Bro you should fix that voting power. IF I got 1k JUP I can split my other 9 wallets and I have 10 voting power. So the voting power placement (to me )
T9 : 500 #JUP Tier Weight : 1.1
T8 : 1K #JUP Tier W. :2.2
T7 : 2.5K #JUP T.W : 5.8
T6: 5K JUP T.W : 12
T5 : 7.5K JUP TW 19
T4 10K JUP TW 26
T3 25 K JUP TW 70
T2 50 K JUP TW 150
T1 100K JUP TW 325
12 Likes
IMO itâs crucial to consider not just the USD value, but also the duration of holding the token, which demonstrates loyalty. Additionally, there may be other factors to weigh in DAO voting such as participations in activities, Voting history there could be several moreâŚ
7 Likes
The people who typically game these votes usually have infinitely more spending power than regular people. Staking does not scare them. I do agree with pro-rata voting though.
6 Likes
Hi @everyone. Staking should equate to voting power!!
6 Likes
It sounds right to have > $100 of JUP, for the last tier. My humble opinion is to have tiers also for the 250 and the 500 tokens. What is Solana known for? Giving the opportunities to anyone to grab the chances. It would be ideal for the lowest tiers to have incentives for the chance to vote. Those proposals should take Solana not just to the moon but to Jupiter!
7 Likes
No matter how you create the tiers they can be abused especially by whales.
For example - the last tiering solution is good, but it actually gives again more power to whales.
Here is the simple math:
T1 has 1.5 x voting power compared to T7 per 1K tokens.
In theory it looks good. But If I am a whale and I want to abuse some vote - I will split my 1M tokens into 10 wallets 100K each and will get 3250 voting power - so it is worse than the original tiering proposal where yes if you have 1K tokens you can split them into 10 accounts x 1 and have 10 voting power and the same can do the whale with splitting his $1M to 20 accounts x $50K and get 20x6=120 votes, but no one will split his $1M to 10 000 accounts $100 each to abuse to that level just because it will be extremely expensive both money and time wise even with bots.
Both systems are far from good but the first one is much better for the regular users.
If there is tiering I also think it is better to be in USD not in JUP. There can be a significant change of price between bull run and bear run. And at one point in the bull rune it maybe hard for small users and investors to join any tier, because if 500 JUP are now around $250-300 if JUP goes to the moon as everyone hopes then Tier 1 can cost $5000 for example. And the opposite if it drops to lets say $0.1 in the bear run it may become extremely cheap to go to high tier.
7 Likes
absolutely fair and logical, the more coins (votes) you deposit, the more you earn
5 Likes
It should be based on lock up time.
6 Likes
In my opinion instead of tiering. The best solution is vesting with exponential voting power.
Something similar to Helium Network voting. (link - Frequently Asked Questions | Helium Documentation)
TLDR:
If you lock your JUP for:
1 week - 0.5x voting power
1 month - 2x voting power
1 year - 25x voting power
4 years - 100 voting power
(numbers are straight from Helium formula and may not be the best for LFG. I think there will be no sense to lock for less than one voting period including the launches themselves).
Then you have not only the VOTES, but also the REWARDS split by the voting power and not the actual JUP locked.
What this means is that people will have much higher power if they lock for longer period but also much higher rewards so there is an incentive to lock for a long period.
And if you are a whale that locks your 1M tokens for 4 years - please be welcome - you should be the most motivated whale in the world for the Jupiter project to succeed. To be honest it is much harder to lock 1M tokens for 4 years than to lock 1k or 5K tokens (especially if you got them from the airdrop and did not pay actual cash for it).
P.S. And if Jupiter adds some extra rewards like % of the fees on the platform (similarly to Uniswap) for stakers and contributors - it will be even higher motivation and I am sure that there will be a huge percentage of the token supply locked for a long time which will also increase the price quite a lot, I am even going to buy some more, before the admins read my message 
)
11 Likes
No one can lock a token for that long. Only 13% of the token is currently in circulation, and it will move towards 100% in the coming years. If you want such a thing, you also have to provide staking rewards as an incentive. You canât just rely on income from projects to motivate this.
6 Likes
We should maybe increase voting powers based on lock up commitment time. Maybe have a slight increase every 30 days. For example the 175 JUP tier 6, increase monthly in slowly increasing intervals 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and so on. That may help keeping the voting strength with original members, and be a insensitive for people to keep tokens locked longer.
