Summary : This proposal is to show validator participation in governance votes on the staking dashboard.
Background : The network benefits from active validators who participate in governance. Delegators may want to factor this in when choosing a validator to stake with.
Motivation : To increase validator participation in governance, and allow delegates to easily identify validators who are actively participating in network governance.
Specification : A new Governance Participation indicator will be available on the validators staking page with the number of votes submitted versus the number of governance proposals created since validator creation.
I think this is great, it helps delegators determine which validators are active on the network and supporting governance. The more information the better!
This is great idea, there is definitively something to do here.
Terra is going even further by doing a minor slash on validator not voting, I think this is something we could think/add to this proposition. I would suggest maybe to slash only after too many votes are missed during a certain time frame to be defined.
I would suggest that in these cases, same as with HIP 11, also provide/propose the design on where that button should be, as it is also a part of the change.
Could be a good idea to have it indicated on that dashboard what the validator voted for in past votes (yes / no) and what their upcoming vote will be (yes / no). Perhaps also make validators have to vote at least 1 week before voting ends, so delegators have a chance to see what they will vote for and act accordingly.
@DKValidator This appears to have a lot of support but as @mindstyle mentioned, some detail on where this should be located needs to be included and ultimtately, are you still willing to put this to a vote.
Weather or not this is a bounty will no doubt be decided if the vote passes.
As the vdao council member I’m really want you to check the Charter and get your eyes on the part of the governance section where we include a feasibility review requirement.
In the case of this particular proposal the feasibility review could be a kind of YES/NO from the core dev team and probable ETA of the UI change, then you can move it to voting.
Hey I don’t see any technical concern on the implementation of this HIP. This should be possible. I would suggest VDAO to create a bounty for the implementation.
I think this is a great idea, except what about a case in which a validator is choosing to abstain?
That’s not being “inactive”. Either “abstain” should be added to the options on all polls in addition to “yes” and “no” or I can’t see supporting this.
I like this idea. It adds a layer of transparency that is beneficial for delegators to have when choosing a validator. It also encourages validators’ participation.
Also – should the “record” start from the date of the implementation of this HIP? That way, those that have purposefully abstained aren’t docked. Just a thought.
