Voting power factors for consideration

Listing the different factors that will be considered for each voting power approach

The methodology used for this approach comparison is documented separately.

Execution & scaling complexity

• Description - How voting power is calculated and distributed between voters can influence the amount of complexity there is to execute and scale a voting process. Many Web3 ecosystems will be looking to adopt a voting power approach that they can feasibly scale to millions of users.

• Maximum score - 5, Very important. Replacing existing governance systems with emerging Web3 ecosystem technology will require solutions that can be feasibly executed and that can scale to handle millions of users.

• Scoring questions - How complex is the voting power approach to execute? Can the approach be fully automated or does it require moderation? Can voters abuse or game the system in anyway to increase their voting power? Is it likely the voting power approach can scale and remain legitimate, secure and robust over the long term?

• Scoring - Low complexity is good (Score - 5). High complexity is bad (Score - 1).

Fairness for network decisions

• Description - Network parameter changes can impact the entire networks user base. Network changes could lead to big improvements or catastrophic failures for these emerging ecosystems. Voting power could consider the wealth, usage and contributions someone has made to maintain and improve the network. Any adopted approaches will determine who has the most influence in network parameter decisions.

• Maximum score - 5, Very important. These decisions can be of vital importance for the network. Making sure that users are treated fairly will be an important part of scaling these ecosystems to handle a large population of users. If the voting power approach is biased or unfair then people may decide to join or start another network.

• Scoring questions - Are people treated equally and fairly when voting power is calculated? Is the voting power approach suitable for network parameter decisions? Is the voting power approach egalitarian or does it result in certain people being disadvantaged? Is anyone excluded from the voting process who should be able to participate? Is participation permissionless?

• Scoring - High fairness is good (Score - 5). Low fairness is bad (Score - 1).

Fairness for treasury decisions

• Description - Treasury decisions are concerned with how an ecosystem gathers and deploys its own assets to maintain and improve the network. Voting power needs to take into account who has contributed towards this treasury and how that voting power should be fairly distributed across the users of the network.

• Maximum score - 5, Very important. It is highly important that users are treated fairly when voting power is calculated and distributed as this will determine how treasury funds will get spent. The ecosystem may want to respect who has contributed towards that treasury as those contributors could move their usage and contributions to another ecosystem if they are disadvantaged by the voting power approach.

• Scoring questions - Are people treated equally and fairly when voting power is calculated? Is the voting power approach suitable for treasury decisions? Is the voting power approach egalitarian or does it result in certain people being disadvantaged? Is anyone excluded from the voting process who should be able to participate? Is participation permissionless?

• Scoring - High fairness is good (Score - 5). Low fairness is bad (Score - 1).