Interview with ENS Core Developer: A Step-by-Step Guide to Mastering the ENS DAO
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Interview with ENS Core Developer: A Step-by-Step Guide to Mastering the ENS DAO
The hype cycle is also an adoption cycle, but technology cycles often have significant overlap.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: Sunny, TechFlow
ENS Labs: Makoto Inoue
"While pure decentralization is a good thing for those who believe in it, mass adoption often requires a combination of Web2 and Web3 solutions."
--- Makoto Inoue, ENS Core Developer
Did you know about other uses of ENS beyond naming? Do you know how to participate in the ENS DAO and genuinely interact with contributors? Are you aware of the difference between on-chain and off-chain voting? Do you know how to bridge your Web2 domain onto the blockchain? Or how to turn your Lens handle into an ENS name?
Naming—or names—has always been one of humanity’s most fundamental activities. Everyone has their personal name, nickname. Everything around us also has its own name. Names help us identify ourselves and others. At the dawn of the internet, early contributors created a distributed data system called DNS to transform complex IP addresses into human-readable domain names. Today, in the blockchain world, we need a Web2-style DNS system to convert hexadecimal hash addresses into more user-friendly names—just as vitalik.eth represents 0xd8dA6BF26964aF9D7eEd9e03E53415D37aA96045. The ENS Foundation was among the earliest organizations to implement DNS on-chain, and as the industry evolved, they gradually expanded their protocol’s functionality. Now, ENS is not just a nickname—it’s also a website address, and a form of social identity.
Makoto Inoue is one of the earliest engineers at ENS and the most OG ENS member on Twitter. In the following conversation, Makoto patiently explains how to get involved in the ENS DAO, how to use ENS as a website address, and how to find tools within the community to build an organic, functional, decentralized collaboration organization. When discussing how Web3 is the internet of value while Web2 is the internet of information, Makoto points out that both are part of the internet, making room for many beautiful technological synergies. Whether you’re someone wanting to contribute to the ENS DAO, someone who has simply traded ENS domains, or someone aiming to build a brand-new DAO, this dialogue is for you.
TechFlow Builder Column: We hope readers inside and outside the industry can learn something new from in-depth conversations with deep practitioners!
TechFlow: Makoto, before diving deeper into ENS, could you introduce your background?
Makoto:
My name is Makoto, and I’m a developer at ENS. I’ve been working here since 2018. Back in 2016, I was a developer at an insurance company in London. Although we weren’t involved in blockchain then, after the UK government mentioned distributed ledger technology, our CEO sent out an email about it. I found it interesting and started researching blockchain. At first, Ethereum wasn’t the most prominent blockchain platform, but when I encountered it, I discovered something called smart contracts. As a programmer, I realized I could use them, making Ethereum an attractive entry point into the blockchain world for me.
Around the same time, I learned about ENS and its founder Nick Johnson, who worked in London. He joined the Ethereum Foundation in July 2016. When I attended an Ethereum meetup in London in April or May, I saw Nick Johnson present his project for the first time. From that moment, I recognized the potential of ENS.
Over the next few years, Ethereum and ENS continued evolving. By 2018, ENS had grown beyond being just Nick Johnson’s side project. He decided to incorporate a company in Singapore and invited me to join the team. Since then, for the past five years, I’ve been working with ENS.
I officially joined in 2019 when ENS became its own legal entity, previously known as True Name Limited. Currently, we operate under the name "ENS Labs," with a team of about 20 people based in Singapore. We’re the primary development company behind the protocol launched back in 2018. In 2021, we launched the ENS DAO, which is itself a separate legal entity registered in the Cayman Islands. This launch occurred in 2023.
So there are two organizations working together. While these entities have different structures, their mission is the same.
TechFlow: What does owning an ENS mean for users in Web3? What’s the significance of providing decentralized identities? What were your and Nick Johnson’s dreams and missions for ENS?
