What if participation in OpenGov would actually cost something?
1% of your voting token automatically get burned, not sent to the treasury for the grifty grifters, no, burned!
You are voting with 2x conviction? Cool, then 2% of your voting power get burned.
Let’s introduce some costs for the big fishes behind the scenes and cause a little buying pressure.
Questions?
*cause a little selling pressure.
We want participation to increase, no decrease with the potential effect of people being upset and selling their tokens.
Voting should definitely remain free, but it may be worth looking into options for burning some tokens when making a proposal that would take out money out of the treasury.
Nah, OP is right. Selling pressure is because of an extremely high inflation rate and an incompetent team to actually deliver and add value to the project. There should be a price to pay to vote because the only ones who vote can definitely afford it to take one for the team. It’s still better than this horrendous dilution and free giveaways.
Good idea with the treasury proposal tax though. That should be implemented too. A burn tax for the grifters.
Who’s going to Aye this proposal then?
Yeh, it’s a bad idea.
If you reckon big fishes behind the scenes are the problem, you’d be better off coming up with a resilient mechanism to get more different accounts to vote.
@Deflationist , you need a better thought out solution for your aim, too.
I’m also against dilution and treasury giveaways but, IMHO, the problem is voters don’t apply enough critical thinking to do the maths and identify when something is a dilution or a giveaway. We need some way to take into account (automatically if possible) where the money will end up after it goes into the proposer wallet. If it keeps going around the ecosystem, we all benefit. If it is extracted, we all pay a second time.