Thanks for sharing your opinion @smaug. Your concerns are perhaps something that are worthy of their own topic (please try and be diplomatic about it). Here are some points that I’d like to raise your attention to:
- You seem satisfied with the existing reward structure. You’re aware that individuals are rewarded based on their stake, and not directly in terms of the time and level of due diligence they put into their vote? You may be interested in these related discussions:
- Here’s a Subnet Management proposal review that I just posted → Subnet Management - 4zbus (Application) - Developers - Internet Computer Developer Forum (dfinity.org). Do you expect the existing voting rewards mechanism to incentivise voters to put this much work into verifying technical proposals, even though they’d get the same voting rewards from an instant accept or reject (blind voting). Note that diffusion of responsibility may seem well and good to many voters, until it’s pushed too far and something snaps.
- You may have overlooked the fact that these grants are only temporary, and will be replaced in roughly 6 months with a new voting rewards system that seeks to overcome some of the issues with the current system (the grants are to help more reviewers gain a following and hit the ground running when the new rewards mechanism launches)
Let’s not overtake this topic with a back and forth. If you’d like to discuss further, maybe start a dedicated topic and link to it from here. 