Democracy, Governance & Attack Vectors Workshop Pre-Reading

[Thomas_Hepner]

Appreciate the thoughtful comment, @afromac ! My intention was to further the conversation, not suggest that you needed to amend your pre-reading.

Two quick thoughts:

@afromac

This situation is purely a social norm and essentially exists as a gentleman’s agreement. The entrance of one of these wallet addresses into the voting process, could provoke the entrance of the others, and would fundamentally alter the nature of governance in the coop. This is a scenario that should be considered in the workshops, but I do not think it represents the current state of INDEX voting in the Coop.

The point I was trying to make is that the presence of hard power, regardless of whether or not it is exercised, incentives and alters human behavior.

It’s worth noting that DATA would not have passed quorum [Snapshot] without the support of a single voting address that represented ~51% of all voting INDEX. While I am happy that this benevolent entity voted in my favor in this particular instance, the fact stands that a single entity had more influence than the other 105 voters combined.

@afromac

Much of our governance happens on chain today. This already produces many procedural challenges, while granting much power to token holders. Decisions need to be made about the future of on-chain voting and how it should be implemented or redesigned in order to better optimize this situation

I actually think the INDEX token democracy disempowers both tokenholders and contributors. Anyhow, looking forward to continuing the dialogue in the upcoming workshops.