mirror of https://github.com/status-im/swarms.git
103 lines
5.2 KiB
Markdown
103 lines
5.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: 172-topic-democracy
|
|
title: Subjective Delegation Liquid Democracy
|
|
status: Draft
|
|
created: 2018-04-15
|
|
category: core
|
|
lead-contributor: 3esmit
|
|
contributors:
|
|
- 3esmit
|
|
exit-criteria: yes
|
|
success-metrics: yes
|
|
clear-roles: no
|
|
future-iterations: no
|
|
roles-needed:
|
|
- UX
|
|
- PM
|
|
- Clojure dev
|
|
okrs:
|
|
- "[P2]: SNT is a powerful utility in Status"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Preamble
|
|
|
|
Idea: 172-topic-democracy
|
|
Title: Subjective Delegation Liquid Democracy
|
|
Status: Draft
|
|
Created: 2018-04-15
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
A democracy where you can specify delegate for carbon-voting proposals with specific multilevel governance delegation topics, or fallback to a predefined defaults if none set.
|
|
|
|
## Swarm Participants
|
|
- Lead Contributor: Ricardo Guilherme Schmidt
|
|
- Testing & Evaluation: <!-- @username -->
|
|
- Contributor: <!-- @username -->
|
|
- Contributor: <!-- @username -->
|
|
- PM: <!--- @username -->
|
|
- UX (if relevant): <!-- @username -->
|
|
|
|
## Product Overview
|
|
|
|
This product intend replace authority centralized control for networks with tokenized participation, such as Status Network currently owned by MultiSig contract 0xBBF0cC1C63F509d48a4674e270D26d80cCAF6022.
|
|
The product would enhance security of network as an attack would require control of more addresses.
|
|
|
|
For a democracy where every member understands basic about every subject required for senstive actions inside the network is utopic.
|
|
As Status Network decisions would be democratic for the users of the platform, a optional voting capability would be given to SNT owners, where they could set their delegate, or vote by themselfs.
|
|
|
|
When users don't vote and don't delegate, their influence would be delegated to SGT (Status Genesis Tokens) owners consensus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Product Description
|
|
|
|
- Users should be able to participate on decisions or delegate their influence. _Important to democracy._
|
|
- Votes are counted as MiniMeToken balance of user at block voting end. _Important to not double tabulating without locking token transfers_
|
|
- Voting or delegating must not cause direct risks to users balances. _Important to don't cause barriers into democracy process_
|
|
- Users that delegates must be able to vote differently then his delegate. _Important to don't cause barriers into setting a delegate._
|
|
- Delegates should be able to delegate influence delegated to them, as a delegation chain. _Important to inflience get into experts._
|
|
- The voting process of proposals should be divided in two polls, first asking for approval votes, and second asking for reject votes. _Important to prevent a big delegate changing decision at last moment._
|
|
- Approval pool uses a "Executive Delegation" and rejection pool uses a "Veto Delegation". _Important to prevent bribe of delegates._
|
|
- Specifics topics should have their own parent topic and specific delegation chain, which if unset by user should fallback to parent topic definition. _Important to influence get into specialists of the topic._
|
|
- Users that didnt defined any delegate would by default delegate to SGT Topic Democracy. _Important to don't cause slowness into Status Network development._
|
|
- SNT must be owned by SNT Topic Democracy. _Important to democracy._
|
|
|
|
### Requirements & Dependencies
|
|
|
|
- MiniMeToken: Important because it allows lookup of snapshot balances in a certain block. This make possible safe tabulation without locking user balances.
|
|
|
|
### Minimum Viable Product
|
|
<!-- Mandatory, completes the Idea in the fastest route possible, can be hacky, needed to feel progress. See https://imgur.com/a/HVlw3 -->
|
|
Goal Date: <!-- Date for evaluation in ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) format -->
|
|
|
|
Description: Topic Democracy as DAO Governance
|
|
- Users can execution of proposals.
|
|
- SNT is owned by topic democracy.
|
|
|
|
## Dates
|
|
Goal Date: <!-- Date for evaluation in ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) format -->
|
|
|
|
Description: Topic Democracy as "opinion" pool as experimental.
|
|
- System is deployed in mainnet.
|
|
- Users can cast opinion as vote using SNT for Status proposals throug Topic Democracy..
|
|
- Users can delegate opinion for Status proposals using SNT through Topic Democracy.
|
|
- Inchain tabulation is not required, because results can be calculated offchain and as no action would be taken by the result, inchain tabulation would be waste of gas.
|
|
- Topic Democracy don't owns SNT.
|
|
- Users are asked to approve proposal to upgrade into DAO Governance. When community decides this system is ready to take control of Status authority, a pool can be done and tabulated inchain to transfer control to Topic Democracy over a Topic Democracy proposal.
|
|
- First DAO Governance can control network/assets by a multisig between current authority.
|
|
|
|
## Success Metrics
|
|
|
|
It's difficult to assume a success metric from the voting, as users that just didn't "touched" the product probably are delegating their trust to Status Genesis Token holders.
|
|
|
|
However if we able to see if users look into the proposals and discuss about them in forums, would be a success signal.
|
|
|
|
## Exit criteria
|
|
|
|
Status Network controlled by Topic Democracy.
|
|
|
|
## Supporting Role Communication
|
|
<!-- Once Requirements and Goals are fleshed out, then it should be communicated to supporting organelles if required -->
|
|
|
|
## Copyright
|
|
Copyright and related rights waived via [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/).
|