My opinion
Must know that although the existing various DAO voting mechanisms seem to have no problems for the time being, even in SEP #1 DAO seems to be quite united, but when the interests of different groups conflict, the problem of unfair DAO voting is very obvious.
In fact I don’t think there’s a need for a vote that everyone would agree with, it’s the vote that’s divided that deserves further discussion.
Users should have 40% voting power, guardians 35%, and investors 25%, which is significantly more fair considering the number of participants.
So I propose weighted voting to balance the voting power of different groups as an anti-whale measure.
0-20000 votes X 3.3
20,000-2,000,000 votes X 1.9
Over 2 million votes X 0.35
- Good Plan
- Other methods
I don’t think Snapshot can achieve such a function, but we can recalculate the voting results after the voting ends, which can lead to a more fair voting result.
Tokens are currently not transferrable, so this approach works fairly well.
After the token is transferable, this method will no longer work (whales can assign tokens to different addresses), so I think this method is only applicable to the vote of SEP #2, I hope to do the next vote on transferability , you can use this temporary method.
As for the long-term issue of voting power, this becomes more complicated once the tokens are transferable. I think @lukas mentioned
It is an effective measure, but it needs more discussion, I am not a DAO expert, but I have browsed @theobtl’s personal website, he seems to have a fairly deep research on DAO(https://theodorbeutel.de/), I hope you can give some opinions on this.