Voting on the first $ZIL governance proposal has just ended. The proposal has passed with a resounding YES, which means that the community has now agreed on the rules for future decision making.
Time to analyze, introspect and see how to make this better next time. A thread 👇
1/ 348 different wallets voted. It may appear to be low given that 25,304 were holding $gZIL before the voting started. But, if you compare with other projects, it is in fact quite high. The last voting on YAM had 4 participants, 177 on YFI, 91 on SUSHI, 30 on UNI and 8 on SNX.
2/ Since 1 $gZIL = 1 vote, the total number of $gZIL used for voting was around 26,694, while the total number of $gZIL captured in the snapshot was 130,481. This translates to around 21% $gZIL being used for voting. The largest voter had 2,479 while the smallest had 0.002 $gZIL.
3/ In order to better understand the voter diversity, we looked at their $gZIL holding. As you can see, only 1% of voters who hold less than 200 $gZILs voted. And generally speaking, it looks like the voting participation was high among those who hold larger number of $gZILs.
4/ As pointed out by @jdune23, one explanation for low participation among users in the smallest $gZIL holding group could be that most of them are staking via Moonlet or Atomic. There was no straightforward way for them to vote.
5/ Given that @moonlet_wallet and @AtomicWallet are the operators with the largest delegated stake and also the largest number of delegators, being unable to vote from these wallet must have been an impediment.
6/ In order to remedy this, @moonlet_wallet has been working on integrating the governance functionality within its app. I hope this could be ready by the time the next proposal is announced.
7/ On our end, we are also working on a wallet module which some of you may be familiar with on Ethereum. This wallet module will provide a single interface for different wallets such as Ledger, @pay_zil, @moonlet_wallet, etc. The Moonlet team has submitted a ZIP to this effect.
8/ We also noticed that during the entire voting period, the community was actively rallying others to vote. As proposed by someone on the forum, it will be a good idea to develop a reminder bot on TG to alert $gZIL holders on voting deadlines.
9/ I thought it might be interesting to know whether the early birds were mostly smaller $gZIL holders or rather the larger holders. Here is chat that captures voting timestamp. As you can see, the smaller $gZIL holder were quite spread out while the whales were rather early.
10/ Finally, the question that always pops up is whether there should be an incentive for people to vote. I am a bit torn on this but maybe we leave it for another proposal. Thank you again for your participation. Onwards and upwards.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Some good discussions on the governance process: forum.zilliqa.com/t/zip-12-stand…. Thought it's worth sharing a summary of what people have been discussing:
1/ Several community members have argued that the voting period on the governance portal should be extended to 7 days 👉 Accepted.
2/ Someone asked to have a Telegram ZIP Alert bot to notify people when there is an ongoing vote. 👉 Maybe @Zillacracy could add this feature in their staking bot t.me/ZillacracyNoti…? The bot currently notifies delegators when the staking rewards are available for claim.
3/ Is there a minimum amount of time before people can decide to make changes to something that has already been approved, or is it a permanent thing? 👉 Maybe a cool-off period of a few months could be set in the future to make sure that the current flexibility is not abused?
Zilliqa governance proposal attempts to strike a balance between permissionlessness and spam mitigation.
1/ Allows one to start a conversation on a change that one firmly believes in by describing the idea as a ZIP and getting the initial buy-in from the community on the forum.
2/ However, it mitigates spams by requiring enough buy-in from the community in the form of informal "FOR" votes on the forum. At least 25% of votes must be "FOR", thereby signalling sufficient interest to take it to the next step. No $gZIL requirement also helps at this stage.
3/ At the next step of formal voting on the governance portal via Snapshot, it is required that the proposer must have at least 30 $gZIL to put the proposal to vote to prevent spam. But, in case the OP doesn't have enough $gZIL, anyone could do so on the OP's behalf.
A summary of the $ZIL governance process via $gZIL:
[Step 1] Proposing a topic: This has to be done on forum.zilliqa.com using the template provided.
Next steps in the thread 👇
[Step 2] Discussions and informal signalling: This happens on the forum as well. You can discuss a proposal with other community members and suggest changes and finally signal your opinion, i.e., whether you are in principle FOR or AGAINST the proposal.
The signalling is only informal and not final. No $gZIL is required at this point.
Step 2 Requirements:
1/ Each proposal must be given at least 3 days for others to signal their opinion.
We continue to hear that several $ZIL holders are unable to withdraw their tokens from certain exchanges and their withdrawal transactions seem to have errored out as incorrect nonce.
A thread on status update. 👇
1/ This has only affected a few exchanges, while there are others, where withdrawals are getting processed as expected. Also, given that the network is processing transactions as usual, we understand the frustration of some feeling stuck while others can interact on-chain.
2/ PROBLEM: We have spoken to some of these affected exchanges to better understand the issue at hand. It appears that those exchanges issued several consecutive withdrawal transactions which are expected to include an increasing counter called nonce.
Some observations and thoughts on ZILSwap: What went well, its impact on the $ZIL ecosystem and where we need to improve with some concrete plans that are being worked on. A thread:
👇
1/ ZILSwap was launched by @SwitcheoNetwork on Oct 5, 2020 (~2 months old). Soon after, we noticed for the first time, a flurry of ZRC-2 tokens (equiv. of ERC20s on $ZIL) getting launched on the network (even though the fungible token standard had been around for a while).
2/ The ability to provide a marketplace for people to exchange tokens was the trigger for deveopers to start issuing tokens and developing a token economy. In fact, there was a token for which, the entire supply was put on a ZILSwap pool w/o any team withholding.
$ZIL ecosystem has grown rapidly in the last few quarters and at least some of it can be attributed to the cascading network effect of seed node staking. A thread on observations, thoughts and ideas on taking it to the next-level (bundled together with some tangible numbers).
👇
1/ Staking has so far locked around USD 400 million of $ZIL. In fact, the underlying incentive design has converted passive community members into daily active network users. And the numbers do speak. Since its launch, the daily txn volume on the network has increased by ~40%.
2/ The most immediate network effect of staking came in the form of $gZIL -- an ecosystem-wide governance token issued alongside staking rewards. $gZIL itself has driven a quarter million on-chain transactions (in the form of token transfers).