AIP-313: Preserve Privacy During Voting Period

Final AIPs Rejected AIPs
1

Proposal Name:
Preserve Privacy During Voting Period

Proposal Category:
Process

Abstract
Hide vote count and totals only during the voting period to allow voters to make up their mind individually before voting and prevent voter harassment. Everything is revealed at the end of the vote so there is full transparency. This will be tested for two months.

Motivation
There might be instances of AIP authors being unlucky because large holders decided to just follow another large holder or because one large holder decided to vote against the proposal early on thus making it look like the community is against the proposal. In an ideal world we want people to make up their mind about how they want to vote.

This will also stop voter harassment. If an AIP author knows certain wallet owners, this will prevent them from going after them during the voting period to try and get them to change their votes.

@br00no attempted a very similar version of this here which failed. The key difference here is that this is a two month trial. After the trial period is over, voting will go back to how it is now. Another AIP will be created towards the end of the testing period to make it permanent. People can vote as per their experience with the system. This is just a trial.

Rationale
We want AIP authors to get a fair shot when voters are considering their AIPs. It’s currently too easy to follow the ongoing popular vote. This will be a short term test to see if voters are comfortable with a new voting system.

It’s a two month period to ensure that everyone goes through at least a few voting cycles before making up their mind.

Benefit to ApeCoin Ecosystem
It’ll give all AIP authors a fair shot at getting proposals passed. This way good projects that get unlucky because a whale voted No early will not affect the trajectory of the following votes. It will also ensure voters are not harassed during the voting period.

Key Terms
Shielded Voting (from Snapshot):

You can enable Shielded Voting within your space if you want to enable partial privacy and reduce voter apathy. […] Shielded Voting is a voting setting in which the voters choices are private during the voting period and get revealed when the proposal closes.

Specifications
Snapshot and it’s Shutter Module

Steps to Implement
Update the DAO’s voting system to use Shielded Voting for a period of 2 months. The two month period begins on the day the first AIP with shielded voting begins voting. At the end of two months, the voting system will return back to how it is now.

Timeline
This will be implemented for AIPs that are created after this passes.

Overall Cost
Zero

2 Likes
2

As you pointed out, this is identical to @br00no AIP-288 which was rejected 61.89% to 38.11%.

I can’t easily tell the difference between this and that version which he could have re-submitted with the same two month trial as yours.

And so, given the margin of for/against in AIP288 which shows that a good margin don’t like the idea, what makes you believe that this similar version will pass as a trial?

For the record, I believe that shielded/private voting is a good thing to have and for all the reasons in this and AIP-288.

1 Like
3

I can’t easily tell the difference between this and that version which he could have re-submitted with the same two month trial as yours.

I have mentioned in three places that this is a test for two months, including explicitly pointing that out as a difference. Not sure I can be more clear on this as a difference.

Why do I think this has a chance? Because this AIP is actually different from the previous AIP in two ways.

  1. The first, that I already mentioned, is that this is a time limited test. If you look at the previous AIP multiple people indicated that they wanted to “try it out” and some even mentioned specific time periods but the AIP wasn’t modified to reflect this. When this was finally presented as a permanent option, some had reservations.
  2. The second, more subtle difference, is the copy. It was clear from the previous AIP forum post and some of the vote comments, people were confused about the term “shielded”. I have reduced usage of this term and explained everything plainly.

Personally I am also looking to a learn a lesson from this AIP: Does AIP copy matter?
The votes will tell. Whether this passes or fails, there are lessons to be learned. The test is muddled by me incorporating more feedback from the previous AIP, nevertheless the results will be interesting.

2 Likes
4

I suggest you say shielded voting for SC and Stewards Elections ONLY.

General AIPs can be left open (not shielded), it is useful to see how others vote to get their opinion. Also you get to view the comments.

Rational - SC and Steward elections have more time and more opportunity to understand them better than a general AIP.

1 Like
5

Yes, I am aware. It’s why I asked why do you think this will pass based on just that [time-limited] difference which seems to be the only material difference between the two proposals.

