The design of the delegation system hinders the UNI holders’ ability to express their will.
Currently, delegating your votes makes almost no sense. If you want the delegate to vote for you, you have to trust him/her blindly.
If you try to vote for or against the first proposal, you find a message:
“Only UNI votes that were self delegated or delegated to another address before block 11042288 are eligible for voting.”
So it works like a snapshot.
And if you disagree with the voting decision of your delegate, you can do nothing.
This system creates an opportunity for collusion among the delegates.
The safer way to make changes within the current system is to use autonomous proposals.
And if you want to vote - you have to vote yourself.
This safer way is not inclusive, though.
It gets expensive to vote for smaller UNI holders, and it’s not easy to create a proposal.
Having a sound delegate system does have a role. ‘Voting’ delegates could act as political parties. ‘Proposing’ delegates could help the community to put the most desired proposals up to vote.
Currently, delegators just deprive themselves of the opportunity to express disagreement with the delegate’s decisions.
I propose to implement two practices:
- the preparation period
- the ability to revoke the vote.
The preparation period is the time when you’re able to assess the proposal without being able to vote on it.
It is also an opportunity for auditors to do their job and warn the community if something is wrong with the code.
The ability to revoke the vote.
Ideally, the delegators should be able to revoke their vote until the voting is closed, even if the delegate has already cast it.
If there’s no way to make the casted vote revokable, there should at least be an opportunity to revoke the vote before it has been cast.
This way, even though with additional friction, the well-intentioned delegates would be able to allow the delegators who disagree with their decision to withdraw their voting power.
If we can’t realize the ability to revoke the vote for technical reasons, then we need to expand the preparation period.
Borderline is that we need to have mechanisms that allow voters to respond to the proposals and decisions of the delegates in regard to them.
- Not Sure
- Not sure