Summary
This is Part 2 of proposal 6082 which we initially started to combat Scam proposals. The main reason for increasing the deposit amount is to significantly cut down on the amount of proposals which can be made on our chain. With proposal 6082 passing & increasing the voting requirement to 1,000,000 $LUNC we’ve seen a noticeable decrease in proposals entering voting period. We believe that by increasing the deposit amount as well to hit the deposit tab we can decrease the amount of scam/spam proposals entering our governance by a significant amount.
Motivation
We’re motivated by the amount of individuals taken advantage of by scam proposals. We also see that there are way too many proposals coming out as of late & this will aid cutting down on spam.
Proposal
It’s simple. Increase the minimum deposit to enter the “deposit” tab from 0 $LUNC to 500,000 $LUNC which is about 50% of the way into voting. We need to encourage individuals to enter Agora discussion first, garnering community opinion & then funding their proposals through our voting tab after approval.
This will not affect a good actors ability to fund a proposal. This is a follow-up to proposal 6082 in which we proposed to increase the voting minimum from 345,000 LUNC to 1,000,000 LUNC & also signaled to increase the minimum deposit amount from 0 to 500,000 LUNC.
Proposed by
Classy Crypto, Classy’s Sphere LUNC Validator / Proposer of 6082
LUNC Holders & Community Members
Contact: @ClassyCrypto_ (Twitter)
Imho its too high of a threshold for a regular holder to participate in governance. Which I think should be accesible. I think the max acceptable amount would be 100,000. 1 million for a prop to go up for vote is also difficult to reach and too risky for a normal non-associated person.
But if we have to remove spam/scam proposals why don’t we integrate a spam filter? Like this, we will continue to increase the proposal amount until it becomes 1 billion LUNC. And then we will again pass proposals to decrease it when price of LUNC goes higher.
How is money a measure of seriousness? Also, you’re not considering that if the repo becomes no canonical then for every change in code, someone will need to pay 160 bucks. Every single merge request. That’s insane.
Why not just use a spam filter? Any open source spam filter can be used. We will need to know a bit of Natural Language Processing for that. It’s not that difficult really.
So true Rabbi! We don’t want to stop Rabbi scam proposals we love your 1000’s of proposals! keep it cheap to help the Rabbi! We love you Rabbi! When will be your next attempt?
I agree with many that 500,000 LUNC is a high figure, but you have to ask yourself 'Will this help stop people getting scammed from scam proposals?". Yes it will help, so I am in agreement with the proposal. I’m not sure 500,000 LUNC would deter people with genuine proposals from posting.
I do agree that some people might not be able to afford 500,000 lunc but if they have a good enough idea , they can always make a free agora post and ask for support from other community members that would gladly put it up , people who are involved enough with the chain should know how agora and proposals work.
If we can get rid of all those spam/fishing proposals the benefits outweigh the negatives IMO.
Could also just upgrade the voting proposal submission process by having a specific element that requires you to insert an agora text in order for it to be submitted as a proposal. And only accounts with say, ‘trust level 2’ can make such agora posts in order to copy into a proposal. Would create a lot more work for scammers if they would need to:
Own an account that’s active on agora (aka here) with at least trust level 2.
Put up a post proposal and then copy that proposal into the voting section of Terrastation.
Still highly likely they would risk loosing their deposit from an ever vigilant community.
Have their agora account trust level 2 account banned when the community recognises their proposal is bogus and have to restart all over again.
1 million LUNC hasn’t stopped scam props. And it won’t, even if you raise this to 1 billion LUNC. This isn’t even a solution. And it doesn’t work like this. What absurd way/line of thinking is this?
From my observation it did reduce the scam proposals and that is exactly why they want to try and make the deposit amount greater too. Your screenshot proves it, there is 1 scam proposal up for voting and more than 100 deposited, if there was no 1m minimum ,there would’ve been 100 scams up for voting.
I don’t see why anyone would be against giving it a shot, if it doesn’t work we can reverse or revise it later. IMO of course.
Unfortunately there is currently no parameter on Terra Classic that allows us to set a minimum initial deposit on governance proposals.This feature was added in more recent versions of Cosmos SDK.
So we either have to wait until we are ready to go to newer SDK versions. Or we have to backport that feature… Which (from my current and limited viewpoint) may not be not too complicated to achieve.
If it is, then can we implement this instead and reduce the fees to 1,000 or 10,000? High fees for proposals doesn’t make sense. It’s an overkill @ClassyCrypto
Getting approval from validators to even deposit a prop?
Seriously WTF is this idea, the scam props are not THAT much of a problem to throw a Trump Wall type of thing between LUNC Holders and governance. How is a normal person expected to be able to fork out 500,000 LUNC and/or deal with Terra Classic validator red tape and political tribalism. This is nuts. We have a clear, accesible system in which anyone can participate. Why are we trying to screw this up for entry-level holders?
LUNC Validator / Proposer of 6082
.