Makoto:
The core work of ENS is to make Ethereum easier to use. This aligns perfectly with our initial mission, symbolized by our logo—the ribbon wraps around the ECM (Ethereum) logo. The ECM logo is famous for its diamond shape, representing its cutting-edge and challenging nature. In contrast, ENS acts as a simplifying layer, improving user experience and accessibility.
One major challenge is dealing with Ethereum addresses, represented by 42-character hexadecimal strings—efficient technically but unfriendly for users. ENS allows users to assign human-readable names to these addresses, greatly enhancing usability and solving this issue.
TechFlow: ENS is essentially a domain service powered by smart contracts on Ethereum. As a technological advancement, how does it fit into crypto cycles? What new paradigms does ENS enable?
Makoto:
The so-called "hype cycle" typically has several phases. The first significant phase was driven by ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings), followed by another centered around NFTs (non-fungible tokens). Before that, 2020 saw another peak we call "DeFi Summer." Initially fueled by ICOs, the second wave focused on "aircoins," followed by a phase dominated by JPEGs, where various meme tokens gained traction. Notably, NFTs also emerged during this market peak.
I want to emphasize that the hype cycle is also an adoption cycle, though technology cycles often overlap significantly. In discussing these cycles, I’ve referenced key terms like Web3 and Ethereum, highlighting their main use cases: DeFi, NFTs, and DAOs. For example, the concept of DAOs dates back to April 2016, while NFTs rose to prominence in May 2017 with projects like ENS (Ethereum Name Service) and CryptoKitties. DeFi platforms like Uniswap and Compound emerged after public interest initially surged.
It’s important to note that many of these innovative ideas existed well before gaining widespread attention during the hype cycle.
TechFlow: How does the ENS DAO operate in terms of governance, voting, and token economics?
Makoto:
In our DAO, we have a governance lead who is an expert in this field. Currently, our governance process mainly relies on User-Generated Initiatives (UGIs) voted on via tokens. However, we noticed relatively low participation in token-based voting. To address this, when launching the ENS token distribution, we introduced a new method.
We asked people to delegate their voting power based on how long they’ve held their ENS tokens. Token allocation depends on the duration of ENS name ownership. For instance, if someone acquired an ENS name in 2021 but has held the same name since its initial launch in 2017, their holding period counts as four years. We encourage users to renew their names for multiple years to maximize token rewards. The exact number of tokens isn’t crucial; what matters is whether someone has held the name for a long time and is committed to long-term contribution.
We introduced a delegation-based system to encourage more active and sustained governance participation, using name-holding duration as a key factor. This ensures that those truly invested in ENS and its growth have a voice in governance.
We distributed legacy tokens based on the name-holding program. Additionally, we allocated tokens to around 100 key participants across various markets and industries. Despite these efforts, we still faced limited governance participation at the token launch. To solve this, we required individuals to delegate their voting rights, maintaining a list of interested participants ready to delegate.
Currently, governance is primarily managed by delegates who hold greater voting power than regular token holders. Their votes are critical for proposals and decisions. However, to avoid overwhelming every decision with voting, we established three working groups: Meta-Governance, Ecosystem, and Public Goods.
The Meta-Governance group oversees overall protocol management and plays a key role in critical decisions regarding protocol changes. Conversely, the Ecosystem working group focuses on encouraging developers to build around ENS and promoting its growth.
In summary, we distribute tokens through the name-holding program and allocate them to key stakeholders. Delegated individuals play a vital role in governance, while the three working groups focus on different aspects of ENS development and decision-making. This structure helps ensure effective governance without overburdening every decision with excessive participation.
Within the decision-making process, we use something called “stewards.” We elect three stewards per market group, totaling nine stewards. This election occurs approximately every six months. Once elected, we adopt off-chain voting.
TechFlow: Can you explain the role of public goods in Web3?
Makoto: Public goods refer to anything that enhances the overall Web3 ecosystem.
TechFlow: What’s the difference between on-chain voting and off-chain voting?
