Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Proposal and Poll: Poll definitions, requirements, and validation parameters #227
This is the main discussion thread for the proposal
Gridcoin polls help guide decision making on the Gridcoin network. It is difficult to use the polls without clear definitions and validation parameters. This will become increasingly difficult as we continue to grow and decentralize as a network and community.
This proposal seeks to establish rule-based requirements and definitions for the polling process. To do this polls are broken into seven categories each with unique requirements and parameters.
If approved, this document will be adopted as the network's polling definitions and protocol. There is no alternative proposal if rejected.
Changes Since Pre-proposal Post
Based on the results of the GUI Bounty Poll that achieved 15+% TVW and 50+% AVW, I have reduced the AVW requirements for all poll types by 10%. I have also set all required poll time except for developer polls to 3 weeks (21 Days). Developer polls remain at a 6 week poll time requirement.
I have also reduced the validation requirements for this poll from 60% to 40%.
The goal of this proposal is to define achievable requirements along with a process for changing them as a framework to build on in the future.
Duration: 3 weeks [21 Days]
Start Date: April 17th
40% or more AVW participation
This proposal would not be possible without the work done by @jamescowens and everyone involved in the #economics slack discussion when putting together the CBR proposal and original AVW definitions. Credit for the original whitelist definitions and process just about copy and pasted into this proposal goes to @guk and everyone in the #boinc_projects slack channel that contributed during that discussion.
And of course a huge thank you to everyone in #poll-definitions on slack and during the hangouts and fireside chats for helping assemble and debate the rules proposed below.
Proposed poll definitions, requirements, and validation parameters
Gridcoin utilizes a protocol based voting mechanism to:
Any network participant with a balance of 100k GRC in a wallet can create a poll. A poll must meet all requirements for the appropriate poll type to be considered valid.
There are seven types of polls:
1.1 Vote Weight and Active Vote Weight
Vote-weight is the power given to a vote cast on the Gridcoin blockchain. It is measured as a modified sum of balance and magnitude. The formula for vote-weight is:
Total vote-weight (TVW) is the total possible vote-weight of the network. It is calculated as a weighted sum of total minted coins and network magnitude.
Active vote-weight (AVW) is a calculated average of the vote weight actively securing the network for the duration of the poll, plus the network magnitude, less the magnitude of any crunching pools. The formula for AVW is:
AV-W = (Average Difficulty* 9544371.769) + ((TotalNetworkMagntiude- Average Pool Magnitude)* (Average MoneySupply/TotalNetworkMagnitude)/5.67)
AVW as a metric solves the validation problems of total vote-weight validation, including missing vote-weight due to lost and burned coins, coins in cold storage, coins held by exchanges, and vote-weight frozen by crunching pools.
AVW enables high weight validation via active network participants.
AVW enables super-validation. Super-validation is a validation percentage greater than 100%. Super-validation implies that inactive balances were brought online to vote on the proposal in question.
Note: TotalNetworkMagnitude = 115,000
1.2 Poll Validation by Active Vote Weight
Poll validation requirements are intended to ensure no proposal passes without significant network support. Each poll type has its own AVW validation parameter initially defined in this proposal. Validation parameters can be changed through management polls.
If a poll is not validated no action is taken.
1.3 Requesting Funds in Polls
Any proposal requesting reimbursement or funding from the foundation must be approved by a network poll.
Funding can be requested for all poll types except for Opinion/Casual and Whitelist polls. The following information is required if funding is requested in a proposal.
1.4 Poll Types, Requirements, and Validation Parameters
There are seven poll types. All poll types except for Opinion/Casual must use "Magnitude and Balance" as weight metrics.
Opinion/Casual polls are for early exploration of ideas or for fun.
Development polls include polls to change a protocol value or for proposing changes to the protocol at large.
Development Poll Requirements
Development Poll Validation Parameter
Marketing polls include any proposal for marketing initiatives.
Marketing Poll Requirements
Marketing Poll Validation Parameter
Outreach polls include any proposal which seeks to:
Outreach Poll Requirements
Outreach Poll Validation Parameter
Management polls include any proposal which seeks to modify the management or organizational structure of Gridcoin.
Management Poll Requirements
Management Poll Validation Parameter
Community polls include any proposal or initiative related to the Gridcoin community, but unrelated to any other department.
Community Poll Requirements
Community Poll Validation Parameter
A whitelist poll is used to add or remove a project from the whitelist. The whitelist is a larger mechanism within the operation of Gridcoin. Each project considered for whitelisting must meet a set of requirements, and several actions must be taken before a poll for adding or removing a project can be considered valid. A project can be removed from the whitelist at the discretion of the whitelist admin if it ever fails to meet a requirement described below.
