Cooper I would like to ask - how important is the 1/1 voting for the protocol? And how much do we need more votes?
sharing here response from @Quasimondo:
I think botto does get enough votes, yes. Generally I would like to find a balance for rewards which does not only favor people with a lot of VPs.
Which is why I believe days voted is a fair measure that should stay in
I also think that number of different fragments voted should get a large ratio
I also think winners voted on is important [if we can easily track those who voted on a winner leaderboard]
I am not too concerned about bot votes at the moment at least not in this phase
number of boosts is something I feel is already covered by the active weekly rewards
Some updates based on discussion:
Voting Data - We can release the voting data so that people can better assess the categories they want to award, and scenarios of how different weight distributions would look in the payouts. We will likely push out the snapshot a few days to give people time to dig in. cc oiseau
stfnfhrmnn Could also consider variations of those, tied to picking winners or almost-winners:
How about further categories that deemphasize the distribution to whales (which already receive by virtue of spending large amounts of VP on winners, potentially)?
As for more variations on categories, I believe we should keep it simple for this vote. Categories need to be pretty self explanatory when listed in the snapshot as I wouldn’t count on everyone following closely. However, I think these suggestions could be good to consider for regular rewards going forward if we are to get rid of this retroactive rewards format, along with other fun formats like quip suggested.
Regarding use for burning, treasury, or LP, it is important that we follow through on what we’ve promised, which is that 50% of revenue would be distributed to participants. LP I think is off topic for this and requires its own discussion, which is ongoing in #governance-discussion on discord right now. Burning and treasury are indirect distributions, so can work as categories among others and provide good data on whether this is where people want to see revenue going.
Rounds multiplier - Will shift this to a “multiplier” rather than a category. We want to distribute according to round participation, which helps weight for time invested without biasing to people’s methods (voting over many days vs. focusing on one day each week, etc.). The way this would work is to simply count your rounds proportional to everyone else’s and multiply by your other qualifying categories.
sw5park Advocating removal of categories that incentivize high-frequency, short-term grinding behavior:
Quantity of fragments voted on
Days voted and Quantity voted - These have gotten mixed support, so important to keep since people can choose to vote on something else. Days voted can be an incentive to keep coming and checking in and do some voting each day, and it is important for Botto to get feedback on many different fragments. I believe there’s been some criticism of “grinding” that is actually an element of simply supporting Botto. Returning each day can be good to continue to see new art and get some votes in.
General notes: As we just saw yesterday, sybiling is a real risk. The minimum 2000 $BOTTO staking requirement significantly mitigates that activity affecting these retroactive rewards, but we should absolutely be wary of things that are notable.
What’s useful about this format is that as a retroactive vote and weighting by rounds helps prevent gaming on this upcoming decision. And if you don’t want to reward a category, put your voting weight somewhere else.
However, given the repeatable nature of each period, these benefits of retroactive rewards probably won’t work as well going forward as they become more easily gameable. We can use the outcome of this vote to see where people want to see weights to determine how we want to reward in the 3rd period and whether to keep retroactive rewards at all. We can also consider other weighted methods and a staking lockup multiplier, but will leave that for a separate BIP.
Voting data release with scenarios + added time to analyze
Rounds become multiplier, removed as category