[POLL] Should Polls & Executive Votes be weighted by the number of the tokens the voter holds, multiplied by the time they have locked their tokens and the number of times they have Voted in the last 12 months?

[ElProgreso]

Reading thru the Maker Rocket Chat, when it comes to a lack of participation by large MKR holders, I sense a current disappointment by the most active community members of the Maker Community.

It comes down to committed community members participating day in and day out, on the Governance and Risk analysis of the DAO—but, a lack of participation and un-involvement by certain MKR token holders(Whales)—who do not participate, “day in, day out” in the future of this community—for whatever reason that may be. Some community members believe there is nothing wrong with the lack of participation. Others will disagree.

With that in mind—should the most committed Maker Community Members—regardless of the number of MKR Tokens they own & use to participate in governance—day in, and day out—be given the ability to have Voting Power multiplied by the time the Voter has Locked their tokens X the number of times they have Voted in the last 12 months?

• Yes, I have participating day in, day out on the future of Maker, therefore I should have more Voting Weight

• No, I’ll stick to Warren Buffet’s motto of She/He who has more “Skin in the Game” should have the most say in the success of Maker

• It does not matter because Whales will always Rule the World

• Abstain

[ElProgreso]

If I ruled the world (imagine that)
I’d free my Maker Community, I love 'em love 'em baby
Blue DAI-monds and pearls
Could it be, if Whales participated—we’d both shine
If I ruled the world. ––Lauren Hill

[Planet_X]

You could be irritated with whales for not voting more, or you could be happy that your vote now counts roughly x300 more because so few vote.

[iammeeoh]

you could be happy that your vote now counts roughly x300 more because so few vote.

No, rhetoric apart, this in not really true.
There is an average of ~30 voters or so. And if you have, say, 50MKR, your vote doesn’t really count (much/at all).

Look at the evidence here: https://catflip.co/voting

We have a SourceCred system in place. It is imperfect and still under test. So I am not suggesting to do anything NOW nor URGENTLY.

But I would find it normal if the vote of top Community members was weighted up proportionally to their CRED.

REMARK: Regarding the W. Buffet’s

She/He who has more “skin in the game” should have the most say in the success of Maker.

You’d still need to have skin in the game. Your vote would only be multiplied, not created out of thin air. And arguably, getting a lot of CRED requires a lot of “skin in the game”. In fact, I argue, much more ‘skin’ than just a few clicks on Uniswap (if you are a whale).

[iammeeoh]

@iammeeoh

And arguably, getting a lot of CRED requires a lot of “skin in the game”. In fact, I argue, much more ‘skin’ than just a few clicks on Uniswap (if you are a whale).

Let me quote myself here, because I think there is a relevant discussion I started a few days ago (but didn’t receive any comments so far…): Question about "Buying votes" - Danger?

If we only value wealth (i.e., MKR holdings) and not trustworthiness (e.g., CRED), we are arguably more exposed to governance attacks: any crazy whale (or attacker) can buy (or borrow for just a few minutes, just before the vote’s end) a lot of MKR and render the vote of small players useless, effectively.