Lets encourage more VP delegation in our DAO by making it easier and less expensive!
Abstract
Currently, voting power delegation in our DAO is limited to delegating to a single wallet address. That means that if a wallet has 1000VP, it can only delegate the totality of that VP to another address. At the moment, the walkaround to delegate VP to multiple users is first to transfer your tokens to multiple wallets and then delegate VP from each one of those wallets. This increases the cost of delegation due to the need for multiple transactions (At least one for transferring tokens and another one to delegate).
Motivation
For the past three months I’ve been experimenting with delegating VP to the top monthly voter and explorer. I would like to expand this program to include the top 5 monthly voters and explorers but right now it’s too much hassle to manage and move mana between 10 separate wallets. Passing this proposal will make delegation easier for my experiment and also allow whales to easily break up and delegate VP to decentralites who deserve it.
Specification
Proposed Solution:
This proposal suggests the implementation of a multi-address voting power delegation mechanism, which will allow members to delegate their voting power to multiple wallet addresses, rather than being limited to a single address.
Conclusion
Benefits:
Lower gas fees: Delegating to multiple addresses will require fewer transactions, leading to lower gas fees for members.
Increased transparency: Allowing members to delegate to multiple addresses will make it more transparent for anyone to see the different delegates another user has.
Improved voting power distribution: Allowing members to delegate to multiple addresses will enable a more distributed voting power, resulting in a more representative decision-making process.
Special thanks to Gino for creating the original poll.
I support this . Delegated VP needs to be better distributed. I am also seeing case where large delegated VP adresses are voting on proposals that tip the scale in favor of a grant or not without explanation or comment .
Imo delegated VP holders should have an obligation to mention why they are voting on a proposal for transparency and clarity.
Agreed. This seems a reasonable and logical expansion. It would be nice to have some kind of transparency as well regarding delegation of voting power. I also love the idea of what you are doing. Put the voting power in the hands of the people on the ground
@RobL (or whoever manages District X’s VP these days) any feedback on why you voted no? Your voting history shows you approved the first version of this proposal.
I disagree with allowing people to delegate their Voting power at all.
If someone has VP and chooses not to use it to vote that is IMO fine.
However, to provide an ability to make it super easy to allow many others to use their VP I believe is problematic in the following ways:
Those with the ability to vote but for whatever reason chooses not to get involved in governance shouldn’t, IMO, be permitted to simply offload their civic responsibility onto others; but as I mentioned this just my personal opinion. Similar to a many other elections including political elections, if a person decides they are not interested in voting, or are simply too lazy to vote, they aren’t permitted to reallocate their vote to others.
Creating a super easy and cheap mechanism to delegate to unlimited persons will likely lead to a grey market allowing those with a lot of VP to essentially “rent” their VP to the highest bidders.
It will make it quite easy for those that intend to submit a grant or any other proposal, but lack the requisite VP themselves, to essentially “rent” all the VP they’ll need to approve the grant or proposal themselves (or at very least vastly improve their odds of getting it approved) from many different people, and possibly across multiple wallets, thus disguising the deceptive nature of this behavior, at what could ultimately be very low or no cost.
While I would like to see many more people participate in voting, multi-wallet delegation of VP, IMO is not the answer, as this could and should be accomplished by buying DCL assets that provide associated VP.
IMO multi-wallet delegation is simply a means of giving away decision making power to, in many cases those with little or no skin in the game, and in many other cases, provide an easy way for those with self-serving interests to easily and cheaply game the system to unjustly enrich themselves.