Thoughts on allowing MKR/___ DeFi liquidity providers to vote?

Presumably as more and more MKR holders lock their MKR into DeFi farms like Balancer and UNI, it may be wise to allow these liquidity providers to vote. It could scale the voting weight based on the amount of MKR staked in the pool so we can continue to hit the numbers required to pass executive proposals. Personally, I have a majority of my coins locked in DeFi at a reasonable APY and I’m a little bummed I can’t participate in voting as much as I’d like.

Just wanted to start the discussion at the very least and get thoughts on how we can avoid having too few tokens to complete a vote.

2 Likes

I’m not sure if you are proposing the projects to vote (not sure how they would do it / if they would be interested), or if you want to lend your tokens and vote with them?

You might want to read this forum post: Introducing DssGovRewards

It would be something like locking your X MKR/___ tokens in a contract via vote.makerdao.com to get voting rights for X amount of MKR.

It’s about allowing LP tokens of MKR/*** pairs to have voting power equivalent to underlying amount of MKR.

On one hand, it seems that both MKR liquidity provision and higher voter turnout are in the interest of protocol, so it helps not to make it mutually exclusive. On the other hand, it’s an interesting technical problem, since underlying MKR amount is shifting with the market, making exact tally problematic. Perhaps some pessimised estimate of underlying MKR would work well enough?

1 Like

Exactly what I’m thinking and why it’s not an easy cut and dry answer as well. Luckily MKR already deals with plenty of oracles. Maybe looking up the value is already somewhat of a non-issue, but seeing as voting is important for the future of MKR I believe this is a valuable thought exercise.

I guess this is not a problem, since MKR locked somewhere else than in the voting contract cannot vote and therefor also not block a vote.

Don’t we need a certain # of MKR tokens to approve an Executive Vote? Or does that scale down if more MKR is locked in DeFi already?

A new exec just needs more MKR than the exec with the currently most votes. So if MKR gets moved out of the voting system, it also gets removed from the competing exec. No issue

1 Like

Then ultimately the only issue here is that holders of MKR aren’t able to vote when their tokens are locked in DeFi. Which I still think it’s worth thinking through a little, but good to hear we’ll always have enough votes.

1 Like

i cannot say that I have a really solid opinion on that topic right now, but gut feeling says that we should not do that. If you bought MKR tokens to participate in governance, you should do exactly that. If you bought MKR to earn money as a LP, that is fine - but no need to give extra power in terms of voting.

Imho we should rather consider incentivising long term locking to governance, it feels like a glitch that you can participate in governance and technically there is no downside to immediately afterwards sell all your tokens.

2 Likes

I would like to see MKR/ETH LP tokens get some voting representation.