It was discovered today that Snapshot calculates your voting power based on who has possession of the gotchi at the time the snapshot vote is posted.
Based on the conversations that went on today in discord, three options have been identified so far…
This is DeFi and this is a feature not a bug
Advantages -
you could let your renters have a voice.
you can sell you vote
Disadvantages -
you can sell your vote
if you don’t want to transfer voting power, you should never rent, because you don’t know when someone will post a snapshot
it’s possible for the person posting the snapshot to rent all the gotchis for very little money and get a large vote, while depriving others of their speech (possible 51% attack)
Change the query on Snapshot so it looks for the true owner of the gotchi and does not transfer voting power.
Advantages -
Simplest fix
*This is how everyone thought it worked
*Does not disrupt renting
*You cant rent your vote.
Disadvantages -
You cannot give voting power to your prospects
*You cant rent your votes out
Make voting power an option next to Alchemica and GHST, in the rental menu.
Advantages -
Everything from above, combined.
Disadvantages -
*Everything from above combined
This will be much harder to implement due to the way everything is designed and will still require tweaking the Snapshot, as ownership transfer is hard coded into the system as designed.
Voting Power is transferred with rentals
Voting power stays with the owner
Build a toggle into the rental contract and let the owner decide
Thanks for creating this topic. Indeed, the new lending implementation has introduced this discrepancy, and since it pertains to voting power, it’s something the DAO should weigh in on.
Does the community believe this change needs to be a CoreProp? Or would we be content with a DAO forum poll + Discord poll?
I can’t imagine anyone is in favor of the voting power going to the borrower. From a technical perspective, can it be implemented so the lender keeps the voting power? If that can be done, a simple forum poll + discord poll would be more than enough for me unless we see someone surprisingly come out strongly opposed.
Not strongly opposed but I kind of like how a feature like this came to be. Incidentaly the topic of democracy came up today and the possibility to sell ones vote would certainly make a interesting twist on things. Maybe if vp transfer along with rentals is removed at this point maybe transfer of vp to another address could be introduced later on?
Having voting power transfer with gotchi lending is certainly an unintended consequence, despite this capability being a “feature, not a bug” of DeFi architecture. For me it seems wrong that someone renting my property should be entitled to inherent ownership rights, e.g., transfer title, use as collateral, exercise voting rights. Aavegotchi is trailblazing new ground here so I think it is ok to occasionally have to retrace steps to address novel new issues in the NFT and DeFi spaces. This voting rights issue certainly qualifies.
I was browsing the Snapshot to catch up with community issues, having recently been occupied with real-world matters, and was stunned to discover that because I’d lent my gotchis out (I wasn’t using them for a spell) my voting power was diminished. I appreciate the technical complexity of implementing gameplay lending without “lending” other gotchi ownership rights, like voting, but there are a host of governance issues, well described elsewhere in this forum, that will arise unless and until this matter is resolved.
I advise every one to go vote in the snapshot that is open. It doesn’t count, but you can see how this is working, and you also can see how instant run off works.
We do not have a quorum standard for IR/Ranked voting as of yet.
Due to how it shows the results, I fee like it could fit perfectly into our current rules, as is. If there are two clear winners, it shows two, and we need the appropriate quorum for 2. If there are three that it shows, due to a wider spread of votes, then it shows three, and would use the quorum rules for a 3 choice vote.
Since this post is kind of of the center of several things, I’m going to put a quick poll here to see if that is agreeable to people, so I know how to phrase the proposition for it.
Use number of votes shown in a ranked vote result, to determine how many options there are, in regards to reaching quorum
Need to research it deeply and make a special system
0voters
When the 3rd choice is much weaker, it doesn’t show it in the results. If everything was 20%/20%/20%/20%/20%, it would show 5 options.
This means that it is handling the quorum itself, and that with our current rules, you would need a vote that at a max is showing 3 popular choices, or it would require an almost unreachable quorum level, and this seems to fit the intent of our rules very well.
I think that now we should not deal with this for a long time, we need to leave a vote with the owner of the gotchi and vote on the prop “land auction 3”, and then someday if we need to change something, we will do it slowly and change the voting order with rented gotchi. And now it is not a best time to change something
I think a DAO forum poll + Discord poll should suffice.
Trying to steelman the argument that the voting-power should indeed go to the borrower, I cannot come up with much… only “long-term-renting”…
or that the borrower-voter-base is truly educated about and interested in deciding about the future path of the endeavor, which isn’t the case, yet.
Voting power has to stay with the owner until then.
