A familiar name in the Internet Computer Protocol (ICP) community is inviting users to weigh in on a decision that could reshape its future. idGeek, a marketplace for Internet Identities and associated assets, has launched a community poll to determine whether it should transition into a Service Nervous System (SNS) DAO. The project has spent the past 18 months building a niche for itself, with over 1,000 active listings, more than 1,300 transactions, and asset sales totalling around 220,000 $ICP. The team behind it believes this might be the moment to let the users take the reins—permanently.
idGeek’s service model lets users transfer and trade locked assets, primarily Internet Identities, across the decentralised ecosystem. It’s a sensitive area of the ICP stack, one that touches security, identity ownership, and the broader decentralised identity conversation. Given the potential for wide-reaching effects, the team feels it would be more appropriate for the direction of the project to be determined by those who use it, not just those who built it.
But before any changes are made, they’re asking: should idGeek move to an SNS model and become community-governed? The polls are now open.
At the centre of the discussion is whether decentralising idGeek via SNS is the best route forward. For those unfamiliar, SNS is the ICP’s built-in DAO infrastructure, allowing Internet Computer canisters to become fully decentralised, community-governed services. By turning idGeek into an SNS DAO, the current team would effectively hand over long-term control to its users, including developers, identity holders, and supporters.
The alternative—blackholing the canister—has been ruled out. Blackholing makes a canister immutable, permanently locking in its code and configuration. While this might seem appealing to purists, idGeek depends on external systems like the Network Nervous System (NNS) and the SNS framework itself. If those systems change, idGeek must be able to adapt. Immutability in this context would be risky and potentially fatal to the service. So, it’s either adapt or risk obsolescence.
SNS governance, on the other hand, provides flexibility. With users voting on proposals and decisions being executed transparently on-chain, it puts control in the hands of the community. This could provide a more responsive and robust future for idGeek, while maintaining user trust through open processes.
It’s not just about governance, though. Becoming an SNS DAO would open up new opportunities for funding. With the potential for treasury management and token-based fundraising, the team could secure resources to expand its capabilities. This includes adding new features, refining the marketplace, and building tools that make identity trading safer and easier.
There’s also a desire to bring more contributors into the fold. A DAO structure could help attract developers and community members who want to improve or build on idGeek’s framework. The code would be open-source, contributions would be tracked publicly, and rewards could be distributed in a fair and transparent way.
Still, this path isn’t without its bumps. The main one is the potential for a 51% governance attack. Because the DAO would control assets including user-owned Internet Identities and escrowed items, there’s a theoretical risk that if any one entity gains majority voting power, they could compromise the system. The team acknowledges this and believes that thoughtful DAO design—possibly with additional technical safeguards—can keep this under control. This is a known concern across many projects in the ICP space, and one the community has debated for some time.
The trust issue cuts both ways. While a DAO adds transparency, it also asks users to put faith in the robustness of that governance. Can the wider community make decisions fast enough when changes are needed? Will they make decisions that prioritise user safety and asset integrity? These are open questions that only experience and structure will answer.
To move forward, idGeek is asking for visible community support. That means feedback through open comment channels and participation in the live poll. If the community backs the SNS transition, the next steps will include an external security audit, publishing the codebase, and preparing for the SNS launch. None of this happens without input from the people using the platform today.
The idea of handing over project control isn’t new in the decentralised space, but it’s still a big moment when it actually happens. For idGeek, it marks a turning point: from a small, focused team running an identity marketplace, to potentially becoming a community-run infrastructure piece of the ICP ecosystem.
This kind of shift also reflects a broader movement within the ICP community. As more projects reach operational maturity, many are exploring SNS as a logical next step. For early adopters, SNS governance offers a kind of built-in legitimacy—it signals that the project is willing to open itself up and let others steer the ship. It also aligns with the core principles of decentralisation, where no single entity retains permanent control.
But it’s not simply a checkbox. Governance, especially over identity systems, is complicated. The ability to transfer and hold Internet Identities touches on rights, privacy, and platform security. DAO design will need to account for abuse prevention, emergency upgrades, and conflict resolution. Voting thresholds, proposal limits, and governance token distribution will all need careful planning.
Still, the team at idGeek believes the time has come. Their service has matured, the numbers suggest strong user engagement, and the demand for transparency is increasing. They see SNS as the next logical step to future-proof the project. The community, however, has the final word.
The outcome of this vote won’t just affect idGeek. If the community approves and the SNS transition succeeds, it could serve as a model for other projects in the ecosystem looking for a route to decentralisation without sacrificing flexibility. It may even spark fresh thinking around how Internet Identity trading and custody are handled more broadly.
For now, the message from idGeek is clear: weigh in. Whether you’ve used the platform once or have listings live on it, your input could shape where it goes next. There’s a live poll, and the comment channels are open.
It’s a bold call for consensus from a project handling some of the most sensitive user assets in the ecosystem. Rather than centralise further or freeze in place, idGeek wants to give the wheel to the people already using the road. Whether the crowd wants to drive is the question of the moment.
