This thread intends to serve as a follow up regarding the Periodic Followee Confirmation, originally brought up by @wpb , which can be found below
After engaging in extensive deliberation and dialogue on the matter, it became evident that there is a shared recognition of the necessity of periodic followee confirmation to safeguard the long-term decentralization of the network. By implementing periodic followee confirmation, we can establish a system that promotes consistent and reliable votin…
I followed it here, however I was told there was a design flaw, to which I attempted to provide an amendment. Eventually DFINITY provided the following response, claiming the proposal is now void, under the premise that the primary objective was reducing spam:
The original proposal about periodic followee confirmation was submitted and voted on with the main motivation to disencourage spam proposals. The proposal’s objective said “This discrepancy in participation rates is an incentive to submit spam proposals for the purpose of receiving higher voting rewards […] This proposal aims to remove this incentive […]” . Spam proposals in this context are proposals that are just sent to increase the rewards for some governance participants without having actionable content.
DFINITY voted yes on the proposal with the primary purpose of addressing spam concerns. Since the original proposal, the NNS achieved spam prevention by 1) an increase of the proposal fee and 2) adjusting the voting rewards as explained here . Therefore, DFINITY no longer believes that spam, as defined above, is a concern at this time, so other areas deserve more design and engineering resources.
The proposal does provide other side effects some people like as well, but with the main motivation (spam) for it gone, it seems prudent to discuss whether it is actually the best solution for the aspects that before were more of a side-effect.
Therefore, we suggest that if periodic followee confirmation should be realized for a reason other than spam prevention, then this should again be put to voting on the NNS.
This would help with
Understanding if the NNS voters agree with the new proposed goals.
Understanding if the NNS voters see a need for this feature in the context of these new goals.
Focussing the discussion on more concrete concerns and questions.
However, the background of the proposal depicts something different:
2 Likes
