Rankings are sorted by cumulative votes. Every official proposal has been taken into account and ranking will automatically update when there is a new official proposal. You can see the total cumulative votes as a DAO and the total number of proposals.
There have been 57 proposals in total, 47 of these were tests, hence filtered out
Removed inactive staking wallets that have 0 votes
No decimals included making numbers easier to read
Changing votes would be added on your total votes initially so we used the last voting power number for each proposal
Total DAO votes had the changing vote issue so we simple add the filtered total per user to get true value
J4J
PREDICTIONS:
Voting will likely be given an allocation in Jupanuary as Meow said ASR is to increase engagement of the DAO rather than a reward for staking. How big or small would an allocation for consistent voters and active stakers be - no idea, but will speculate. 1B tokens airdropped in Jupanuary and 2.3B votes so far this year as a DAO. Assuming a conservative 50mil (5%) allocated to JUP DAO voters and distributed linearly. Linear accounts for consistent participation as those who vote consistently are higher up on the leaderboard.
50mil/2.3B = 0.0217 JUP per vote.
Realistically by January there are more votes: We will probably have, 2x votes August, 2x votes Sept, 2x votes October = 6x votes total. 274mil votes on last vote. 274mil*6 +2.3B from current total = 3.95B
Some brilliant presentation, calculations and analysis around this Ranking Jup voters factor. You came up with some fairly good presumptions around the numbers that are quite fair & easy for most to understand👍🏿
I love what you build bro and to be honest, i think you should share in in the discord. It can be very interesting for people to track some data regarding the votes.
And i think, we should also have a “section” on the discord where people can read theses proposal even if they are not voted. just for information
Yes have added 4 tables at the bottom to cover all other ranks. Have created some histograms and will release a different post on this but there is also a massive sybil problem as you outlined before
Would be nice if you can add as well the percentages (% of voting power). I let you decide if you want to add it and but thank you anyway for creating the dashboard. Many will find it really useful.
The question that pops when i read your notes is whether a potential juptuary allocation for consistent voter would be rather based on some kind of “commitment metrics” than on the total amount (hereby whales would be on top as usual).
Someone pays $2mil for their JUP and stakes, they have more votes but are penalised with tiered. While they are penalised sybils make 10x their investment due to splitting their JUP into 1000s of wallets. JUP team knows this so I assume Linear yes.
Okay so obviously some ppl are abusing the voting and it’s not surprising that there are some sybils. However, making it linear would screw up all of the small stakers which imo are the prevailing part of the voters and here is my reasoning.
For comparison with L0, here we have 10x less wallets and i am sure that with some criteria (not even that strict tho) we can easily take out at least 20-30% because they’d be obv sybils and that will leave us with some relatively small amount of wallets (with higher chance of them not being sybils) and by screwing them up going the linear way they will not end up very happy as well, and let’s don’t forget that the voters are semi-responsible for the fate of the project. Wouldn’t they need a proper reward?
