Funny how my above post has been flagged, i didn’t attack anyone. I’m asking legit questions and bringing up valid concerns. I’m going to assume that people who don’t want to address what I’m saying are the ones taking advantage of the flag system in this forum. I am now asking @lij @Jacksteroo @giv to review my above flagged comment and reinstate it if there is no violation. I’d hate to believe we quell voices with different opinions or asking hard questions. Not a good look if that’s what is going on here.
It seems you are well aware of the ecosystem given your post: Does Harmony need new leadership? How do you propose validators vote on snapshot with no integration into their command line? We all in the space had the scare of having our keys compromised so its no wonder that few are willing to copy their keys out into mm and risk their wallet. The governance problem also is in place after binance seemed to have added over 700kk ONE stake on their node making quorum difficult. This lead to HIP 25 failing to pass which many voted in favor of.
How does harmoforce chnage the game to their agenda? The reddit and telegram are delegates moving their ONE together to help elect more nodes and grow the network? How is money the motive here? Hopefully the core team you tagged will come and answer you friend.
Obviously at this point it’s a waste of time to write here. People would rather flag than engage. Even my post asking for review is flagged. Nice passive/aggressive way to highlight one post I made about leadership. I don’t regret making the post, I was incorrectly under the impression that criticism is welcome. I was wrong. I know what I need to do now and it saddens me because how long myself and a few other substantial partners have been in Harmony. I’ll leave anyone reading this, which I doubt will be any one because there is no freedom of voicing unpopular or uncomfortable things, with this. Be careful how you stifle voices, sometimes you don’t know you are talking to and how much of a turn-off that mentality can be. Now flag away.
Criticism is welcome, thats how anything hold to benefit but what is the counter or an improvement to highlight over what is provided? I normally have been lurking on here but aware of the on chain voting halt. How do you propose to resume a possible voting halt after what had happened during HIP25?
It’s good to see some discussion on here.
My impression is that you are framing these proposals as a type of hostile takeover and suggesting that the status quo is/was working properly. Simply put, the obvious issue with voting is that it’s broken; it doesn’t work! And everybody knows it’s broken. It’s been broken since February when Binance increased their overall stake by an additional 750 million ONE(?), causing HIP-25 to fail despite overwhelming support from voting validators:
On HIP-25, 2.59 billion ONE voted YES, 3.86 million voted ABSTAIN, 0 ONE voted NO. And yet, HIP-25 failed:
If 99.85% of all votes were YES (with 0% NO votes), and the HIP still fails to pass, something is undeniably broken. Surely you’d agreed?
The logarithmic voting method is intended to address this issue. It is explained in detail in the OP and several other posts above.
To compound the already broken voting system, governance was later migrated from gov.harmony.one to snapshot org. Unfortunately, snapshot org doesn’t allow for the same voting options as gov.harmony.one. You can see multiple VDAO governors discussing the issues with snapshot org here:
“Right now it will be nearly impossible to pass any HIPs.”
Another issue with snapshot org is that it doesn’t integrate Harmony’s CLI, so validators have to import their keys to metamask. And after the security issues with browser extension wallets and Chrome’s zero day vulnerabilities, there is understandable hesitancy within the Harmony validator community.
How do you vote on fixing/implementing new voting, fixing snapshot, etc., when the voting method you would have to use to do so is broken and doesn’t work in the first place? Do you have an alternative? Do you have a solution?
“Money is the motive.” This is a non sequitur.
“Harmoforce”? Another non sequitur.
Harmoforce has helped 10 new validators become elected. And it’s been a good resource for current and aspiring validators. But I understand that not everyone will agree with its efforts to support small validators and further Harmony’s decentralization. Some people prefer to support large validators and actively oppose decentralization. That’s fine; that’s life.
I’ve seen a few people over the last few months try and attack the Harmoforce group. It always strikes me as bizarre. It ends up sounding like the ramblings of a belligerent conspiracy theorist. I’m sure that isn’t what you were attempting to do though.
I think it’s an automatic flag. I might be wrong but I don’t see any issues with the concerns you have. I’ve been out of loop with the snapshot voting for a few months now. I would need to research what the current situation is. I know the current VDAO is doing the best they can with the situation they have right now. I don’t think it’s fair to throw in the agenda part like how you suggested. I believe that statement requires some more content for me to agree with you. Other than that you have some valid points. Right now it’s 10:40pm and very late for me to look at everything. Tomorrow morning i’ll be able to provide more feedback from MY PERSONAL OPINION as a validator.
What is the status of stake weight voting via CLI in order for us to vote on these changes? @HarmonyValidatorDAO
As of now there is still a bounty out for it with no progress aside from it being assigned, so it does not seem to be goin anywhere fast. However, if snapshot is to be integrated into the HMY CLI we will be back to the same position with stake weight voting as highlighted above from the HIP-25 vote results. Voting as of now will likely be 1 wallet 1 vote until we can get more feedback on the proposed voting logic and push it to testnet with the help of the Developer DAO.
Term 4 Charter and Voting Logic AMA - Come hang with us all day!
Starting and 4:00pm UTC (12pm EST)
In the Crypto Arcade AMA room Gather
@sophoah @giv @lij @harmony_dev_dao May it be possible to receive a feasibility for implementing the proposed logarithmic voting mathematics, logic and development of an alias voting wallet? This would be good to test on testnet initially.
You don’t have to use the cli. You could maybe write a simple web3 script to facilitate voting… this way the private key can stay on the server, same as the cli.
Join us now for an AMA cryptoarcade | Gather
I tend to say that in IT, anything is possible. At the end depending on the technical solution it may take longer that’s it.
@sophoah If that is the case, should we not try to develop a functioning on-chain stake weight voting mechanism before the VDAO unilaterally changes our longstanding governance model to a much more complex and convoluted logarithmic voting mechanism that is designed to strip certain validators of their voting power?
It’s designed to avoid the Binance problem which caused a HIP with 99.85% YES votes and 0% NO votes to fail.
Please see the HIP-25 voting results:
The proposed voting method is 50% stake weight and 50% logarithmic. It was brought forward by the VDAO for public discussion and feedback from the community. The number of voting alternatives that address the HIP-25 Binance problem have thus far been limited. My understanding is that the community has usually preferred to account for worst-case scenarios and black swan events (i.e., the Binance problem).
Everyone is welcome to provide constructive feedback.