[Signal Request] Change Monetary Policy Votes to Ranked Choice

We recently added a feature that allows for Ranked choice instant run off voting in polls. We have used this feature once at this point for the following poll https://vote.makerdao.com/polling-proposal/qmnun5btup2jmo5pnggsy2wviguzrpsqweb3aijn5muth3.

You can find some of the original discussions around ranked choice voting on the original forum post here.

We have not yet decided to move forward with Ranked Choice voting on any of the weekly polls and specially not the monetary policy polls. I personally would love to see this happen, so I want to put out a bit of a poll in order to start the conversation / gauge interest in using ranked choice voting for the weekly monetary policy votes.

Stability Fee Vote / Base Rate + Risk Premium Vote

  • Yes (Ranked Choice on all SF votes going forward)
  • No (Continue with first past the post voting for SF going forward)
  • Abstain

0 voters

DSR Spread Vote

  • Yes (Ranked Choice on all DSR spread votes going forward)
  • No (Continue with first past the post voting for DSR spread going forward)
  • Abstain

0 voters

FYI: First signal request. Hope I didn’t screw it up too bad. If anyone has some suggestions on how I might improve the format next time feel free to DM me.

8 Likes

I am in support of switching to ranked choice for all monetary policy votes, but as of May 25th there will no longer be Stability Fee votes. Do you mean Base Rate?

1 Like

Honestly I didn’t really know what the best terminology would be for the stability fee vote given the recent polls.

IMO the best solution would be to have ranked-choice votes for both the base rate and risk premium. Presumably later would presumably be voted on less frequently and may ultimately be derived by some quantitative model or the other, but I would think we are a ways away from that eventuality so ranked-choice voting will likely still make sense in the short term.

That said, I sort of went with a compromise and just said SF since that in essence captures the intent here, and doesn’t use yet to be implemented ideas / terminology. I could be convinced to reword the poll if we think it is necessary, but given that it has already seen some engagement I wouldn’t want that to invalidate any previously cast votes on the topic since the difference IMO is a bit pedantic.

Maybe Heart, DM me, or otherwise respond to this comment if you feel it is necessary. Depending on engagement there I could either add a second poll concerning base_rate / risk_premium or reword the original.

It’s up to you if you want to keep it this way. The numbers and general sentiment seem to indicate that most are on board for switching all monetary policy to ranked choice. Honestly, you could probably just put “Switch all Monetary Policy Votes to Ranked Choice” through a governance vote and it will likely pass.

2 Likes

I suspect in this case it’s fine to modify the poll title to ‘Stability Fee / Base Rate Vote’. I imagine everyone knew what you meant when you created the poll. If anyone strongly objects to base rate being ranked but they were okay with SF being ranked, they can change their vote.

3 Likes

Regarding signal request suggestions, I’m going to give them here so others can potentially learn from them. To be clear, I’m generally very happy you made the signal request and I don’t anticipate any major problems.

  • Don’t give polls a fixed end date, you can’t change it later, which is sometimes annoying if you want to extend the poll for reasons of participation, or to build more consensus.
  • Do include a statement at the end of the signal request as to what the next steps are. This is where you would put a suggested end date and/or leave room for extension.
  • Do Make polls multiple choice unless you are very sure it doesn’t require it. In this case it’s single choice, and in this case, that is completely fine.
  • Do summarise the pros and cons around making the change you are proposing in the initial post.

Edit: For reference I made a new post: Practical Guide to the Signaling Process

1 Like

@LongForWisdom / @rich.brown the poll here has expired and it seems that we have a clear winner. That is it seems that the community is supportive of ranked-choice for monetary polls going forward.

Curious if we feel it is necessary to be ratified via an on-chain poll or is the vote here sufficient.

There is no sybil resistance or a way to determine MKR ownership through the forums. It will have to go to a poll on Monday I think.

Yep, I agree with Rich. See the thread here for guidance: Practical Guide to the Signaling Process and refer to the on-chain poll template.

Sounds good. Will try to put something together for this either today or tomorrow.

1 Like

@rich.brown @LongForWisdom Submitted a PR let me know if any modifications are needed. https://github.com/makerdao/community/pull/560

3 Likes

The pr above was included in this weeks round of polls.

Go vote here: https://vote.makerdao.com/polling-proposal/qmqjqhf3dymgft68bb2qzqkf7ekbgzggguh7rkngvoengy

You can view the current status here.

3 Likes

Thanks for shepherding this one Andy, great PR as well.

FYI: you are now officially a system architect :wink:

3 Likes

Hey guys just wanted to try and remind everyone to go and vote on the ranked-choice poll.

https://vote.makerdao.com/polling-proposal/qmqjqhf3dymgft68bb2qzqkf7ekbgzggguh7rkngvoengy

Currently the while the Yes vote is winning the popular vote the NOs have a ~1100 MKR lead.

There’s about 1 day left to vote so there is still time. If you are supportive of the initiative I encourage you to cast your vote :ballot_box:. Lets see if we can make this happen.

4 Likes

Yes, is back in the lead now!

This vote has passed. @LongForWisdom I believe this thread can be closed at this point.

1 Like