Temperature Check - Revote functionality

Temperature Check
#1

Hello everybody,

Being part of the community, I am deeply interested in its prosperity and understand that every vote for or against some change can make a difference. That’s why it’s so important to make carefully weighted decisions.

As it happens, community members may fail to make the right choice from the very beginning. Sometimes they lack information or simply vote on something by mistake. Unfortunately, it can’t be changed, and that’s what my proposal is aimed to resolve.

I believe that each governance participant should be able to revote once during the voting period. This will allow them to reconsider their opinion on gaining more awareness on the issue, as well as make the process mistake-proof.

If each member is able to change their vote after, say, discussion or deeper research on the subject, more well-informed decisions will be made. It will positively impact project development.

#2

Yea not a fan personally. If you have been on Uniswap’s governance page you would see there are MANY steps in getting a vote on something, and even after weeks of arguing or posting temperature checks and pre-vote check they still do not get things passed. The bar is set high for a reason, in order to have governance votes and get the code, you would also need to have it audited before implementation. I do not see a real need for a re-vote. There is literally days or weeks before things get passed and are discussed.

#3

Don’t agree with you on that one
First of all, it’s a defense against misclicking
Second of all, not everyone participating in off-chain voting will be in on-chain
Also, this revote thing will help against payed-for votes and votes under pressure.
And there is still a chance that there will be vulnerability in voting period

#4

Yeah, but maybe let’s do revote on a special period, like after voting? so you can rethink your decision? it’ll be only once

#5

That will be too much on the protocol, UI and smart-contracts. Why should we do such difficulties if it’s not gonna be that much of improvement, but more problems for the community. It’s gonna make voting time bigger. I’m all in for the revoting, we just need to specify it.

#6

Hey, can’t it lead to some problems in the protocol? like, why any other governance protocol doesn’t have that revote thing? i think, if they could they would. maybe it’s not safe?

1 Like
#7

Again, there is still a chance that after all of the audits some weaknesses can be discovered during voting period, cause WhiteSwap voting period is 7 days. See here

#8

We have an example of revoting in real life. In Estonia they have unlimited number of revote during early election. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia
It hasn’t broke democracy, at least yet, for them. Re-voting in this case is used to reduce pressure, although this is not our case, since the addresses of the voters are not hidden, but apparently this does not bring any vulnerability to the process.
The DeFi governing contracts are not really developing in any way in improving usability right now, this also could be a good step in this direction.
Imagine if a user, to whom thousands of people have delegated their votes, “accidentally” makes a mistake when voting, this can become a critical mistake in some cases

#9

How do you accidentally make a mistake while voting? I have never even heard of such a thing in real life or in blockchain(unless perhaps someone older has dementia?)… it also requires you to click again for the gas fees after voting… I 100% disagree with this the entire point. Voting, in the first place is making up your mind. Not changing it whenever on a whim. Which is probably why literally no other governance program on ethereum has revoting. Or at least any defi that matters.

#10

A lot of the times, systems get hacked not because they have a flaw in code, but because of human factors. We can be sure that everything is secure before we get rid of the human mistake. If you have not heard about wrong vote execution, it doesn’t mean it never happened or won’t happen in the future. It’s generally logic mistake. Revote makes the governance more secure and doesn’t take anything.