Fully agree!
Inciting bribery should be avoided
1 Like
and the cancellation should be cancellable
but remember all projects that launch with LFG will, by the current rules, airdrop to JUP voters. So greed already works in favor of selecting the best project (if you go with a sh!tty project for the bribes, and it wins, you’ll get some sh!tty tokens, but you’re missing the airdrop of the good strong project that could have won instead.)
my worry is “only if we win” bribes, for the reasons mentioned before
Low-lift video will be immensely helpful if it is entertaining and informative. Happy to help edit or do motion graphics in the short term, long term I think some sort of Q&A would be helpful as well, but higher priority should be short digestible explainers of any sort
2 Likes
Re blind vote, have a blind vote for the blind vote as your trial. Do not do this for the LFG!
Ultimately, everyone is after maximising their own returns - regardless of the project and what value it can bring to the world. Therefore my suggestion is to make a blanket rule that either;
- ALL projects need to airdrop their token for ALL voters
or - NO projects airdrop anything to any voters
or - The projects do a token exchange with JUP (or some similar backyard accounting) to elevate the regular quarterly voting rewards that JUP distributes.
or - Buy and burn JUP…
Many possible solutions, but ultimately we want to avoid projects being voted for because of the bribe (airdrop - which is probably tiny anyway) and rather because they have an awesome project that people actually want to USE.
We need to keep the focus that this should all be about making Jupiter more awesome than it already is 
Considering the number of voters, Option 1 is the least favourable as $5 of an airdrop just makes people angry, however increasing the value of JUP is more beneficial for all stakers.
2 Likes
Just pleased I voted for the @CWG without any reservation. Not the first time you have proven that you listen, observe, process issues being raised, analyse it and present it back to the community for feedback. This is critical for any project that wants to be sustainable long term and carry the community with them. I read almost every single post in this forum each day & I can testify that your summary has superbly summed trending issues raised in all recent DAO votes+++. I am confident most of the changes you signalled will be implemented in the next voting rounds and:
- I strongly agree with reducing the winning spot to 1 & considering other outcomes if results are very close as you highlighted.
- I remain against blind voting for reasons you highlighted. One thing we should notice is that many people in this community come from different parts of the world with a strong believe against things not being done open cos the very reasons they are into crypto is cause they are trying to avoid such practices in their countries, states, etc. it’s important that we consider this especially when open voting hasn’t had any significant impact on the outcome of the votes since inception.
Finally thanks @Slorg for precise and valued packed summary always.
1 Like
100% align with all what you have highlighted here. Brilliant👍🏿
Speaking purely from the data perspective, there is clear data that projects that are ahead likely win due to momentum.
Attributing this, at least partially to blind voting makes sense to me.
Round #1:
Round #2:
So i dunno. worth a shot?
1 Like
In terms of voting, I do agree with blind voting, but also people should only have the power to vote once. i.e. not being able to change your vote once you have voted. The bar showing the progress on how the vote is going should be hidden, once you vote, the number of votes should show up for transparency, however, the person should no longer change their vote. This should limit heard voting by not allowing people to change their vote to the protocol leading the vote.
2 Likes
Agreed, concerning your points on two winners vs one winner.
Question re: reducing to One Winner
does Second place project get to compete again ?
would hate to miss supporting a good project that was perhaps my second choice
2 Likes
There is no actual elimination involved. if a project does not win the launch vote, they will remain in the forum and discord as an applicant and continue building support. UpRock was a great example of this. they did not win the first round vote yet they came through in the second round with a good launch vote.
2 Likes
thanks for this clarification
3 Likes