Workshop #0
28/03/2024
This is the very first uniFires Governance Workgroup Session where we invite members from the Cardano & Polkadot ecosystems to come together and to discuss and share Governance related topics, ideas, challenges and priorities.
This Session focused on covering different aspects of the Polkadot Governance systems.
Session recording at:
https://youtu.be/SY2t6RxjvRc?si=GQ1_sE9KpWgFae7V
Hosts:
Felix (Cardano Ambassador)
Viktor (Polkadot Ambassador)
Participants:
Eystein (Cardano Nordic Community, Stake Pool Operator)
Meeting Summary - Q&A on Polkadot Governance
Is there a core group of people who have retained power or influence in Polkadot's governance, or do you see a diverse set of decision-makers?
Polkadot’s governance is based on liquid democracy allowing DOT holders to Vote directly or to delegate their Vote.
While this governance system defines the decision making process in open Gov, there is still a governance layer at the Stake Pool Operators and core protocol updates which are done via the Technical Fellowship
How actively are entities like the Web3 Foundation and Parity participating in Polkadot’s governance?
While individual members of such entities may participate in governance, there is no direct involvement or control exerted by these entities over governance decisions. Their role is more about delegation and support for the community's decision-making process.
The Web3 Foundation recently started a program (Decentralised Voices) where large amounts of DOT holdings from the W3F are delegated to a small group of voters.
Are there any penalties on Polkadot for misbehaving in some form, and how does the community enforce standards?
Polkadot’s governance model includes mechanisms to deter and penalize bad actors, ensuring the integrity of the decision-making process through e.g Referendum Killers which allow to target and remove specific proposals which seem a danger for the ecosystem.
How does the Polkadot ecosystem manage the risk of malicious technical proposals that could potentially harm the network?
Polkadot’s governance model at OpenGov includes a deposit system for proposal submission, which acts as a deterrent against frivolous or malicious proposals as well as the role of the Technical Fellowship and root proposals which are handled in a parallel governance mechanism.
The Polkadot Technical Fellowship was established in 2022 and plays an important role in the Polkadot OpenGov. This fellowship replaced the Technical Committee from Polkadot's first iteration of governance, and will be serving both the Polkadot and Kusama networks. This Fellowship is designed to be far broader in membership (i.e. to work well with even tens of thousands of members) and with far lower barriers to entry both in terms of administrative process flow and levels of expertise. For more information, read through the Fellowship Manifesto.
Is there positive economic incentive for Polkadot voters, or how do you ensure participation without direct financial incentives?
There are no direct financial incentives for voting in Polkadot’s governance model. The incentive lies in contributing to the ecosystem's health and long-term value appreciation.
Has Polkadot experimented with different voting methods, such as quadratic voting, to increase inclusivity?
Polkadot experimented with quadratic voting for brand-related decisions. However, challenges related to ensuring one person-one vote integrity have prevented its widespread adoption for governance decisions and OpenGov current voting mechanism is based on plutocratic mechanisms.
Are there ethical rules on liquid democracy within Polkadot, such as preventing vote selling or establishing a market for voting power?
There’s currently a lack of formal restrictions against vote selling or similar practices, underscoring the importance of community standards and ethical considerations in guiding participants' actions. Ethical Standards in both ecosystems seem to emerge through actions and experiences rather than being pre-designed.
Kukabi, a voting delegative, receiving a voting delegation from the Web3 Foundation in the first round of Decentralised Voices started to draft some first hard rules on his voting decisions, following very clear own parameters
Surfacing Challenges:
Economic Incentives and Participation: Crafting economic incentives that encourage positive participation in governance without leading to centralization or other unintended consequences is complex.
Decentralization vs. Efficiency: Balancing the need for decentralization with the need for efficient decision-making is a nuanced challenge. Too much decentralization can lead to gridlock, while too little can undermine the principles of blockchain technology.
Sustainability of Governance Models: Ensuring that governance models are adaptable and sustainable over time, capable of evolving with the ecosystem's needs and external pressures, remains a key challenge.
Ethical Governance Practices: Establishing and maintaining ethical standards within governance models is challenging but essential. Mechanisms to deter malicious activities and promote beneficial proposals need to be refined and implemented effectively.
Community Engagement and Education: Apathy and low participation rates in governance processes are ongoing issues. Cultivating a more informed and engaged community requires comprehensive educational efforts that demystify governance and highlight its importance for the ecosystem's future.
Technical Governance Mechanisms: Developing and implementing innovative technical solutions for governance, such as different voting mechanisms and proposal evaluation frameworks, poses challenges, especially in ensuring they are secure, transparent, and reflective of community consensus.
Inclusive Governance Models: Creating governance structures that encourage broad participation and ensure equitable representation remains a significant challenge. Finding mechanisms that allow for diverse voices to be heard and have an impact is crucial for the long-term health and resilience of blockchain ecosystems.
Ecosystem Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing: There's a crucial need for platforms and initiatives that facilitate ongoing dialogue and knowledge exchange between different blockchain ecosystems. Bridging knowledge gaps and sharing insights on governance practices can accelerate innovation and problem-solving across communities.
Last updated