Tezos governance voting benefits proposal

Philosophy and Economics
1

I wanted to talk about issues near and dear to us all regarding Governance. What does everyone think about adding some sort of adjustment to the governance in the upcoming proposals? As Binance/Coinbase refuse to even abstain from voting, this really puts Tezos in a dangerous position of being extremely centralized and not being able to make quorum. I have several idea’s and I would like everyones input:

  1. Reward bakers that vote, even with “abstain” with higher chances of getting priority 0 blocks or p0 endorsements

  2. Penalize non-voters by reducing their chances(I prefer the reward based system above)

  3. Force bakers to use their votes or lose their baking rights after so many cycles of not voting.

  4. Allow voters to not get reduced rewards for taking p1 block and endorsements(one of my favorite ideas).

Please feel free to comment and leave your own idea’s. I really don’t want Tezos to get stuck for another 3 months because we can’t meet quorum. It’s even worse than having people vote “nay”…

1 Like
2

The quorum dynamically adjusts and the blockchain isn’t “stuck for 3 months.” The proposal period restarts right away. I don’t see any showstopping issues with the current system.

1 Like
3

From my understanding it only adjusts dynamically to the number of participating bakers, we need more bakers to vote “abstain”, otherwise we won’t reach the participation quorum needed.

4

Independently of what we do or not about non-voters, I believe we need to incentivize priority 0 blocks and endorsements otherwise we would not have priority-dependent rewards in the first place.

5

Related to this: Voting nudge

2 Likes