[bisq-network/proposals] Natural delegation on DAO voting (#34)

Chris Beams notifications at github.com
Mon Jul 30 08:39:43 UTC 2018

Implied in @ManfredKarrer's text above, but worth calling out explicitly is that voting zero by default allows the voting process to scale up with integrity. For the last nine months we've had basically every contributor voting on every contribution request, and everyone virtually always votes `1` on every request. This suggests that everyone is reviewing everything, and while that might work with our current numbers of 8–10 compensation requests per month, it will break down miserably if those numbers get much larger. The current process is simply not scalable. Some means of delegated voting is a must, and I like the simplicity, elegance and immediate implementability of this approach.

In reality, I doubt that every stakeholder actually reviewed every contribution request in detail every time, and that some degree of "well, everyone else voted `1`, so I will too" has been going on. With the approach outlined above, voting becomes much less burdensome on the individual voter. They should at least have a look at each compensation request, but for those they have no familiarity with or expertise or interest in, they can quickly and honestly vote `0` and move on to the next request.

In this way, when a contributor reviews the results of voting for their compensation request and sees, for example, that all or the vast majority of stakeholders voted `0`, it may give them pause, and cause themselves to ask, "Is what I'm working on important?", "Am I representing my work clearly?" and so on. And this may cause them to ask questions and get feedback about what they can do differently in the future to get more voting engagement. The status quo of voting `1` by default obscures how stakeholders may really feel about a given compensation request, whereas voting `0` by default allows the reality of stakeholder sentiment to surface naturally.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180730/48187aee/attachment.html>

More information about the bisq-github mailing list