Are you an LLM? Read llms.txt for a summary of the docs, or llms-full.txt for the full context.
Skip to content

1. Commitment Pooling Protocol (CPP): The Core Primitive

Mental model: A Commitment Pool is like a small, governed clearing house for community “gift cards” (vouchers). People deposit vouchers or reserve assets, exchange them under published rules, and redeem them for real goods/services. The software enforces limits and keeps receipts so disputes and guarantees can be handled transparently. CLC connects many pools so vouchers can find redemption paths beyond a single community.

CPP is a protocol for coordinating value using commitments. Commitments are the economy; CLC makes them open and routable. CPP is described in the book, Grassroots Economics: Reflection and Practice.

1.1 What is a Commitment?

A commitment is a clearly defined promise of future delivery - e.g., maize, transport services, labor hours, storage, or currency redemption. These commitments are represented as vouchers, which function economically like pre-paid delivery claims (similar to gift cards / service credits). (further defined in the section of voucher schemas).

1.2 What is a Commitment Pool?

Roles:

  • Pool steward: decides listings, values, fees, limits, guarantees, and pauses for a specific pool.
  • DAO (CLC): governs shared network services- standards/registries, routing policies, monitoring, liquidity/off-ramps, and optional insurance.
  • Router/operator: finds and executes paths across pools; can prefer safer profiles and degrade toxic routes.
  • Guarantor (optional): backs specific vouchers/pools with an explicit remedy if commitments fail.

A Commitment Pool is a stewarded contract suite that implements four interfaces:

  • Curation: Registers acceptable vouchers (Commitment (token) Registry),
  • Valuation: Maintains a value index (Value Index Registry),
    • The Value Index is the pool’s price list: a reference that says how much each voucher is worth relative to a common unit (often local currency), so swaps can be quoted consistently. Pools can use different valuation methods and still interoperate, as long as each pool can quote and enforce its own rules on each hop.
  • Limitation: Enforces credit/swap limits (Swap Limiter),
  • Exchange (Vault/Fee Registry): Configures fees and custodies assets; executes seed/swap only if listed, valued by the pool index, within limits, and in stock; emits receipts for every action.

Each pool behaves like a mini clearinghouse inside a cooperative, governed locally by those who depend on it.

Big idea: We are already doing commitment pooling all the time: wages, rent, invoices, loans, warranties, memberships, and mutual aid are all promises that get trusted, netted, and settled. Today that pooling is mostly closed, opaque, and permissioned (inside institutions and platforms) so commitments can’t easily connect or route beyond their enclosures. CLC DAO proposes to make the underlying protocol open and interoperable, so commitments can be published, pooled, and routed across communities and markets - by anyone.

Why this matters: pools can be compared and risk-rated because their listings, limits, fees, reserves, and guarantees are explicitly published.

Minimal Swap Logic (canonical)

  1. Listed?: Input and output vouchers must be listed in the Commitment Registry.
  2. Price?: Compute input→output via the Value Index (with fee preview).
  3. Limits?: Enforce Swap Limiter windows/caps for each voucher (and account/global if configured).
  4. Exchange:
    1. (fees): Apply Vault/Fee Registry fee rules (pair-specific OK); preview and emit on receipt.
    2. (inventory): Verify Vault inventory for the outgoing voucher.
  5. Transfer & Log: Move in/out, update registries, and emit immutable receipt (quoteId→receiptId).
  6. Multi-hop?: Repeat hop-by-hop; atomic if supported, else HTLC/escrow with explicit abort paths.

In other words: a pool only lets people exchange vouchers that are (a) approved, (b) priced by the pool’s published index, (c) within safety caps, and (d) actually in stock - then it issues a receipt.

1.3 Why CPP is Different from Traditional Crypto Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs)

Most decentralized exchanges (automated trading pools) rely on bilateral token pairs, continuous curves, and volatility-driven fees. CPP supports those use cases and enables low-frequency, high-impact coordination:

  • Community savings (VSLAs),
  • Production financing,
  • Mutual credit and mutual aid,
  • Insurance and guarantees,
  • Lending against real output,
  • Settlement of personal and institutional debts.
  • Portfolio-directed liquidity (e.g. curated pools for ecosystem services, humanitarian support, and health & wellness)

CPP is optimized for fulfillment and auditable receipts, not speculative churn.