The current governance proposal process on Terra has some flaws that allow spamming and
repetitive proposals to be submitted by users. To address these issues, this proposal suggests
implementing several changes to the proposal process.
Implement an advanced spam filter that tracks the lineage of the address proposing votes, i.e.
how “old” it is calculated in “blocks-produced-since-creation”, to further rank the Free For All
votes into “old” and “new” addresses to provide a further filter for people wanting to waste
their tokens on spamming governance.
Proposal Process Amendments
This proposal suggests a set of amendments to the proposal process to improve its efficiency and reduce spam.
The proposed changes include:
A rule that prevents proposals for the same theme from being made after they have been rejected or have not reached a quorum.
Implementation of a more advanced spam filter that bans wallets that submit X votes that are all rejected over a period of Y time.
Introducing two tiers of votes - one approved by the “senate” and another that is free for all.
Amending the free for all votes by ranking them based on the lineage of the address proposing votes, i.e., how “old” it is calculated in “blocks-produced-since-creation.”
A proposal fee that increases exponentially for wallets that present a proposal that is rejected or does not reach a quorum.
This rule will ensure that only high-quality proposals are submitted, and the proposal process is not cluttered with repetitive or unnecessary proposals.
The advanced spam filter will prevent spam and ensure that only genuine proposals are submitted. Wallets that consistently submit rejected proposals will be banned from posting proposals for a set period (e.g. 6 months to a 1 year).
Two tiers of votes will help improve the quality of proposals.
- A “senate” tier will be composed of members who have proven themselves to be trustworthy and knowledgeable.
- The other tier will be free for all.
The amendment to the free for all votes will rank them based on the lineage of the address proposing votes. This will further filter people wanting to waste their tokens on spamming governance.
The proposal fee will increase exponentially for wallets that present a proposal that is rejected or does not reach a quorum. This will ensure that only high-quality proposals are submitted and discourage wallets from submitting low-quality or scam proposals.
The incremental proposal fee should be implemented by the development team, with the fee amount and increment rate decided by the development team based on the severity of spamming and the impact on the governance proposal process.
The incremental fee should be returned if the proposal is successful.
The amendments will be implemented on the Terra network by the governance team. The proposed changes will be introduced through hard fork, and wallets will need to update their clients to participate in the proposal process.
The proposed amendments aim to improve the efficiency and quality of the proposal process on the Terra network. It will discourage spammers and ensure that only high-quality proposals are submitted.
By introducing two tiers of votes and ranking free for all votes based on the lineage of the address proposing votes, the quality of proposals will be improved.
The proposed changes will require a hard fork, and wallets will need to update their clients to participate in the proposal process.
The human element is crucial in governance, especially in matters related to censorship. While code-as-law can be a powerful tool, it’s important to recognize that technology has its limitations and cannot replace human judgment entirely. As you said, computers lack the ability to understand concepts like compassion and empathy, which are crucial in making fair and just decisions.
In the case of governance, having a senate or similar body empowered to screen proposals and
make decisions on censorship can be a valuable addition. This allows for human input and
decision-making while still leveraging the benefits of blockchain technology. It also helps to
ensure that the governance process remains fair and transparent, and that proposals are
evaluated based on their merit rather than just being rejected or censored arbitrarily.
Consequence of a YES vote:
These proposed changes aim to improve the governance proposal process on Terra and ensure that the proposals that are submitted are relevant, useful, and have a high chance of success.
By implementing these changes, we can create a more effective and efficient governance process that benefits the entire Terra community.
Consequence of a NO vote:
We will keep the Governance proposals process unchanged and subject to the systematic submission of proposals on the same topic, proposals without relevance to the project as well as proposals without foundation that often only have the objective of disturbing the normal development of the blockchain and governance.
Best Regards Dominium