Makoto:
On-chain voting involves sending transactions directly on the Ethereum blockchain.
In contrast, off-chain voting relies on "Snapshot," which determines voting power based on your token holdings. You express your vote by sending a signature, but it incurs no gas fees, making the process non-binding on-chain.
For example, if we want to allocate funds from the DAO treasury to someone, we need to execute an on-chain transaction, so we use on-chain voting.
However, when electing stewards, we use Snapshot for "soft" or "sense" votes. The elected stewards then determine their required budget and initiate on-chain votes to allocate funds to projects within their domain. Since they own these funds, they decide how to distribute them across projects.
In short, our governance process involves electing stewards every six months via off-chain voting using Snapshot. Then, stewards decide budget allocations and conduct on-chain voting for specific financial transactions.
That’s how our governance structure works.
TechFlow: That’s fascinating because most DAOs I’ve encountered are quite chaotic, with people juggling multiple tasks similar to startups. Yet, observing how ENS builds specialized structures across different areas and leverages both on-chain and off-chain voting mechanisms is impressive.
Makoto:
We weren’t the first to adopt this approach, but our timing was fortunate. Prior to the DeFi Summer hype cycle, there was a phase focused on building foundational governance components. For example, Snapshot—a tool now widely used—was originally developed as part of Balancer, a DeFi project. They needed a low-cost voting solution for token launches, leading to the creation of Snapshot.
Similarly, our delegation system was inspired by CoinList. During this period, many other projects contributed foundational work. We also heavily utilize smart contracts, operating similarly to another DeFi project, Compound. In the year before launching our token, we did extensive groundwork, allowing us to integrate best practices from various projects.
In summary, while we weren’t pioneers of this governance model, our development timing allowed us to benefit from advances made by other projects during the DeFi hype cycle. By combining various best practices, we’ve built a more robust and efficient governance system.
TechFlow: How does the ENS DAO conduct on-chain voting and execution of proposals?
Makoto:
So far, we’ve had 15 proposals (this was during ETHcc 2023). “Executable” means conducting on-chain transactions.
This relates to protocol upgrades based on IF statements. In such cases, some smart contract holders participate, and if the proposal passes, they execute code that changes the actual ENS protocol. This is a classic example of on-chain voting.
TechFlow: I assume not every proposal needs to be automatically decided via IF statements. In other cases, we indeed require some form of human-driven decision-making. In what scenarios is off-chain consensus (or social consensus) within the DAO more necessary than on-chain IF statements for passing proposals?
Makoto: Yes, this involves social decision-making. It concerns approving ENS normalization standards—guidelines everyone follows for consistent formatting.
We have a way to normalize names. While ENS allows plain text, people might use emojis and special characters. For example, “γitalik.eth” could be mistaken for “Vitalik.eth” (since γ resembles V and stands for V in Greek). To address this, we decided to create a JavaScript library to detect and eliminate such cases. This process isn’t done on-chain, so on-chain governance isn’t required, but off-chain consensus is beneficial.
This proposal relates to steward elections. Similar to real-world board elections, we aim to select specific individuals. The process involves choosing whom to nominate. This is how we distinguish between on-chain and off-chain governance. All voters have equal voting power based on their points or delegated points. This is also the voting standard.
Therefore, any vote outcome or state-changing operation must be completed via on-chain transactions. Everything else doesn’t require on-chain involvement—it’s purely for scalability. So, you don’t necessarily have to do it on-chain. That’s the distinction—and why anything social doesn’t need on-chain processing, while transfers or protocol upgrades do. This is common across many protocols because gas costs can be prohibitive unless absolutely necessary.
TechFlow: ENS was initially developed to make Ethereum’s hexadecimal addresses more human-readable and user-friendly. It’s been around for a while—what new use cases have you observed emerging?
