I agree that GnosisDAO should probably be distanced by regular “protocol” DAOs. The DAO stakeholders cannot make efficient judgments over a broad range of initiatives and protocols the same way Uniswap governance can make educated decisions over the Uniswap protocol. Being a multi-protocol DAO, would not scale well because the stakeholders could not build up sufficient expertise across all protocols (or only at a high level). Therefore the focus / expertise of the GnosisDAO should be somewhere else, where it could scale much better.
For example:
- Investments - This is very scalable and also works with the GnosisDAO at some point overlooking dozens if not hundreds of initiatives / projects / investments
- Protocol spin-off factory: This would require some lower-level involvement at the beginning, but after spinning off a protocol into its own community the GnosisDAO would take more of a shareholder role, participating in high-level topics of the governance of the protocol but not necessarily being involved in all details of the protocol governance
- Providing basic initial decentralized governance for new (third-party) communities / protocols where there is not yet sufficient decentralization in the community / token itself. Basically “DeGov-as-a-Service”.