[DAO: QmVDiPm] Percentage based VP

Governance
21

Impressive numbers, for sure ! But…

  1. The majority of this 250m is locked in for operations of the exchange, and unavailable for loaning.
  2. 250m is not that much out of 1.8b anyway…
22

That’s a good point, nevertheless the math in the example is still flawed for the WEAR part: if 0 vote yes and 0 vote no, then 0 VP will go towards the vote, so there really can’t be a 0.5% there.

23

They did it with steem before if you read the OP…
They just paused withdrawals for 1 week while they used the VP to vote.
It would be hard to get the other 1.6b to vote against them when I personally struggle to get 500k VP on my proposals…

24

You don’t need 1.6b to counter-balance 250m.
And someone borrowing from Binance is different than Binance acting directly.

25

Nevertheless… the VP in these wallets is indeed quite impressive: #Ed1B, #aceC.

However, note that these seem to have never been used to log into DCL.

Perhaps the answer is to mandate a moratorium on any VP logging in for the first time ?
The more MANA there is on that account, the longer the period ?

One could still create a new account and then send MANA to it, of course.
But this way, the MANA in locked exchange wallets should still be truly kept out of the way :thinking:

26
External Image

This was the TLDR on that link in the OP…

There are a lot of good ways that should be implemented to prevent things like this.

27

This proposal was done to start the discussion around how we can prevent corruption.

So let’s start a list:

  1. Percentage based VP. (Penalizing those that hold all their VP in one asset)
  2. Penalizing those that don’t vote often.
  3. Penalizing those that have recently acquired VP.
  4. Penalizing those that have never logged in? (I’m sure a whale will log in if they have to… Why not add a small barrier… :man_shrugging:)
  5. help :laughing:
28

There are a lot of ways to prevent things like this, but it is not the case that a lot of them are good.
When it comes to smart-contracts, we want to be as surgical as possible in any change that is made.

1 Like
29

#4 is what I am suggesting. The more MANA you have when you first log in, the longer you have to wait before you can use the VP (new accounts with 0 VP don’t have to wait at all).

It won’t be that easy since the user can simply transfer the MANA out to another account, but if it’s a big exchange, that won’t be too much of a risk.

All of the other suggestions feel unfair in some way or other.