i think this is a great idea and it makes a lot of sense. Luckily GnosisDao has come up with a potential solution for gas burdened voters. SafeSnap is a tool for combining off-chain voting with on-chain execution, without compromising decentralization.
anyone else like this idea, as it kinda permeates throughout the student body, majority wise it makes sense too. Simply put, i would compare it to the fairest, non-greedy, make more,then pay a little more. Just the P2P concept itself is one of the basic principles ,and main reasons why i am here. I dont know about y’all,but not paying out money each and everytime i want to create wealth for myself? When the inputters of a few buttons on a keyboard make more than any 50 of us majority wise, anyhow. Another good reason? non-corporate officers, board members, lobbyists, all y’all go away,you arent welcome, nor needed, heck, unwanted period! You think?
Fully agree, may be to vote with the same smartcontracts but on a Ethereum Testnet could be a solution
While we are talking about better voting system on Aave, let me up this post Use aAAVE to participate to governance
I think that should be a priority from the governance perspective and probably the most efficient cost/reward solution to get more people involved in governance process (12% of AAVE tokens are aAAVE fyi).
@Emilio did you have time to check out Bancors attempt for gasless Voting?
Could we possibly move voting to the Polygon network? It’d be nearly free there without the snapshot risk?
Also just to tie this post in from November :
~$100 in gas to vote really disincentivizes community participation.
I support everything in favor of improving the current voting system.
I think the current voting system gives too much power to addresses with big voting power which demotivates average people to vote. As a result this decreases decentralization.
The main issue is, as stated in this thread, gas fees. I think being able to vote from Polygon netowrk would be a nice solution fot this if possible.
Second issue is that in my opinion average token holders don’t get informed enough about AAVE ecosystem and might see voting as a chore. My suggestion is adding a small incentive funded from the AAVE reserve on top of the first proposition to incentivize voting. I don’t think it should be something large, for example a return of 0.01% of the amount used to vote is enough to get people interested.
This is an awesome idea. Would kill the fees, but be secure. Maybe a good way to go. Thanks for that!
Governance and security are strictly correlated. While i believe the polygon network to be secure, it’s objectively and comparatively less secure than Ethereum (probably only Bitcoin is as secure as Ethereum). For this reason, even though voting is still very expensive, i would be reluctant in moving the governance to anything that is not ethereum itself. Hopefully L2 solutions will come up soon to ease the load on the ethereum network, and given the fact that they inherit the ethereum security, maybe there will be good chance to move the governance to one of these networks
That’s a fair point. Polygon isn’t as safe as Ethereum. Did the bancor gasless voting thing turn out well?
Afaik they didn’t release anything to submit the actual proposal onchain (that is the most important part of the process)
I agree. I have not voted a single time because of GAS fees. Can voting be implemented on the Polygon chain?
Honest reply. I only vote on ETH if it is related to a airdrop because of the fees. I think the democracy happens in these forums and the vote is just a formality. When the popular opinion is behind the proposal it is put forward and because of the high fees only some vote.
If voting is gasless and creating propsals is cheap the quarum can get congested with non-sensical or bad propositions. This is happening in snapshot voting attleast.
The problem with snapshot (that i love btw, it’s an amazing tool) is that the token loses it’s intrinsic value. If you own AAVE with onchain governance, you own a piece of the aave protocol. With offchain voting the token only becomes a signaling token, but you can’t have any direct effect on the governance itself.
Issue is, there will always be high demand on L1, thus smaller holders who would love to voice their opinions would be stuck with 2 options. The first being delegating their votes to a 3rd party, and the second being the user would need to suck it up and spend the gas to vote. With the first option while some people may decide that allowing a third party to voice their opinions is the way to go, there are many that disagree. And while you can revoke delegation privilege at any time, that too requires gas. A lot of people such as myself have never voted in a single proposal due to high gas fees and I’ve always wanted to vote. The only option that users such as myself have, are to be active within this forum until something is done about the voting mechanism which allows the little guy to maintain 100% rights to their vote. I believe there is a way to have a weight to offchain voting, and requiring an oracle that can keep track of the results and have a bot publish the results on chain.
I’m not sure I’d agree with you on that front. The token holders aren’t the ones committing a change to the code today when they vote on chain, they’re still trusting the devs to do their jobs. Whether we signal approval on Snapshot or on chain voting that’s still the case.
I recognize though there is some value in having votes recorded on chain. I’m just not sure it’s worth the fee. I’m likely missing some of the gravity of the decision though. Until then I’ll keep hoping that Aave will expand to a L2 we trust enough to allow voting/staking/reclaiming on
Oaky maybe another idea. I don’t know if this is possible and what about the gas fees. But I just wanted to write it down as long as I remember this
Is it possible to create 2 smart contracts, one for yes and the other one for no. You can then delegate your power to either one of these and they will execute the voting in your favor. The gas fees for these voting will be taken from the protocol reserve or something like that.
In this case you would be able to vote but wouldn’t need to pay gas. Only if delegating your power would also be that expensive everytime. Maybe delegation could happen somehow though L2 and will be executed on L1?
Hopefully someone understands what I mean.
True, when you vote, you are still trusting the entity who submitted the proposal. But nothing stops you from collecting enough prop power to do a proposal yourself (not all changes require code - some configuration parameters can be changed without any coding) and/or hiring a team of developers to build something on your end, without relying on third parties. This is not possible with a snapshot + multisig setup. That might seem a subtle difference but in my opinion is huge. If you hold AAVE or you are a delegatee with enough power, you effectively own a piece of the aave ecosystem.
Why not just use Snapshot?
Check the replies above - snapshot doesn’t have a trustless and decentralized way of forwarding the proposals onchain. It changes the nature of the token to a mere signaling token