The “shielded vs private” difference isn’t all that distant. They mean the same thing. And I would like to think that Apes are smart enough to understand that. I was going to add a joke here, but I caught myself at the last minute. lol

As to AIP copy, I believe (going from the two $20M publishing proposals by Jonah and Simon) that if they are too similar, the second one has to wait three months to be submitted. It’s also the reason for my question. We probably need someone like @Chris.Admin to chime in on that.

2 Likes
6

If the length of time required for an AIP to go from idea to draft to vote in a well-organized format on the only official forum, plus being featured / discussed in DAO-funded media, in Spaces, on Discord, etc. isn’t enough time for discussion or canvassing, anyone still confused should be asking not voting.

There’s plenty of voter harassment and corruption potential in AIP votes too. Shielded voting would make that tougher.

1 Like
7

The key term here is “approved.” This proposal is, in spirit at least, a resubmission of the rejected Shielded Snapshot proposal.

3 Likes
8

I feel like your request kneecaps the whole proposal :confused: Gov steward election I agree is more important, and if I had to choose, at minimum I would want to have it for those. But having it for general voting would be the most meaningful/impactful.

I don’t want to give up a significant chunk in order for the proposal to pass - I’d prefer to maintain the spirit of it. At the end of the day it’s just a two month test. I feel like people might change their minds after trying it out, and results day will be much more exciting. Perhaps we could even hold spaces during that time to generate excitement.

it is useful to see how others vote to get their opinion. Also you get to view the comments.

The forum is ideally the place to do this. Maybe this might push more people to participate here.

2 Likes
9

So, lets say it is allowed (see Chris’ comment above), to go to vote - and it passes. So, that’s two months of testing it. What then determines whether or it’s successful enough to be retained, and if not to be rolled back?

2 Likes
10

Your proposal is almost the same as the rejected one, just with a test period.

Frankly a test period is very confusing as then what happens after the 2 months? People vote again? Or it just goes back as before (not shielded) after 2 months?

I am not sure if this is fundamentally different and warrants a revote. My suggestion at least imho is different enough it might be considered ok to vote on it again.

Your thoughts?

11

@SmartAPE your reply is in here too.

Frankly a test period is very confusing as then what happens after the 2 months? People vote again? Or it just goes back as before (not shielded) after 2 months?

I have clarified the proposal. Basically another AIP to make it permanent. This is purely a test. This puts the onus on voters and considers their experience with the system, which make the current vote a lot less “risky”.

I am not sure if this is fundamentally different and warrants a revote. My suggestion at least imho is different enough it might be considered ok to vote on it again.

There was significant evidence (discord, snapshot comments and discourse) that showed people misunderstood what “shielded” means. There was also lots of feedback regarding “trying”. If this convinces a few more impactful voters to give it a try, that’s all this needs to pass.

12

Any particular reason why you picked two not one month? Or even, say something like “the next 4 AIP elections” is probably better too as it’s more definitive for people to recognize.

13

AIPs get released in batches. Saying the next “X AIPs” is logistically more difficult and more awkward since in one batch there could be some shielded and some unshielded AIPs. This is much cleaner, where the admins can easily decide if a batch falls within the AIP or not. For voters it’s also much more straightforward since there will be a clear delineation in the batch.

2 months gives voters enough time to try the system and also get the next AIP up in time if necessary.

1 Like
14

I see. Yeah, that makes sense, then.

15

it could be a better thing, I didn’t understand how it works but from what I understand it could be a good thing.

16

Hi @leyota ,

Your topic will be moving to the AIP Draft phase in less than 24 hours. Are you content with the feedback received or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 7 days?

If we do not hear from you within 48 hours after your topic closes, your topic will be moved straight to the AIP Draft process.

We look forward to hearing from you.

-12GAUGE

17

This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

18

Hi @leyota ,

Thank you for your ideas [and the ApeCoin DAO community for the thoughtful discussions]. A moderator will get in touch with the author to draft the AIP in the appropriate template. Once the AIP is drafted and meets all the DAO-approved guidelines, the proposal will be posted on Snapshot for live official voting at: Snapshot

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. @leyota please see your messages for the next steps.

-12GAUGE

20

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@leyota has completed editing their AIP Idea to be their AIP Draft.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-12GAUGE