AIP-447: Better representation in the Special Council Elections: Improved Candidate-Round Voting Strategy

PROPOSAL AUTHOR: Bigbull - Potentially the author(s) can be the overall GWG Stewards (Related to AIP-412)

PROPOSAL NAME: Better representation in the Special Council Elections: Improved Candidate-Round Voting Strategy

Bigbull is an elected ApeCoin DAO Governance Working Group Steward.

TLDR: The voting strategies for the Special Council are different to the Working groups for the candidate round in the election, this can cause confusion amongst voters.
In the current candidate round of the election voters have to select one candidate only. If approved they will be able to select one or multiple candidates. Firstly, this is useful if more than one seat needs to be filled. Secondly, It is also useful when voters have several top choices they are happy to see be selected. Thirdly, it allows delegations to better vote to represent the diverse views in their delegations.

Change the Snapshot Strategy to weighted voting, which enables the voter to distribute the weight of their vote among the candidates they wish to see getting elected.
It is important to note that we are already using this process overall with the Working Groups elections and this method of voting in the Nominee round of Special Council elections. Furthermore, under this format should you favour our existing Candidate round standard of single-choice voting, you can still concentrate all of your voting power on one candidate. We’re simply offering an alternative for those who wish to have a broader influence across all positions being filled.

The benefits are similar to AIP-412 which was specific only to Steward elections. The author choose not to include the Special Council in that AIP and there are benefits for better representation in the candidate round of the Special Council Elections as well. This also will simplify the voting procedure for voters by standardising the process across the board from Working Groups to Special Council.

1. Diversity in the Special Council
Qualified candidates will have different backgrounds and this way you can vote for more than one candidate. This gives the ability to vote for multiple candidates you may see working well together.

2. More accurate representation of voters choices
By making every vote count. More voters will vote and their vote will count to the total tally, this will encourage voter turn out and Special Council members who best represent the community.

3. Potentially better represent Diverse interests in Delegations
It will also enable the voting in delegations to better reflect the views of the diverse group of voters in those delegations. This will solve the concern that certain whales in sub delegations control the outcome of the entire delegation. N.B. If a delegation wishes to only select the number 1 candidate that is their choice as an independent Delegation. However, we would encourage them to follow the same method of voting as in the main ApeCoin.eth snapshot.
No new platforms or technologies are adopted. It is a change in the strategy used for the rounds of the Special Council election only.

Descriptions provided from Snapshot official site.

Official Explanations
Snapshot: Online voting platform that ApeCoinDAO uses that allows DAOs, DeFi protocols, and NFT communities to vote without gas fees.

Snapshot voting strategy: A set of conditions used to calculate a user’s voting power. These strategies enable Snapshot to determine the final result of voting on a particular proposal.

Current Approach
Snapshot single-choice voting: Each voter can choose only one option.

Suggested Approach
Snapshot weighted voting: Each user can spread their voting power across any number of choices, from one to all. Their voting power will be divided between their chosen options according to how much weight they attribute to each option by increasing or decreasing the voting power fraction.


  1. Have the AIP approved.
  2. Have GWG communicate that the snapshot voting strategies have been standardised with the Special Council and Working Group elections. Also to say the new SC rules apply from Q4 2024 elections.
  3. Have Webslinger Replicate the Working Group Candidate round snapshot voting strategy used in Q2 2024 elections on apecoin.eth to the Special Council candidate round of the elections.
  4. Have the APE holders vote via snapshot to select winners of the Candidate round of the election of Special Council.

Once the Q4 2024 Special Council election is completed using this voting method, then the progress will be reported to the community. There will be no change until the Special Council candidate round of the election (in Q4 2024) as added to the apecoin.eth snapshot.


“Total amount requested from the ApeCoin Ecosystem Fund = $APE 0.”

  • This would require the APE Foundation to replicate the voting method in the nomination round into the candidate round of the Special Council election on Snapshot.
  • It would require GWG to explain this adjust to the community for the next election of the Special Council in Q4 2024

*Changes from the concept in AIP-412 - I renamed first round as Nominee round, and second round as Candidate round. Why? Because if under 5 nominees it will go straight to the Candidate voting.


The option to be able to endorse multiple candidates sounds very valid and I agree that a voter might find they probably agree with more than one candidate and this proposal pretty much solves that problem.


I really appreciate this segment of providing examples of other organizations that use this.


This seems pretty straightforward. Tbh we already approved this but the pedantic nature of the DAO at times requires another AIP I guess.

One thing I would push back on are some of the “benefits” listed. Point two for example - creating stronger leadership teams and “best” person for the job - bold claims like these are perhaps unnecessary & unfounded.

Example - winning an election imo does not mean “best” out of all the candidates.



We only approved for Stewards. It is important that we change what the DAO wants, so we can’t add for SC unless that is also approved. I didn’t make the original AIP, so have no comment as why was only for one type of role.

I will change it slightly to More likely to create…


Thanks. Makes sense. Giving voters more options at more stages imo is a positive change.

Added a few words to my reply as once I read it back did seem perhaps a little aggressive? Not sure. But not my intention. Thanks.


Hi @bigbull,

The community feedback period for your proposal would be ending in less than 24 hours.

  • If you’re content with the feedback received, your next steps are to finalize your proposal using the AIP Draft Template.

  • A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft. Upon receipt of the final Draft, we will review and provide instructions on the next steps.

  • Are you ready to proceed to the next phase or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 7 days?

We look forward to hearing from you.


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

Hi @bigbull,

Thank you for your ideas [and the ApeCoin DAO community for the insightful discussions].

A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft using the appropriate template.

  • Once the AIP Draft is confirmed by the author and meets all DAO-approved guidelines, it will receive an AIP ID number and move forward for Draft Analysis Review.
  • @bigbull please see your messages for the next steps.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. In accordance with DAO-approved guidelines, if the author does not respond within 30 days, the proposal will be automatically transferred to the Withdrawn category, and the author can re-submit the idea.


Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

The AIP Draft submitted is currently incomplete and feedback has been provided to the author.

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

Thank you,


Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

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

This proposal has been assigned the AIP ID Number 447.

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

Kind Regards,


1 Like

I’ve been thinking on this for a while now. Why don’t we just change all rounds of elections in which the top X (where X>1) candidates are selected to simply be weighting voting or switch to a voting system in which each voter get a number of votes for each position to be filled.

In either situation, we would get a more representative selection of who voters want instead of having them choose/decide on only 1 candidates. I am unsure thought which of these two voting options would be better for the community (or if the second voting strategy is feasible on Snapshot yet).