found an interesting post on the internet that aligns with the assertion that ‘validators are representing their delegators when it comes to making decisions on https://governance.harmony.one’
there’s a quote:
Blockchain and crypto technologies are bringing very positive changes to various sectors. With DeFi, It changed the financial sector by letting the average individual become active stakeholders of financial networks. It is giving artists and musicians more control over their work and royalties via NFTs.
Similarly, Blockchain technology has the potential of enabling true democracy at all levels of governance through Decentralized Autonomous Parties (DAP).
a) should a validator inform the delegators with which decision it’s going to participate at the voting? b) should a validator make his decision public before the voting and discuss it with delegators if they don’t understand why a certain validator makes this choice (whether it’s ‘agree’ or ‘disagree’ choice)? c) what should/shouldn’t a validator do more? d) go forth with your vision on the raised query
ps: we’re at the early origin of building a decentralised autonomous organisation for our stakeholders; it’s clear that validators tech background makes them advanced before delegators, but I feel a strong need to ask your opinion on how is that important for the DAO purposes to have an equal access to the similar rights for all staking contributors?
I think that’s an interesting point. As far as I noticed, validators - that I am aware of - announced their voting decision afterwards, leaving delegators no chance to have a conversion or redelegate. I think communicating voting decisions will be a key point of chosing / changing a validator in the future. Not only based on their decision, but also on their ability to communicate and debate their decision process with their delegator.
When I started my validator I created a Telegram chat for my delegators. From point one I have polled the chat to see what the majority wants in terms of my vote. We discuss at length each proposal and so far it has worked very well.
I’m encouraged and excited that the raised question is recognised and noticed by the validators. I’ll be consistently spreading this point of view to masses and building appropriate behaviour of validators on staking.harmony.one as the vdao council member and forth.
I don’t run a validator - but as a delegator, I feel like I have a stake in this conversation.
As a delegator (note: not as a harmony team member), I would like to know how my validator will be voting on important issues. Some issues - I am not competent to have an opinion on (which cryptographic curve we are using, EPOS parameter change, etc). While I could spend time researching and coming up with a slightly not-dumb opinion - they aren’t my areas of expertise. Other issues (changing external voting power, lowering voting threshold levels, etc) I may very well have an opinion on.
I would like to know - beforehand - two things – (1) That my validator will actually vote on the issue at hand and (b) how my validator intends to vote.
I imagine some things the validator will poll their delegators for the answer - but others they may use their expert judgement to make the decision. And I am okay with that.
But - at the end of the day - I would like to know BEFOREHAND how a validator will vote.
