Enhancing voting power of the regional ApeCoin associations

In recent months, the voting dynamics in the ApeCoin DAO have shifted to become heavily in favour of two large delegates - Horizen Labs, and Mocaverse NFT.

This has resulted in diminished impact of every day voters, and in particular, of the regional APE delegations, which were formerly an influential and highly active mode of participation in the DAO.

I would like to discuss that idea that the ApeCoin DAO delegate $APE voting power to the regional APE delegations, as a way to ensure that their vote still matters in the ApeCoin DAO, and as a way of balancing out the top-heavy voting dynamics currently at work in the DAO.

By regional APE associations, I am referring to the ApeCoin DAO delegations that are centered around specific geographic regions, such as the French Ape Yacht Club, UK Ape Yacht Club, Bored Club Canada, Elites Apes of Hong Kong, etc,

The rationale would be that, the regional delegates have been some of the most consistent and active participants in the DAO from the beginning. As regional non-profit associations, they are also somewhat sheltered from special interests and are most likely to be able to vote objectively and with the best interests of ApeCoin in mind.

I am open to ideas about the appropriate number of $APE to be delegated to each community, and curious about people’s thoughts on this idea.

I like the idea but I think it raises more questions and issues that should also be considered.

The first one that comes to mind is, is this the best solution or just a solution to addressing the two large delegates? How else can we help address this issue? Would this be considered as the Ape Foundation over-extending itself or showing bias?

While I would like to see more regional associations have their voice heard, I also would l like to consider how we get new associations started so that they could make an impact (it’s easy to help bolster that which exists but shouldn’t we also consider how to incentive new groups as well)?

1 Like

The way I read Wabaam’s idea is this would just be a starting point for the conversation/initiative.

I think more qualifying criteria could be agreed upon to include active delegations like SURREAL and new entrants - maybe down the line or even within this AIP.

But I strongly feel this is an extremely positive approach by a SC member. :handshake:


I really like the sentiment behind the idea - let’s move power back to community led groups and away from corporates.

I do think that if it’s done in the way proposed, it should be expanded beyond regional delegations to other types of community groups like guilds or interest groups. Web3 is so global and decentralized that we should also make sure to empower communities that exist based on shared interests and not just shared geographies.

Overall though, this is totally the right direction and I’m very supportive of figuring out how to reduce the power of the two large corporate interests and increase the power of the every day community member.

Hey thanks for the feedback, it’s a great point about also wanting to incentivize new groups as well. Promoting the regional APE delegations at the expense of new groups would be a less than ideal approach.

That being said, I do think we need to take an iterative approach, starting with something manageable and then looking to expand from there.

1 Like

Thanks @furiousanger :handshake:

And I’ll extend this response to @Aepicurean as well -

It would be great to find ways to support other communities like Surreal and other new communities as well. My thinking currently however is, as you suspected, to focus this AIP on just the regional delegations, and leave it to others to come up with ideas for how to support and incentivize participation from other existing communities or new communities.

Not because they’re not not important, but because we are in a situation where we urgently need to make progress right now, and I believe enhancing the regional APE delegations is a reasonable and common-sense approach that can get broad support from the community, right now, when we need it.

To quote an old friend @badteeth, I don’t want to let perfection get in the way of progress.


I agree that this is a massive problem, but I need to play devil’s advocate here.

Let’s say that I’m Mocaverse, and I purchased a whole bunch of $APE for the influence that purchase granted me in DAO votes. I was playing by the rules and operating within the system that was presented to me.

It worked. I now have massive power. I’m also down real bad on my $APE purchase as the price continues to slide down. But hey, that’s okay, because I paid for the influence and I still have that.

This approach would basically strip their influence down, while still leaving Mocaverse down bad on the amount of money they spent on $APE. This would not be playing by the rules that Mocaverse was playing by when they made the purchase. I think this is a problem because of how arbitrary the solution is. Boosting the power of specific regional communities, instead of trying to solve the core issue which is a lack of meaningful engagement from holders.

While I think this AIP would fail regardless, because what incentive does Mocaverse and Horizen have to pass this, I still think we need to consider their positions and how to create an equitable system for them. Of course I could be incredibly wrong and they’d both support this, in which case it passes without question.

Where Yat at? :joy:

I agree with you on this being a quick fix for a real current problem. It would be great if you added in some sort of mechanism for this fix to end once a working group has gotten approval for a long-term solution to voting power. If it had that, I’m in full support.

1 Like

I look forward to seeing what you have in mind.

I think understanding how and why certain groups are or have become regional delegations may provide some insight in both how to properly address regional delegation voting power and into how we can promote new ones to be created as well.

From my perspective, I’m not sure how I could start creating a local regional delgation. What would be the point, what benefit does it give to my regional members, why should they care, how would it be funded?

GM @Waabam….

I am behind you in the sentiment… I recently used the GWG budget as an example as it was the most recent larger voter turnout proposal. With this proposal, of the 21 million votes, 13 million came from 2 voters… this does need adjusting in some fashion.

I don’t know that amplifying the voice of select groups is the answer. This idea would take the common holder even farther from having an impact on DAO voting… I am a believer in amplifying the broader community’s overall voice, not just select few regional groups.

I do believe there is an opportunity to correct the equilibrium of the DAO voting… I’m of the mindset empowering a few regional groups feels like heading further away from empowering the broader community. I’d recommend engaging the community and considering putting together a group to brainstorm on the best metrics long term for all the members of the DAO.

Thanks for all your hard work.


Thank you for putting up this idea Waabam and I appreciate that you are trying to address some of our current challenges. However, I have some reservations about the proposal.

FIrst, I’m concerned that it further diminishes the voting power of individual voters and delegates as well as the several other delegations that aren’t regional groups. They would have even less influence.

Another is that the delegations you want to include are exclusive to BAYC, so not everyone with one Apecoin can participate in them. It may also discourage new delegations from forming if they perceive that regional Bored Ape delegations hold disproportionate influence.

We’ve got multiple proposals up right now trying to tackle issues with voting and many people chiming in with different thoughts and possible solutions on different threads. Just brainstorming here, but wouldn’t it be better to form some sort of focus group to try and tackle these issues in a cohesive way and put forth a comprehensive plan?


Hi @Waabam ,

The community feedback period for your proposal would be ending in 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 6 days. New replies are no longer allowed.