thats just a mock up dude
I do think the illustrative example of present AIP-196 voting is reflective, at least approximately in ratio. In any case, while I hear your concern of potentially influencing voters, I do not believe that is the spirit of this proposal. This would simply be making a voter more informed.
Potential manipulation with low voting power may not necessarily mean success anyway. Case in point: we have seen during the recent elections that high individual voter wallet totals did not necessarily correlate with a higher total voting power.
Agree about making the voter more informed. The more data the better imo. Especially when the DAO inevitably starts discussing potentially changing the voting mechanism down the road.
To alleviate concerns on potentially influencing voters, maybe it can be something where the data is displayed after a vote closes. But even then, if someone really wanted to look up how many wallets were currently voting in favor vs. against he/she can already find that info.
I have two concerns, that I cannot get past:
We all push the saying - “1 APECOIN is all you need to be a part of the DAO”, everyone says this including me, it is a fundamental of our DAO, yet this addon of non-applicable easily manipulated data will fly in the face of that. As we are saying come join us, only need one apecoin to be a stakeholder and interact and vote, however, we will add this new STATS box that will blanketly disregard your VOTE.
No one here, including myself, is an authority on voting and what effect adding these STATS will do, simply slapped onto the snapshot UI, imho, they will certainly effect the voting, anyone that says otherwise only needs look at GERRY’s election to SC and the spaces hosted by BOOKS - we all watched in real-time as STATS were produced (right or wrong who knows), that showed the ‘popular’ vote as GERRY, this then caused others to change their VOTES and, no issue with me BTW, we now have GERRY on SC rather than DL.
So STATS are great yes, but only really great when you understand how they are compiled, so what’s included and excluded etc, and also if they have some need to be there, in this case they don’t as our voting mechanics are not currently setup for a popularity contest.
These stats will also create a cat and mouse game of manipulation, unwinnable imho, if they become prominently displayed on snaphot UI .
If anyone can help me reconcile these concerns, I’d love to hear your thoughts.
“1 apecoin is all you need to be a stakeholder in our DAO, but btw we will dismiss your VOTE in this box, but don’t worry it’s included in this box.”
Maybe I could agree with a link, right at the bottom of the snapshot UI in much smaller font, possibly linking all the STATS and details of how they are compiled etc, but simply adding those two, easily manipulated ‘popularity stats’ have no place in the snapshot UI, and only reflect what the compiler assumes are ‘valid’ votes, when all are valid imo. I do btw agree we should have an abstain button, as this is a part of the voting mechanics currently in place, but not displayed.
Exactly. If a STATS person wants to look up the info they can easily do that already, and include or exclude as many wallets as they like, rn we have 1 apecoin = 1 vote.
To add them onto the SNAPSHOT UI directly, can and will, as the SC VOTE showed, influence VOTES, right or wrong, but it’s not how our VOTING is setup.
Love this idea, but the threshold idea is an important one. Best illustrated here: https://twitter.com/red_vulkan/status/1608587488192524288?s=20&t=vRO8OfD1LqqQuwo9EJZSUw
Seems like having a few tiers in this would be useful and shouldn’t be much more work if they’re implementing the base idea
This is a great point. Some funky stuff going on with wallets holding 1 or 2 tokens. Different tiers paint very different pictures
I know @Vulkan mentioned, but having this extra data can’t hurt and can help add more context to the conversations we have in spaces.
For the breakdown BT linked, what happened with delegated wallets?
You took the 1 wallet and represented it as 1 voter, yes.
And what do you propose we do going forward with delegated voting power, the same I assume, yes.
Do you really not see how this info is falsely representative and also goes against what delegation is all about? Delegated voting power gives the wallet the authority to vote on their behalf and you disregarded this, noted and then represented this as just one voter.
Anyway, I’ve made my several points of why I feel this is not a great idea.
Ty all for taking the time to listen.
You make great points @furiousanger. I agree with you that delegation would/should be handled differently if we are looking at wallet counts. It certainly should be factored in.
My data I’m pulling from Snapshot is limited so it’s not clear exactly how many people are delegating their tokens and to who.
The data I’m looking at is just a start. There is much more info to be included to gain an accurate representation. Part of this is gaining a clearer breakdown of how things like delegated and staked tokens are being represented in voting.
Personally, I like a lot of data. It helps paint a broader picture of what may be going on. As far as perception, if someone is going to be influenced by this, then they are probably already being influenced by the actual results in progress. Maybe they will question why the results are different and spend time to read the AIP for themselves.
You make a great point about things like delegated voting power. I’m not sure how to find out the info on how many wallets were delegated to each delegate, but that data should be included imo.
I also agree with @badteeth regarding tiers. I thought it was really interesting how the results change when you look at different things. And you bring up a valid point about someone just creating 3 $ape, etc. wallets in order to try and game the system. But maybe more visible data is the answer, not less.
There are certainly some challenges and concerns that need to be taken into account. I too love data, so possibly going with a link or similar that takes interested parties to the full data breakdowns/analysis would be better.
I agree with this and disagree. I feel it’s fine if people are being influenced by the current data displayed as those numbers/stats make up the voting system we have in place - most APECOIN in favor wins; the additional ‘limited’ data FoxSlightly proposes we add is not part of the voting system, so I see the two as uncomparable, so for me it’s peculiar if people are to be influenced by them in perhaps the same way.
Current SNAPSHOT UI displays factual data - current results, voter wallets and amounts, AIP summary, system, start and end date etc - but now you propose we pollute this by adding data which is based on assumptions and exclusion, to create what one can only call a deceptive, easily gamed, ‘popular vote’ field, which I assume some may be backing to illegitimise whale votes in general, not sure, but if people are unhappy with our current voting system then let’s change it, not do this.
If we use the RAW data to populate the proposed addition I think we’d all agree this would not be representative of the community (as was demonstrated during final SC voting), but if we change the data a little first, what are, and who decides on, the best practices for this manipulation (filtering), and where/how do we relay this to the snapshot users if we do?
As always, wonderful discussions taking place!
Your topic will be automatically closing in less than 24 hours. Are you content with the feedback received, or do you wish to extend community discussion for a further 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.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
Thank you @foxSlightly 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. @foxSlightly please see your messages for the next steps.
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
This Topic has been Withdrawn based on the DAO-approved guidelines due to no response in the last 30 days. The Topic may be submitted again by any user and upon approval, will be open for 7 days for community discussions.
This Topic will move and remain in the Withdrawn AIPs category.