Absolute Majority Weight Proposal Draft

[JxBrian]

@Accumulating.icp

So, in essence, while yes, neurons are likely to select the same followee - that is okay. It’s about the fact that neurons are taking an active role in liquid democracy, rather than utilizing a set & forget mindset, to simply collect staking rewards (as maturity is a governance reward, not a staking reward).

I’m guessing this is to pass a Howey test?

I looked further into the topic and found the following quotes interesting.

@LightningLad91

It seems like what you’re suggesting is that instead of increasing the cost to submit a proposal, or decreasing the weighting. You want to artificially level the playing field by undoing everyone’s follower setting on all topics. Knowing full well that most VP will be left unconfigured.

@roy23

people that joined the “8 year gang” with the promise of “passive income” now have to spend 2 hours a day reading through proposals to make an “informed decision”. better don’t go on holidays because could be you come back and find out all rules have been changed retrospectively and your staking returns have vanished.

Why not just overcomplicate everything to the point only full-time IC governance experts get any rewards at all? I have been watching this whole changing of rules the last few months and really wonder how all of this is supposed to make people stake their ICP at all. If you constantly keep changing the reward mechanism the last thing you’ll earn is trust.

I think it is absurd that the NNS was configured to adopt the proposal as it makes it complicated for the average investor to keep reconfiguring who they follow in order to maximize rewards. It is totally a pointless repetitive chain of events that has the potential of driving away investors.