Removing Temptation 1

It’s definitely clear now!

1 Like

much appreciated. ty

Hi @furiousanger,

I understand your concerns about the potential for abuse and exploitation of the vote counter. It is true that as the community grows, there may be an increase in bad actors trying to manipulate the voting process for their own benefit.

To answer your question, the vote counter is intended to display a snapshot of the proposal’s popularity within the community. It provides transparency in the voting process and helps members see the level of support for a proposal.

However, I agree that leaving this option in place could lead to more abuse in the future. I believe we should find a way to prevent abuse and false support while maintaining transparency in the voting process.

Perhaps we could implement some safeguards such as limiting the number of votes per member or verifying the authenticity of the voters. This would help ensure that the voting process remains fair and democratic.

-Mr. Hype :fire:

So I think rn we are limited per account to the amount of “ticks” we can do on AIP proposals and as we lack any kind of verification for new accounts to also add “ticks” immediately, I propose we simply remove it, as it is certainly not fit for purpose.

I was going to add in screenshots of the usage histories, but I think sometimes I may go OTT with responses, so I’ll leave that for now.

I just feel that as more and more people become aware of the DAO, that it’s in fact not a BAYC token-gated process, that the idea does not have to be yuga specific, open to any that’s applicable, (and I really think even on CT right now this hasn’t happened), we are going to see so many bad actors using the “scatter-gun” approach to try get any old rubbish approved; and when this happens that “tick box” will become ridiculous to even look at, as maybe you’ll have one comment on the thread and 6969 ticks showing “support”

1 Like

Another problem is that the count will depend on # of visitors that week / how long an AIP remains in idea stage. So it becomes a very unreliable indicator.

I DO like that it’s instant feedback for authors, but would much rather have “Hate it”, “Don’t get it/confusing,” “Could be good, needs work”, and “Love it” buttons with only the authors being able to see results of which buttons were pressed. Or smth like that.

I think if we remove Vote button, we should also remove the “20 chars minimum” requirement for replies so ppl can “vote” in replies. I often just want to reply with “Love it” or “This is great” or “Would vote yes” and it’s weird to be forced to type a longer reply.

1 Like

Hopefully some day we get to a stage where people are encouraged to read all the threads on an aip page. I’m ngl I rarely read through all the comments, and sometimes I do rely on the data displayed in that “tick-box”. When the count is too high it’s a red flag for me, as I know how big the community actually is and roughly how many active members are on here rn. Some within the community may be unaware of how easily anyone can make multiple accounts within a few mins and click the “support” button many times. And if these “bumper” numbers are all these community members go by, my question is then, is this acceptable or simply ‘us’ being totally neglectful as we know what’s possible?

This all leads onto another question - is discourse really even the way to do the AIP process? Are there other options that are much better? How could we think about improving all of this ourselves? Since posting these “knee-jerk” AIP ideas it has got me thinking about all sorts, especially how bad discourse actually is.

Maybe we get together one day and make something better :wink:

There’s no perfect tool, imho. If we keep having “grass is greener” attitude, we’ll just live in misery. We can just use Discourse to its max potential first.

And DAOs by definition of being decentralized have overhead, require time investment, are inefficient, etc.

I think there’s just some frustration with wanting to see more results and we’re taking it out on tools. Deep breath! We’ll get there. Rome wasn’t something-something.


Tools are great, exploits are not; totally agree we can fix what we have.

Great stuff, LFG

1 Like

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

Hi @furiousanger,

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. @furiousanger please see your messages for the next steps.



Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@furiousanger has requested to withdraw their application. This AIP will be moved to and remain in the Withdrawn AIPs category.

Kind Regards,