9/ One cool observation from voter analysis is the rise of a few early superstar 'governooors'. The top 5 users have 2000+ votes in a single DAO 😵
(if any of you rockstars read this, dm plz, would love to chat)
10/ On a different note, @optimismPBC recently removed a proposal by @cobie. Although there were no bad intentions and they re-listed it, it brings up the question:
- How decentralized is DAO governance? 🤔
What's the point if it's a C(entralized)AO?
11/ One way to measure how decentralized DAO governance is, is thru the Gini coef.
Gini is a measure of income equality but can also be applied to DAO voting, where:
1 = very centralized
0 = very decentralized
12/ For simplicity, let's only consider those that voted on an issue. I.e. Measure the skewness in power of actual votes per proposal. For example:
User: Voting Power
Alice: 1
Bob: 1
Carol: 10
Proposal Gini:
- If only A votes -> 1
- If A & B vote -> 0
13/ Turns out, most DAO proposals are heavily skewed toward a few powerful voters.
Specifically;
➡️ ~25% of proposals are >= 0.8 Gini
That is, unfortunately, quite high 😬
14/ There is hope though! DAO governance does seem to be going in the right direction and becoming more decentralized (albeit slowly).
➡️ A decrease of ~23% over the past year in avg Gini coeff (0.81->0.62)
15/ What about proposal outcomes? Does everyone in a DAO just vote the same? Mostly, yes, but not always!
~1000 proposals won with less than 60% majority ⚖️
The highest-profile debate was for @Wonderland_fi. Of course, @0xSifu is in the mix too!
16/ I do think healthy debate is vital in any governance system🤝
With that, wanted to highlight some DAOs with a lot of it. Here are the top 10:
➡️ # of DAOs w/ governance is growing (8x past year)
➡️ Large % proposals created by small % of DAOs
➡️ Voter activity up significantly over the past year
➡️ Recurring voters are hard to find
➡️ Voting power relatively centralized but improving
1/ To match the pace of crypto, we're excited to launch monthly updates to developerreport.com 🚀
Crypto has evolved a lot since @ElectricCapital's 1st report 4y ago
• Devs have 2x'ed
• Repos have 6x'ed
@eherrerosj & I dig into Q1's insights (it has been hard on devs)👇
2/ First some high level stats.
We currently have:
- 21.5k devs (~7K Full-Time)
In Q1 2023, we've gained:
- 8.7k new repos
- 9.3k new devs
This is lower than last few quarters... but why? Can't say for certain, but we can provide some context.
3/ Seasonality 🔄
Crypto is highly cyclical & this is reflected in dev metrics. Seasonal Jan dips tend to be proportional to market size, stage & run-up. '23 Q1's dip follows this trend.
Jan dips for Full-Time devs:
• 2019: ~10% (post '18 peak)
• 2023: ~20% (post '21/2 peak)
1/ Over 44 MILLION contracts have been deployed to @ethereum since genesis 🤯
I analyzed all 44M using @InsightsFlow so you don’t have to.
Turns out, 70% of live contracts (~15M) are copies from one of 15 templates.
🧵 Here’s a breakdown of the dominant contract codes
2/ Destroyed contracts 💀
🏷️ ~50% of ALL contracts (~22M)
More 'anti-code' than code, but what does this mean? It means 'self-destruct' was called on the contract, removing all bytecode.
Why?
My guess is gas is to save gas ⛽ (see below)
3/ Gas Token contracts
🏷️ ~10% of live contracts (~2M)
To disincentivize state bloat, EVM refunds gas to a user for destroying a contract. This resulted in users deploying empty contracts when gas prices were low & destroying when high, for a quick refund 🎰.