- Decrease incentives to submit spam governance proposals
- Protect the NNS from censorship, and preserve the current accessibility of submitting NNS governance proposals (i.e. does not increase the cost or difficulty of submitting an NNS proposal).
- Protect NNS voters from governance proposal spam
Note: In this post, all references to “proposal” refer to governance proposals
- Introduce an 2-week incubation period in which after a proposal is submitted, it is “incubating” and remains locked (not live) until it reaches a minimum support threshold. (Let’s say 2% of all voting power).
- Once the proposal meets the 2% minimum support threshold, it is transitioned to a live vote on the NNS, and treated the same as any NNS proposal that is currently submitted to the NNS.
- Any incubating proposal that does not reach the 2% minimum support threshold within 2 weeks of being submitted falls off the ballot and never reaches a live vote.
- Voting on any incubating proposal is voluntary, in that it applies an NNS voter’s voting power towards the reaching the minimum support threshold, but does not create or grant any governance rewards to the voter.
- Voters have no obligation whatsoever to vote on proposals while they are incubating, and are not penalized nor are they directly rewarded for if they abstain or vote on a proposal that is incubating.
- Voters are only rewarded for voting on live proposals (that have passed the minimum support threshold and are no longer incubating) in order to receive voting rewards.
- Currently, NNS Participants only view and vote on spam proposals because they are required to. Not voting results in lost governance rewards, which are then directly split amongst those who do vote on the spam proposal. Introducing an incubation period and minimum support threshold removes the requirement to view and vote on each and every proposal that hits the NNS.
- If this proposal is implemented, NNS Voters will no longer be required to vote on incubated proposals, and each proposal must reach the 2% minimum support threshold on its own merits and value proposition in order to be unlocked.
- This proposal does not increase the proposal creation or rejection cost, and therefore does not impose a greater financial burden on NNS Proposal Creators.
- Adding an 2 week incubation period allows governance proposals a significant amount of time to garner voluntary support and meet the minimum support threshold. If the proposal fails to meet this threshold within the incubation period and falls off the “ballot”, the NNS proposal creator can work to improve and advertise their proposal and resubmit it to the NNS.
- Adding an incubation period and a minimum support threshold allows governance proposals to be visible on the NNS for a longer period of time, ensuring that less active NNS voters have the opportunity to vote for incubated proposals they support.
- Adding a minimum support threshold encourages NNS proposal creators to advertise, receive feedback, and iterate upon their proposals before submitting in order to ensure they will pass the voluntary 2% support threshold and proceed to a live vote on the NNS.
- Add an additional filter/tab for viewing and voting on incubating proposals. Incubating proposals should be ignorable and visibly separated from live proposals in a way that makes the UX for voting on incubating proposals feel voluntary or optional.
- Add search functionality for incubating proposals that allows NNS voters to search for an incubating proposal by topic name or ID. This way, a voter does not have to scan through or view potentially hundreds of proposals in order to find the one they wish to support.
- For each incubating proposal the UI should also contain:
- A graphic demonstrating how far the incubating proposal is from being unlocked
- The time remaining until the incubating proposal will fall off the ballot
- This will not stop the current spammer from submitting NNS Proposals.
Rebuttal to (1): Looking at one of the recent spam proposals by @ysyms, Internet Computer Network Status, we can see that only 0.2% of the total voting power is voting to accept these NNS proposals. This means that after two weeks, this particular spam proposal would fall off the ballot and never make it out of incubation.
Keep in mind that even for some of the spam NNS proposals that garnered more than 2% of the vote, many of these votes were forced, in that NNS voters were required to make a selection in order to receive governance voting rewards. The introduction of an incubation period and minimum support threshold in which all votes are voluntary further reduces the chances that a spam proposal will pass.
- It may be possible that more than 2% of the overall NNS voting power would be interested in continuing spam proposals for financial benefit.
Rebuttal to (2): If more than 2% of the overall NNS voting power support a spam attack, increasing the proposal cost would have little to no affect. There are two potential solutions in this scenario.
- Further raise the minimum support threshold for governance proposals
- Fix the amount of governance rewards disbursed to be on a weekly basis, as mentioned in solution 3 of Community Discussion: Revise Governance Voting Rewards to Fix Proposal Spamming Rewards Exploit
- As an NNS Proposal submitter, I feel like this minimum support threshold places an additional financial burden on me to submit proposals to the NNS.
Rebuttal to (3): The proposed solution does not change proposal submission costs for NNS creators. If one is submitting a proposal that they do not feel will receive the minimum support threshold by a voluntary vote, then they should advertise their proposal and timeline on the forums and social media (Twitter, DSCVR, Distrikt) to garner the necessary support before submitting a proposal to the NNS. If a proposal cannot reach 2% voluntary support, it’s unlikely that proposal will achieve a majority of voting power and pass when it goes live.
I’m only putting this discussion lead section here so you know who to reach out to with any questions or concerns if you don’t feel comfortable posting publicly in the forum. This section of the post will not appear in the formally submitted proposal to the NNS.