Makoto:
We have several use cases, mainly three types. The first is binding a name to an address; the second is binding an address to a name. The third use case enables login functionality. Once you connect your wallet app, it knows your Ethereum address, allowing you to display your name. Again, this ties back to the address.
Now, let’s discuss the fourth use case, which targets IPFS. Are you familiar with IPFS?
Or have you heard of something called a distributed file system?
It’s a decentralized file service. People use it to create censorship-resistant websites. For example, in countries like China that restrict access to certain websites, IPFS allows users to access content via its unique addressing system—the hash of the entire content. It doesn’t matter who uploaded it because IPFS represents content by its hash. One of the most famous IPFS gateways is ipfs.io. People can write controversial articles criticizing governments, and anyone synced with the decentralized file system can access them. This avoids censorship due to the lack of single-point control.
What we provide is a way to make these long, complex hashes more memorable. We offer names representing these IPFS addresses. For example, instead of typing “ipfs.io/ipfs/vitalik.eth,” users can access it via a name like “ipfs.io/vitalik.eth.”
This auxiliary use case complements blockchain. In contrast, IPFS focuses more on distributed content like images and NFTs. Ownership data resides on-chain, but actual content (like JPEGs) is usually stored in databases or on IPFS.
This separation helps optimize the use of both technologies.
In short, one ENS use case is creating decentralized websites using IPFS, offering an alternative to traditional centralized web hosting.
TechFlow: Names also represent identity. However, on blockchain, they also reveal a person’s financial transactions. These two identities seem conflicting, as most people dislike linking their private finances to public profiles. Is there a way to reconcile this conflict?
Makoto:
The services we offer make using ENS easier. We inherit all the inherent advantages and benefits of blockchain itself. A common concern people raise is reluctance to use their ENS name due to fears of reputational damage or identity exposure.
However, my view is that when you use services like Bitcoin, you’re already exposing yourself to some extent. People can see your activity through your online transactions. ENS merely provides a human-readable name to represent your address but doesn’t expose any additional information beyond what’s already public. Therefore, using ENS itself doesn’t mean leaking more personal data.
Owning an ENS name doesn’t necessarily compromise your privacy or how you operate.
Let me give an example. I have multiple ENS names linked to my public Ethereum address. Some are used for more public interactions, such as engaging with lower-value NFTs and broader communities. Others are reserved for financial transactions and kept separate.
In a way, this is similar to how you use Twitter. If you don’t want to, don’t expose everything—but you still reveal some things depending on usage. That’s my perspective.
Regarding privacy, many new privacy technologies have emerged, such as Tornado and a new French company called Sismo. These solutions allow you to manage assets and addresses without exposing sensitive information.
For example, you can prove ownership of assets without revealing your actual on-chain address. These solutions exist, and more importantly, integrating DNS with such privacy services is essential. As ENS, we prioritize maintaining service integrity and encourage developers to leverage privacy solutions rather than relying solely on DNS for privacy protection. That’s our approach.
TechFlow: An interesting point is that beyond financial transactions, we’re seeing more social applications emerge in Web3. How do you view the convergence of domain names and social identity?
Makoto:
We enable integration between ENS and other social platforms. So, if you have a Lens profile—for example, the founder’s name is stani.lens—you can resolve that profile using an ENS name, such as appending stani.lens.xyz. Through integration with ENS and other platforms, users can seamlessly access their profiles.
Additionally, in the realm of social networking services, there are ways to use ENS names as a form of identity to display information like NFTs. This integration enhances user experience and is being widely adopted.
TechFlow: Some users are sensitive about inferring social behavior from financial data—what’s your take?
Makoto:
Absolutely, that’s a valid point. When you claim a POAP and link it to events, people can actually track and know which events you attended. So, if you’re concerned about exposing attendance at certain locations, claiming a POAP might not be ideal. It’s similar to the privacy trade-off when enabling location services in tweets on social networks. Ultimately, it comes down to personal choice and how much information you wish to publicly share.
