Hey y’all,
I love the proposal. I support the general idea. First I will provide some context as to the original voting score:
- The original plan was to give all actors a voice, including the people who just hold GRT in their wallets. Even though they do not have as much skin in the game as the Indexers or Delegators, they still need to be considered.
- We always wanted the individual groups to have a say no matter what. That is why we locked them in at 33% each.
So the good thing about it is, each cohort does have a say. The bad thing about it is that the voting power per token can get skewed pretty bad, as shown by Oliver. I had not thought about it from this angle, and I think this should be corrected.
I do think the proposal is good, and I really like the simplicity of it. Because users should be able to easily know their voting power.
One option I would like to add to the proposal is the potential of putting upper and/or lower bands on the percent of vote power the total cohort can get. For example:
(This is only a quick example, it needs more thought)
- Token Holders - no more than 25%
- Indexers - no more than 35%
- Delegators - no more than 35%
- Curators - no more than 10%
The point of this is to prevent a scenario where Indexers can completely take over the network because they always have the most strength if a vote is in their control. In the long term, this could prove to be contentious, as delegators could get to a scenario where they will never be able to win a vote against indexers. It could also create a black market for delegators to put their tokens into a smart contract as a bribe, and get paid for it (see Votium for a real-world example).
In conclusion, I would like to see Oliver’s proposal implemented, but with upper or lower bounds on the voting power by cohort. It would also be great to keep it simple for the users, which will be a bit complex, with what I am suggesting to be added.