6 Likes
I think that the main motive should be not to forget why all the people comes to Solana. Is it because they are fed up of other platforms? Is it because itâs simpler? There are so many reasons. And there are maybe more reasons that have to be named. I believe Solana will always find the way to shine!
7 Likes
Hi !
Thanks for your writting ! I was asking myself the same question : how to import more democracy in a DAO ? Thatâs a tricky question. For now, we just imported a tax-based voting system, which is problematic. Intuitively, I kind of liked the option 3, but thought the tier had to be revised, if thatâs even possible. As such, it incentivizes people to split their $JUP, as it is better to have 1000 wallet with 100 $JUP (1000 voting power) than 1 wallet with 1M $JUP (10 voting power). So, it doesnât solve the problem it was supposed to solve (wallet splitting).
BUT, if you do what follows :
Tier 1 :
= 1M $JUP = 11111
Voting power
Tier 2 :
= 100k $JUP = 1111
Voting power
Tier 3 :
= 10k $JUP = 111
Voting power
Tier 4 :
= 1k $JUP
Voting power = 11
Tier 5 :
= 100 $JUP
Voting power = 1
This distribution solves the issue of wallet splitting but it is useless, as it would be the same as â1 token, 1 voteâ. And even, it gives whales slightly more power.
So, as far as I know, there is no solution to the problemâŚ
So, if you have an entry barrier, say, 100 $JUP : what are the benefits ? It would probably incentivize people to have more skin in the game, and we could argue that 100 $JUP isnât a huge amount of money⌠Thatâs forgetting that in some countries, $100 is more than a month of salary⌠Do we really want to exclude the vast majority of people who doesnât live in rich countries ?
So, for now, the 1 token 1 vote seems to be the less worse solution. I think that will be the challenge for the years to come. Maybe with a digital ID (not only a proof of humanity, but something like a proof of identity). That would mean a ZK proof system, as we donât want the crypto world to become the worst dictature.
Anyway⌠Thanks for posting. The question rises both technical and philosophical questions that the ecosystem as a whole will have to solve.
Best regards !
6 Likes
Yes this does make sense . I just thinking maybe it should go a little higher . For high stakers . Sense there should be OG of Jupiter . I will post my wallet holding if need prove it. I have about 600 Jupiter this is not benefiting me . LFG
I love what these guys are working toward .
2 Likes
Actually they can.
I personally have $50K of HNT tokens locked for 2 years. 4 were a little too long for me, but it still depends on the incentive. And this is almost 50% of my portfolio in the Solana ecosystem it is not like 5% an I do not care about them. I just believe in the Helium project and I am more than sure that in couple of years it will be worth even more, so instead of hodling them, I have locked them so I have voting power + rewards. If I were just hodling them they will not earn anything. And yet the HNT rewards for stakers are quite low.
But yes you are right about that it should have rewards and not just voting power. And in my proposal I have proposed to also distribute the rewards according to the vesting/voting power. This will give an actual incentive to lock for a longer period. And the future rewards can be really high, because the staker will receive rewards in a token that can go 100x and they are there from the very start.
So this actually would be a really big opportunity for someone starting small to invest $1K into the LFG, lock his tokens for a long period and actively participate in the voting and potentially investing in those projects in the long run can have quite a big return compared to some whale and shark that wants to join by manipulating some vote and not take part actively.
8 Likes
This system I think would be the best, but it would be nice to have more âtimeâ options for lockup and, in my opinion, it would almost be a necessity to incentivize stakers through rewards, honestly, I donât think there is a great potential for long term staking (more than a year) without rewards.
3 Likes
How would a max limit of 175 make botting expensive? Any thoughts on how we can quantify price/vote if someone botted it with a million JUP? If the reward is higher than the cost of botting, people will do it even if they gained a buck from it.
2 Likes
In my opinion one vote per person, if you are a whale and have milion of tokens - then you will get incentives from staking and other airdrops anywayâŚ
3 Likes
How this will help the LFG and Jupiter in general?
3 Likes
I agree on locking Jupiter and showing dedication for the Ecosystem
You should have a lock period of 1 month imho. So you cant pump your bag and move on.
Its difficult. First you are showing dedication by buying $Jup but we need some systems in place that Big Whales cannot rigg the system for their own good.
Very complex. We will get there as a DAO
4 Likes