Drag S(C) slider to see theorem in action
Scored Monarchy: 2/12
drift ≤ V(G)/S(C)
The King Problem

12 governance models. 5,000 years. Every one scores ≥5/12 — except the scored monarchy at 2/12. Paper 10 derives why.

Standard DAOs score 10/12 on the governance void index — worse than unconstrained monarchy at 5/12. The scored monarchy reaches 2/12 by removing the methodology from the voting surface. Arrow's theorem does not apply to math. The dissolution guarantee is the structural response to the one thing that can't be designed away: custodian decay.

Constraint-Custodian Theorem
drift ≤ V(G) / S(C)

V(G) = void score of governance structure. S(C) = constraint strength of custodian. Lower V(G) and higher S(C) both reduce drift. For human custodians, S(C) decays with λ > 0.

The dissolution response
Die > Drift

When S(C) decays below threshold, the scored monarchy dissolves rather than drifting. Mortal by design. 26 kill conditions — any one suffices.

The 12 Models

Each model scored on the 12-point governance void index. The scoring is structural, not ideological. A model that concentrates opacity, responsiveness, and coupling scores high. No exceptions across 5,000 years.

Model
Score
Key factor
Scored Monarchy
2/12
Methodology outside voting surface. Dissolution guarantee. Custodian constrained by spec.
Direct Democracy
5/12
Transparent but susceptible to engagement capture. No opacity filter on proposals.
Unconstrained Monarchy
5/12
Single custodian, high opacity. Efficient but dependent on S(C) of the ruler.
Constitutional Republic
6/12
Structural constraints exist but erode through interpretation. Amendment process is responsive.
Oligarchy
7/12
High opacity. Decision coupling concentrated. Information asymmetry is structural.
Theocracy
8/12
Invariant reference claimed. Opacity in interpretation. Coupling through identity.
Corporate Board
8/12
Fiduciary opacity. Responsive to shareholder attention. High coupling through equity.
Military Junta
9/12
Maximum opacity by design. Responsive only to internal hierarchy. High coercive coupling.
Technocracy
9/12
Expertise as opacity. Responsive to internal signals. Public excluded from verification.
Standard DAO
10/12
Token-weighted voting maximizes coupling. Pseudonymous = opacity. Adaptive = responsive. Worse than monarchy.
Totalitarian State
11/12
Near-maximum on all dimensions. Only transparency of existence prevents 12.
Anonymous Cabal
12/12
Maximum score. Full opacity, maximum responsiveness to internal dynamics, complete coupling.

Why standard DAOs score so high

Token-weighted voting is a coupling mechanism: more tokens = more governance influence = more financial stake = more attention directed at the system. The voting mechanism IS an attention gradient. Pseudonymous participation creates structural opacity. Adaptive proposal mechanisms create responsiveness. A standard DAO hits 10/12 not because of bad design — because the structure produces high void conditions.

Read Paper 10

Paper 10 (The King Problem) formalizes the governance void index, derives the Constraint-Custodian Theorem, scores 12 models across 5,000 years, and proves the scored monarchy is the minimum-drift solution. MoreRight License v1.0 (Tier 2).

Read Paper 10 → MoreRight DAO → Paper 9: Voidspace →