and base our values on what we take to be the core virtues exemplified by Bitcoin.

Note that many of the key principles in the Black Paper (mentioned by @exiledsurfer above) can be derived from this, such as: censorship resistance, self custody, transparency, being programmatic, being permissionless, and allowing pseudonymity. These are all clearly core values of Bitcoin that attract bitcoiners to believe and support bitcoinization and, therefore, core values for Sovryn.

One thing that really excites me about Sovryn is that it will enter domains that raise deep and interesting questions about the character of Bitcoin that are currently hard to see (given that we are right in the middle of it taking shape).

For example, if Sovryn enters into offering a jurisdiction, this raises the question of the political character of Bitcoin. Is it libertarian? Is it capitalist? Is it progressive? Is it anarchist? Or is it at bottom simply a-political, non-human, and hence neutral? I don’t think the answer is obvious (though I have tentative views on this).

Sovrynites must be students of Bitcoin. The fundamental core commitment of Sorynites should not be to simply settle on an answer but to study and further reflect on the virtues and character of Bitcoin and the ongoing bitcoinization with the purpose of taking these virtues further.


Love this idea! Its only fair stakers of SOV get to sign and receive the NFT. Be a good incentive to bring more Sovryns using the dapp.

I think this is a valuable idea. Values are important.

1 Like

More food: “Cypher Law” framing from Ross Campbell:

Cypher law supports internet-native property rights. It is an extension of international law that informs rulemaking and remedies in markets that run on autonomous code. It serves the practical trustless nature of such markets. It regards privacy as a fundamental right and consequence of public cryptography.

Autonomous code consists of programs that resist intervention, such as the settlement of cryptographic assets. This is not to say intervention cannot be programmatic, but it will largely be consensual within the bounds of an agreement.

Cypher law informs the risks, crypto economically, as well as judicially, for engaging in autonomous agreements and validating them with software. It can be an aid in rationalizing such formation, execution and validation among strangers with diverse backgrounds.

Cypher law practitioners understand the code and traditional legal context of autonomous agreements and their markets.

Cypher law is leaderless.

Cypher law has emerged organically on the internet, without edict, over the last decade to structure incentives over trillions in fiat. It is largely unspoken, self-regulated and guided by crypto economics and codified consensus rules, while remaining aware of intervention risks and related game theory.

These rules, or the cypher social contract, are formed and litigated among those that validate transactions and communities that give them value.

Disputes may arise over the validity of the ledger, informed by notions of fairness or the threat of traditional legal systems, and in this manner, cypher law is an extension of “Law”, but ultimately, is determined by its own jurisdiction.

Ledger est lex. Ledgers may split their records, but the markets they serve will compete to resolve their state without “State” intervention, as that is most efficient. Cypher law accommodates such market competition.

Cypher law is coordination.

Like traditional legal systems, cypher law empowers coordination by rationalizing risk. It allows people to plan for the future and make agreements by streamlining settlement.

In cypher law, code is a fair representation of the intention of affected parties or their “promises”.

Unlike traditional legal systems, human interpretation in cypher law is pushed to the far edges, replacing lawyers and judges with promissory code that executes on signatures.

Coordination here is not concerned with nationality or personal background. In this way, cypher law is more tolerable to support markets among total strangers on the internet.

The communities that operate on cypher law are those that validate transactions for rewards and those who populate them. These communities do not rely on the enforcement remedies of legal systems, but largely, the incentives displayed by crypto economics.

Where rules are transparent and predictably applied to assets, cooperation becomes that much easier and powerful.

Anyone can form an agreement on a cypher legal system and be reasonably sure that it will execute as expected. Anyone can mine or validate a transaction, adding to the memory of the market, its common law, and expect a reward.

Cypher law is property 2.0.

Cypher law enhances property rights by allowing anyone to freely enter and exit their assets without bias. These assets are secured by the credible neutrality of cryptography. Cypher agreements are therefore ratified more by the validity of their terms than by their participants.

Cypher law will continue to advance to support an international market in p2p trading, company formation and more advanced financial primitives, like lending, by reconstructing remedies usually provided for agreement defaults in traditional legal systems, with internet-native enforcement mechanisms.

Cypher law is not anarchy.

Cypher law is informed by the rules of other jurisdictions and their application to those maintaining ledgers.

Autonomous agreements expedite execution but do not remove the consequences of their formation and state against other legal systems.

The cooperation of other legal systems with cypher legal systems, like the coordination among cypher communities, will be driven by rational incentives and rewards.


Who is going to write this? Ideally it would be by individual(s) who do it freely because of their belief in the ethos. However, I think we shold be open to passing a SIP (or Exchequer unilaterally allocates some funds) to pay prominent Bitcoiner’s to write this constitution for us.

I have a few ideas:

Andrew M. Bailey, Bradley Rettler, and Craig Warmke: They’re actual philosophy majors that believe in Bitcoin. So they have experience writing and a breadth of knowledge.

Allen Farrington and Big Al: *They wrote a philosophical, technical, and economic critique of DeFi. It’s a really nuanced view that acknowledges some of the ponzi like economics of DeFi while also seeing the power it can offer. *

Robert Breedlove: Tons of pieces, a lot of people here I imagine are already aware of his work

@yago @exiledsurfer @light I’d love to see you guys do a Spaces or even an informal call with any/all of these parties and see if they’d be willing to draft a constitution?

1 Like

But do they believe in SOVRYN?


Not yet :smiley: .

I’ve read a lot of their work and I personally think they would believe in SOVRYN but likely haven’t had a reason to deep-dive. We would need to show them the way. That’s why a Spaces would be interesting. Have an open conversation and see if they’re aligned.

1 Like

After listening to the Oct 28th community call with Niftify, I got the sense that some projects that want to partner with Sovryn are incompatible with Sovryn princples or at least may lead down a slippery slope where a lot of the value within Sovryn is tied to entities that do not hold the same values as Sovryn.

I just came across the idea and possibility that popular wallet providers eventually maybe being regulated and perhaps dapps that are compliant will not be allowed to provide compatibility with unregulated wallets.

I understand that the desire to grow quickly may lead us down the path of supporting all projects that want to bring value into the Sovryn system, but if that means endangering these core values as set out by any Sovryn constitution then I think that the onboarding of projects that do not align with the Sovryn values become a real threat to the system in the future in the form of having regulation being able to significantly impact SOV’s value.

This is really tough as not embracing these projects may lead us to a path of slower growth that will likely harm current SOV’s value but will lead to more robust intrinsic value in the future if it plays out that there are sufficient teams out there that are working on projects that do align better with Sovryn’s core values.

1 Like

@gauchorboy I have been having similar thoughts. There is no easy balance to be struck between strict but inflexible principle and pragmatic but opportunistic considerations. Codifying the principles means attempting to codify the trade-offs we are prepared to make. An important and difficult task - and one which will still not provide unambiguous clarity.

I have taken several shots at writing out some thoughts on what a ‘constitution’ could look like to my mind. I haven’t been satisfied with the results yet.

1 Like