[VIP-34] Snapshot proposal requirements

VaultCraft Improvement Proposals VaultCraft Improvement Proposals [VIP]
1
Snapshot proposal validation method
    1. Increase voting power threshold
    1. Whitelisted addresses
    1. Other
0 voters

Summary

VaultCraft DAO utilizes Snapshot for governance. However, spam accounts have flooded the DAO with proposals containing scam links, endangering the community. This is possible because Snapshot enables anyone meeting certain thresholds of voting power to create a new proposal.

To address this issue, three implementations can be considered:

  • Increasing voting power threshold
  • Whitelisting addresses
  • Other

Each option is discussed in further detail below.

Validation options

1. Increasing voting power threshold

Previously, the threshold was set to 50,000 points of voting power to create a proposal. Points were determined by

  • VCX held (1 point each)
  • VCX locked for veVCX (5 points each)
  • Delegated points (1 point each)

Given current MP of VCX ($0.02361), anyone could purchase $1,180 worth of VCX to obtain the necessary voting power to create proposals. It seems this economic threshold was too low, as individuals have purchased the necessary VCX to post fake airdrop links with malicious links.

One solution could be to increase the economic barrier to entry to obtain the necessary voting power. This could be achieved by increasing the amount of points necessary from 50,000 to either 500,000 ($11,805) or 1,000,000 ($23,610).

2. Whitelisting addresses

Alternatively, Snapshot proposals could be gated to certain whitelisted addresses. To begin, these addresses would be the same as the signers of the DAO multisigs (established, tenured contributors to the DAO)
To add additional whitelisted addresses as Snapshot authors, community members would be invited to create a forum proposal presenting their qualifications and if approved, be added as a whitelisted author.

Other

Any other methods to protect from malicious actors while continuing to operate as a decentralized organization. Community input would be greatly appreciated in the discussion below.

Implementation

On Snapshot, the Proposal Validation will be set to either ‘Basic’ or ‘Authors only’ depending on the DAO’s decision.

As an example, this was the previous strategy used to determine voting power, with a 50,000 point threshold to create a proposal.
erc20-balance-of-weighted
{
“symbol”: “veVCX”,
“weight”: 50,
“address”: “0x0aB4bC35Ef33089B9082Ca7BB8657D7c4E819a1A”,
“decimals”: 18
}
erc20-balance-of-weighted
{
“symbol”: “VCX”,
“weight”: 1,
“address”: “0xcE246eEa10988C495B4A90a905Ee9237a0f91543”,
“decimals”: 18
}
delegation
{
“symbol”: “VCX (delegated)”,
“strategies”: [
{
“name”: “erc20-balance-of”,
“params”: {
“symbol”: “VCX”,
“address”: “0xcE246eEa10988C495B4A90a905Ee9237a0f91543”,
“decimals”: 18
}
},
{
“name”: “erc20-balance-of”,
“params”: {
“symbol”: “veVCX”,
“address”: “0x0aB4bC35Ef33089B9082Ca7BB8657D7c4E819a1A”,
“decimals”: 18
}
}
]
}

2

The option with whitelisted addresses makes sense. Can we rather include the owners of these addresses to act as a ‘moderator’ for our governance process?

This will be a case where all PIPs on forum that need to proceed to a snapshot vote are done by deadline the post needs to meet on Forum (provided it satisfy all criteria to move to snapshot) This will be done by owners of the whitelisted addresses, with or without the request of the forum post authors.

1 Like
4

This makes sense.

The whitelisted addresses can be responsible for turning any forum posts that recieves meaningful support on its poll to a Snapshot on behalf of the forum author

5

I like the whitelisted address approach, but have it set clear so its non-bias, “As long as the proposal is inline with the DAO’s code of conduct, all proposals will be submitted”. Further so to prevent centralization.

1 Like