Removing Temptation 1

Proposal Name

Removing Temptation 1


Remove the “TICK-BOX” (VOTED counter) from the top of AIP proposal’s page on discourse.

Author Description

Concerned DAO member FURIOUS ANGER.


To stop abuse, clean up the discourse UI, remove unnecessary distraction.


This box has no purpose and is abused very easily.

Steps to Implement

Few clicks of the mouse, possibly 10-15 minutes, maybe DAR would post a reply if this is incorrect.


24-36 hours after vote conclusion.

Overall Cost

Costs ZERO dollars (because we have people employed already that manage the discourse and are paid to do so).

Proposals submitted to the AIP Ideas category can be vague, incomplete ideas. Topics submitted here are not required to be submitted as a formal AIP Draft Template, however, you may still use the template if you wish.


Thanks for sharing your proposal, @furiousanger .

I understand your concern about the potential abuse of the vote counter and how it could affect the perception of the community. However, I believe that removing the vote counter might not be the best solution. It is important to have transparency in the voting process and to ensure that community members can see the level of support for a proposal.

Instead of removing the vote counter, perhaps we could find ways to prevent abuse and address the issue of false support. What do you think?

-Mr. Hype :fire:


I looked into it, and it appears correct. If you turn shutter on in the snapshot space settings, then the results will not be shown until the end of the voting period. This can only be changed space wide, and after the change it affects all new proposals from that point on.

Here is what the settings page looks like on testnet


The current results box looks like this with shutter turned on:


You can see the itemized list of votes underneath the “Cast your Vote” block and the voting power, but you cannot see which option was selected.

Here is a link to Shutter’s description of the feature here Announcing Shutter Governance - Shielded Voting for DAOs


I like this suggestion. This is how it’s done in US Congress (and most others) where reps have 1 min or whatever to vote and only then results are displayed on the big screen.

Though I don’t know how much of a temptation it is, really. My proposal had 1M In Favor and 300M Against as of Tue night. By end of Wed it had 1.1M in Favor and 1.6M Against :smiley: So clearly, the temptation wasn’t strong enough!

Still, even 1% temptation should be eliminated. Best bias is no bias.


Hi MH,

Thanks again for taking the time to reply to my ideas, it is appreciated and noted always :handshake: :handshake:

So I was going to demonstrate that I could have 54 votes similar to the Esports AIP idea, however, I don’t want t used against me down the line - but I could easily do this if i wanted, and I’m ngl, I’m not fully decided yet.

As new entrants flow in, as we encourage '1 apecoin is all you need2, what percentage of those do you think will be upstanding and honorable people? What percentage of those will just be here to exploit “our fair lands”? I suggest that it will increase considerably as we grow, and the more temptations or ‘exploits’ we leave in place, the more they will be abused.

One question - what does the counter do exactly?

I know what I think it was suppose to do - display a numeric snapshot of popularity within the community - and like all marketing tools it is gamed.

Are we all really that uninvested that we need a basic counter at the top of the page? I also suggest that this feeds into a wider argument of making participants lazy.

Tl;dr - what do we all see the button as? As we grow expect to see more bad actors abuse this option to give false impression of consensus.

Thanks, looking forward to reply.

1 Like

Dar - you are becoming my most favourite person in the whole world atm - tysm :handshake: :handshake: :handshake:

Hi Sasha,

I just cannot see, with such highly intelligent and invested people, which is what we are all claiming to be here, why we would need a ‘ticker’ that summaries “community feelings”.

For the less well educated and involved members, I feel they are being mislead by “data”, that can, and is, easily manipulated.

I just feel it is an unnecessary option open for abuse, and as more people arrive, most will do just that unfortunately. This will leave honest people like yourself (AIP authors) at a disadvantage, compelling them to perhaps ‘keep up’ with the ‘jones’ and do the exact same. Selling their souls and becoming what they hate. An endless vicious cycle, making the button even more meaningless minute-by-minute.

Hope to see more ideas/AIPs from you btw, next one fam, you got this!

1 Like

I’m confused.

Is this about the “Vote” box here on the Discourse forum, or a suggestion to remove visibility of all vote totals when an AIP is on Snapshot?


Yep, only this specific VOTE box at top of the ‘AIP ideas’ stage/page.

Thank you.

I thought so. I think most of the responses above are about Snapshot though, so please consider clarifying.

My 2c: the way the AIP is worded is a bit … maybe confrontational or presuming ill intents and abuses. Consider making the case that it serves no purpose at all, is clearly confusing, and that alone is reason enough to get rid of it?

I’m in favor of eliminating it, as I believe newcomers often think that’s how we vote.


I think what happened - I submitted two AIPs - both are separate issues and trying to be smart I named them the same, using only I and II for differentiation - I envisaged III, IV, V, VI etc etc as the years progressed lol - mb, now I realise it was bad idea

Great points, I will adjust shortly. ty mate

1 Like

Oh - this is the vote numbers in discourse? I must have read this before my coffee, because I responded on how to hide the voting totals in snapshot, sorry.

Yes, you can turn off topic voting for the categories easily in discourse. I’ve often wondered why topic voting was turned on for the AIP categories. Also I don’t think the topic votes are used in the AIP process, are they?

I think maybe that is why the topics were going through the open → closed → reopen → closed process. Because when a topic is closed then you get your vote back to be able to cast it for another open topic.

Again, sorry for misunderstanding.


I like the series idea.

Could add a descriptor like Removing Temptation 1 - Discourse Thread Votes, RT II - Abstain Voting on Snapshot, etc.


Mate it’s fine, it was me being an idiot trying to be smart - I will adjust titles.

:wink: :handshake:

Sometimes just keep it simple stupid, and I didn’t do that, smh lol

On it, ty peeps.

The previous administrators had this feature enabled when our DAO launched.

You’re correct, the built in Discourse Topic voting is not used in the AIP process in any way. Although I remember an AIP was written (and withdrawn) that did attempt to use this vote counter as sort of a temp-check for governance.



I went with a numeric one for now on this AIP just to make records easier my end, and also so that it’s simple to understand. I will revert back to roman numerals if this does go to a final draft for snapshot and if I ever move forward etc with additional ones in this “series”.

I now realise the two AIPs I created needed clear distinction. Voting should most definitely not be confused or likened in anyway with a “fluff” “tick-box”, that said, I have renamed that one totally.

Thanks again Br00no - you helped me make important changes to convey my ideas much better. :handshake: :handshake:

1 Like

OH lol I thought you meant snapshot page…

I honestly neither see a point to the Vote box nor have anything against it :stuck_out_tongue:


I am blaming DAR too (lol, jk).

But yep, two AIPs, one to remove the abstain vote button and one to remove the “tick-box” up top, (it’s not really a vote button most definitely lol).

I think my feelings have evolved slightly re the abstain button removal, maybe hidden is another option - it’s all great discussion and has us all thinking more so it’s great, also leads in and back to all the other topics on-going re voting - LFG

If you get a chance, pls re-read both, I have adjusted and made much clearer, and hopefully this will nicely fit into wider discussions too, LMK. ty