More information including discussion threads that informed the creation of the whitelisting and greylisting processes, information about each project's Work Availability Score and Zero Credit Days, and details on the greylist process are linked at the end of this section.
Project Requirements for Whitelist Consideration
Required Actions before Creation of Project Addition Poll
Required Actions before Creation of Project Removal Poll
These are necessary only if a project meets all whitelist requirements, is not greylisted, and is otherwise functioning as intended
Whitelist Poll Requirements
Whitelist Poll Validation Parameter
I believe that clearly defining a rules-based system for polling will substantially increase the efficiency of our decision making as a network and community. The rules-based approach should help us transition the polling process onto the blockchain should we ever find ourselves in a position to do so. I am very open to alternative approaches, however I believe it is time to move forward with what we've got and build on it to fit our needs as they grow. I look forward to the coming discussions and of course, I don't care which way you vote, just vote!
How did you decide on the 20% AVW validation parameter for management polls? That seems to be the tricky one, because technically a sufficiently powerful bad actor could use 20% voting weight to change the other validation parameters to 20% as well, unless other network participants stepped in and outvoted the bad actor.
Technically yes, 20% is dangerously low, but:
Our network has demonstrated, for the size that it is, that its current whales seem to manifest the community will, and that there is a growing group of core actors, some whales and some not, that help work through situations and opportunities, inform the community, and are capable of making decisions. If a bad actor (or even one of the whales) attempts to take advantage of this low management requirement... I have confidence in the larger community and core actors to come to a rational resolution.
The number comes from the discussions before the poll. We couldn't settle on AVW requirements for the different poll-types so I chose values that seemed to be best compromises from the various opinions. The 20% management is set so low that any proposed change to this structure will easily be validated and force discussion. And because we are still a fairly tight network, as I describe above, it should be secure until we move past this initial phase of organization.
As this proposal is meant to be a scaffold from which we build something better, I would expect a proposal within 12 months that would rework or raise at least that 20% management AVW.
I wish my wallet would indicate which polls I already voted for. I like the current ability to change my mind by voting again, but I'd nonetheless appreciate a symbol reminding me whether or not I have already voted, and if so, which of several choices I last selected.
Is there a glossary on groincoin.us or so that defines how this value is derived / what it means? My hunch was that this is the sum of the magnitudes of all CPIDs. I may be right/wrong - I just don't want to guess.
You reference via a URL to some place that defines it all.
As above - some site explaining it would be nice. That could then also give reference(s) to sites computing that respective value - like gridcoinstats.eu or so.
The purpose of my comment was to avoid voters guessing what your definitions mean, i.e. to anchor these definitions on some common ground.
We're on the same page. Unfortunately Gridcoin documentation and accessibility is severely lacking. People are slowly working to improve it as the legacy code and mechanisms get revamped or stabilized.
I definitely could have clarified AVW more here and will attempt to do so in any future documentation.
For now I'll point you to the CBR proposal which I think has the most detailed definition of AVW in the "Validation" section.
The 115,000 magnitude has to do with the "kitty" for research rewards. It is a protocol defined static number divided equally among white-listed projects then relatively among those projects' contributors.
If anyone wants to work on documentation (of more than just AVW, please) and getting everything up in an easily accessible place, I am more than happy to help where I can.
There is a inconsistency:
In my opinion project discussion should be kept in one place (thread) reserved for that project.
This proposal suggests that cryptocurrencytalk is not the best place for these types of discussions. It proposes changing the process from requiring a post on CCT to requiring a post a github or reddit -- places that are easily accessible, more open, and more oriented towards development.
If people think CCT is still relevant we could look into adding it as a required posting platform, but my initial reaction is to let is fade away as an honored part of Gridcoin's past.
We could have dedicated github threads for each project here:
grc-H202 "> How did you decide on the 20% AVW validation parameter for management polls? That seems to be the tricky one, because technically a sufficiently powerful bad actor could use 20% voting weight to change the other validation parameters to 20% as well, unless other network participants stepped in and outvoted the bad actor."
Instead of a BS answer , it does happen and has happened in the past.. This number fit's someones agenda better. We have had polls that were a lock and 0hr investor vote turns it 180 degree.
How creative and useful.. Forum #42 for projects...ffs gridcoin issues get ignored and berkeley hosts a real forum, as do most projects.