First, I think it's great to have a talent network that's owned by it's stakeholders, but I think it's questionable to say the token holders "own" the network.

My concern is that the organization is split into two entities:
(1) Freelance Labs, which owns and controls the website.[1][4], and
(2) A Panamanian Non-profit that "owns" the token.[2]

Stripe's copy:
"And because it’s decentralized, the people that use Braintrust also own and operate the network: Talent keeps 100% of its earnings and clients can make their budgets go further by cutting out unnecessary middle men."

#The Braintrust Foundation has nothing to do with the website:

From the usebraintrust.com TOS[1]:
"This Terms of Service (also referred to as the “Agreement”) is a contract between you (“you” or “User”) and Freelance Labs, Inc. (“Freelance Labs,” “we,” or “us”)."

#The website controls the operations of the network:

Also from the usebraintrust.com TOS[1]:
"The Site is a marketplace where Clients and Freelancers can identify each other and advertise, buy, and sell Freelancer Services online. Subject to the Terms of Service, Freelance Labs provides the Site Services to Users, including hosting and maintaining the Site, facilitating Projects between Users,, and assisting Users in resolving disputes which may arise in connection with those Projects Users are required invoice and pay any amounts owed for any agreed upon Projects facilitated by the Site and/or Services."

#Users keep all their earnings, except for the 10% fees clients pay:

From the Braintrust whitepaper[3]:
"Talent are charged no fees: they are paid their full contracted rate (whether that be per hour or per project). Clients are charged 10% of the total contract value, an amount that is significantly less than in other networks and consulting firms.

Client fees are collected in USD, converted into BTRST, and sent to the Braintrust DAO through the Fee Converter, a smart contract that was proposed, voted on, and implemented by the community in October 2021. This process makes it possible for client fees — in the form of BTRST tokens — to pay for network operations and to fund community programs"

#The token technically doesn't own anything:

Also from Braintrust's whitepaper[3]:
"BTRST is not a share of stock, does not represent a claim on profits, dividends, equity, or debt in any company or organization, and is not a financial instrument. BTRST has been adopted by the Braintrust network and users for various activities on the network only, such as for staking, governance, voting, and educational purposes"

#The token has no claim to anything:

From a podcast with Adam Jackson:
"We have a token instead of a share of stock. It does not represent any financial claims, any dividends or profit sharing, simply because there is no profit. The network is meant to run sustainably. It's meant to sustain itself. And so, it charges just enough fees to get by on, paying for hosting and maintenance and upgrades and that sort of thing."

Again, I still think it's a potential improvement on the alternatives, and they've built a lot of functionality, but I just worry that the website, seemingly the only way to contract on the network, isn't owned by the foundation.

Is the foundation contractually obligated to heed to any votes from the DAO? It's not very clear that they are.

They've built out a lot[6] that makes me hopeful their network will hold its value, but I just wish they could leave no doubt that their users own the network as well as the resources that power that network.

For example, what if once the network has gained enough value, the owners of Freelance Labs sell the usebraintrust.com website to UpWork? Can they, and if so, what happens then?

[1] https://www.usebraintrust.com/terms
[2] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1756245/000175624518...
[3] https://www.usebraintrust.com/whitepaper
[4] https://sec.report/CIK/0001759292
[5] https://www.hbs.edu/managing-the-future-of-work/podcast/Page...
[6] https://info.app.usebraintrust.com/