Hej Harmony Validator Community,
this post is written from the Validator DAO Governors, @CoinChowder and Stakeridoo in review of the latest movements and failed voting for the Bootstrap Initiative.
With the impending migration to the new Snapshot.org, we believe it is paramount to open this discussion up and collectively determine what is the best and fairest governance strategy that should be used moving forward.
Up until now, the Validator DAO has been using the stake weight voting method whereby Validators represent their delegators to vote. This vote is weighted based on the size of the validator, meaning that the higher amount of ONE staked with them, the more impact it has on the voting outcome.
Please also take this opportunity to revise what is currently in the Validator DAO charter in relation to voting, and hopefully we can discuss and make any necessary amendments to it.
Validator DAO Charter Document
Now, let’s go through the existing options that the new Snapshot.org can offer us.
First, a strategy must be established to define who can vote and how. Thus, a staked weight strategy or a single vote can be selected here. Here different conditions could be set. For example, a minimum of ONE resulting in one vote per wallet. Or generally the staked ONE & ONE as voting power. Currently, no delegation is directly linked in the new snapshot. There would be the possibility to perform delegations in Snapshot (currently under development for Harmony network). Snapshot
Or you could create a special non-transferable VDAO token which reflects the staked voting power or just as a single vote. This could be distributed after application to the VDAO, which would also be a simpler solution for HIP-11. The possibilities are endless.
The new strategy should be chosen with care, especially since the quorum has to be defined in the new snapshot and it does not allow for percentages.
To learn more about strategies, please visit this page.
The new snapshot contains several new voting methods, each with their pros and cons.
As it suggests, Validators can only select one option and allocates all their voting power to that single option.
Validators can vote for multiple options and their votes will be equally distributed amongst their selected options.
Each voter may spread voting power across any number of choices. The results are
calculated quadratically, you can test out these calculations here https://wtfisqf.com/
Each voter may rank any number of choices. Votes are initially counted for each voter’s top choice. If a candidate has more than half of the vote based on first-choices, that choice wins. If not, then the choice with the fewest votes is eliminated. The voters who selected the defeated choice as a first choice then have their votes added to the totals of their next choice. This process continues until a choice has more than half of the votes. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an “instant runoff” that allows a comparison of the top two choices head-to-head.
Each voter may spread voting power across any number of choices.
Similar to ‘Single choice voting’ but with predefined options: ‘Yes’, ‘No’, ‘Abstain’ which is what we have been primarily using until now.
To learn more about voting methods, please visit this page.
Other Useful References:
This video explains the pros and cons of various voting methods which I found to be quite useful.
This video explains dictators, veto power and other critical aspects of weighted voting.
Do you like to stick with the actual strategy we had so far (staked weight & only Validator can vote)?
If no suggest a strategy and voting type