TechFlow: Since you previously worked as a developer at an insurance company before leaving the traditional sector for Web3, what insights have you drawn from the differences between these two worlds? What did you find possible in Web3 that you hadn’t imagined feasible in Web2?
Makoto:
Indeed, in today’s data environment, privacy issues frequently arise due to data openness. Previously, in finance and insurance, I did extensive data analysis work. In Web2, accessing data requires corporate permission, and even then, data remains restricted and controlled by the company itself. Such limitations hinder innovation and creative use of data.
For example, I had a great experience using early versions of Twitter, which allowed access to vast amounts of data known as "Twitter Firehose." I could perform fantastic data analysis and hacks using this information. However, as Twitter shifted toward monetization, access to this data was restricted, drastically changing the ecosystem.
In contrast, the appeal of blockchain lies in its openness. Blockchain platforms are inherently open—developers can build without needing permission from centralized entities. Most codebases are open-source, fostering collaborative environments. Developers can simply send pull requests on GitHub to propose new features for projects like ENS, with transparent development processes accessible to all.
Having experienced the constraints of closed-source systems at the insurance company, I deeply appreciate the openness in the blockchain space. We encourage collaboration with diverse teams and individuals, cultivating a sense of community and interconnectedness. Attending conferences and events allows me to meet new people and expand my network—something I rarely did in my previous job.
In short, for developers like me, transitioning to the Web3 paradigm is an empowerment—an expansive world full of possibilities and freedom, unlike the constrained environment of traditional Web2.
TechFlow: That captures the essence of blockchain’s public data enabling collaboration.
Makoto:
Open-source projects already exist, and we recognize the value they bring. Especially in the Web3 context, we strongly encourage open-sourcing data. In the realm of smart contracts, code transparency is crucial for building trust. Thus, when you visit platforms like Etherscan, you can verify the historical performance of smart contracts. This emphasis on openness and transparency fosters higher trust among users.
In Web3, the community recognizes the importance of collaboration and shared knowledge. Open-sourcing data and code not only strengthens auditing and verification but also promotes the development of robust, secure solutions. By allowing others to access and review code, potential issues can be identified and resolved, leading to more reliable and trustworthy applications.
In short, the spirit of Web3 revolves around openness, trust, and collaboration, and embracing open-source practices plays a pivotal role in building a vibrant, sustainable ecosystem for the future.
TechFlow: I understand Web3 is a web of value built on trust assumptions, while Web2 is a web of information. Still, they both run on the internet. As a developer, how do you view the convergence of Web2 and Web3?
Makoto:
I’d like to clarify that while pure decentralization is beneficial for believers, mass adoption often requires combining Web2 and Web3 solutions. One approach, as I mentioned earlier, is so-called "semi-centralized" solutions—storing sensitive address information off-chain.
The downside is potentially reduced transparency since information isn’t on-chain. However, it benefits privacy, as address references aren’t immediately visible. Thus, it’s a good balance between privacy and transparency.
If you want to build a service providing users with a unique address to query their investments, you can achieve this by combining Web2 and Web3 technologies. This approach lets you enjoy benefits from both worlds while reducing risks and privacy concerns associated with pure Web2 solutions.
Another example combining past and current technologies is Web3 usernames (like ENS) and Web2 inputs (such as .com domains). Companies like Apple or Google might opt for Web3 usernames if they want a unique presence in Web3 without paying high fees for popular .com domains. This helps build trust and avoid confusion. However, for companies where trust isn’t an issue, using Web2 imports like .com domains is sufficient. Platforms like Coinbase use CB.ID, an internet domain managed by ICANN. This suits their custodial service, as customers trust their security measures.
In short, choosing between Web3 usernames and Web2 inputs depends on specific use cases and desired levels of trust. Companies can select the method that best aligns with their goals and user expectations. For example, Coinbase’s CB.ID is a suitable choice for its platform, providing a universal way to send and receive funds without revealing specific identity details.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
深潮TechFlow
