Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CIP-1694 | A few smaller changes #545

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

WhatisRT
Copy link
Contributor

@WhatisRT WhatisRT commented Jul 5, 2023

These are changes that we wanted to make for a while but were too busy and didn't make it in time for the previous merge.

  • All governance actions are now enacted one epoch after they have been ratified. This is necessary to comply with requirements coming from moving the stake distribution to disk.
  • Remove dropping of governance actions in favour of delaying. The only effect this has is that if a NoConfidence GA is enacted and a new committee is elected later, any non-expired GAs can still be voted on and enacted (but the new committee has to approve them explicitly!).
  • Make the DRep registration not required. This improves liquidity of democracy.

- All governance actions are now enacted one epoch after they have
been ratified. This is necessary to comply with requirements coming
from moving the stake distribution to disk.

- Make the DRep registration not required. This improves liquidity of
democracy.
@Ryun1 Ryun1 added the Update Adds content or significantly reworks an existing proposal label Jul 6, 2023
@Ryun1
Copy link
Collaborator

Ryun1 commented Jul 6, 2023

  • Make the DRep registration not required. This improves liquidity of democracy.

I am not a fan of this, I think this adds some unneeded complexity which may result in considerable confusion for participants. For me this adds confusion around DRep's role and how delegation to them works.

  • What happens if you delegate to registered DRep but then vote for yourself?
  • Can one delegate voting power to an unregistered DRep?
  • Is there differences between unregistered and registered DRep votes on-chain?
  • Is there benefits for people to become registered DReps?
  • What happens if there is a large amount of stake associated with unregistered DReps, with such stake not included in AVT, could it be used to swing votes?

For me, the requirement of submitting a DRep registration is a very low hurdle for people to be able to vote and thus participate in Liquid Democracy.

@WhatisRT
Copy link
Contributor Author

WhatisRT commented Jul 6, 2023

Let me just clarify a few things. In the currently published design:

  • You can already delegate voting power to an unregistered DRep
  • You can already vote as an unregistered DRep
  • If you do those two things, the vote/stake is actively excluded from the results

All this change does is to not actively remove those votes. It simplifies the design (we need to do/check less things) and it means that DReps can't make the right to have your vote counted impossible to obtain by setting the deposit to an astronomical value.

@Ryun1 Ryun1 changed the title Smaller changes to CIP-1694 CIP-1694 Update | A few smaller changes Jul 9, 2023
@Ryun1 Ryun1 added the Category: Ledger Proposals belonging to the 'Ledger' category. label Jul 9, 2023
@tallwalton

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Category: Ledger Proposals belonging to the 'Ledger' category. Update Adds content or significantly reworks an existing proposal
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants