Enhancing Community Engagement and Governance Participation via Voting Rewards

Proposal Summary

This proposal outlines the introduction of a reward mechanism for voters in the Polkadot governance system, aiming to increase voter participation and decentralize influence within the governance framework. Here’s how it would work:

Reward Pool: Allocate 1.75% of the current inflation rate to create a voting reward pool. This allocation ensures that voting incentives are sustainable without significantly impacting the staking rewards.

Voting Rewards
Proportionality: Rewards will be distributed proportionally to the amount of $DOT used for voting. Some will not vote which will make the voting rewards pay out higher for those that do vote relative to maintaining the current staking system. This is beneficial to ALL people that want to be active in governance and will vastly increase voting turnout

PolkadotDAO X Handle:
Purpose: To foster community awareness and engagement, a new official X (formerly Twitter) handle will be created and managed by the Polkadot DAO.
Functionality:
Information Sharing: Posting all proposal details, including summaries, full texts, and links to further discussion platforms like Polkassembly or Subsquare.
Notifications: Sending out reminders about upcoming votes, voting periods, and deadlines via X posts.
Engagement: Encouraging users to turn on notifications for real-time updates, thereby increasing engagement.

Mobile Application:
Development: An Android and iOS app will be developed to simplify the voting process, making it accessible and convenient for users to participate in governance from their mobile devices.
Features: The app would include features for easy proposal browsing, voting, and tracking of one’s voting history and rewards.

Rationale:

1. Increased Participation: By rewarding participation, we expect an increase in voter turnout, which is crucial for a decentralized governance model. This will lead to decisions that more broadly represent the community’s consensus.

2. Decentralization: Smaller token holders might feel more encouraged to participate, reducing the disproportionate influence of large holders (whales) on governance outcomes.

3. Community Building: The PolkadotDAO X handle and the mobile app serve as tools for community building, providing a centralized platform for information and interaction, which is less fragmented than current methods.

4. Sustainable Engagement: Unlike staking which requires constant participation to avoid penalties, voting incentives allow for sporadic but impactful participation, aligning with the lifestyles of many community members.

Implementation Steps:

Approval: This proposal must pass through standard Polkadot OpenGov procedures, gaining community approval through referenda.

Development & Integration:

• Development of the mobile app.
• Setting up the X handle, with initial posts and strategies for follower growth.
• Adjustment of the inflation rate to fund the reward pool.

Launch: Roll out the X handle and mobile app simultaneously with the implementation of the reward system.

Monitoring & Adjustments: Continuous evaluation of the system’s effectiveness in terms of voter turnout and community feedback, with adjustments made accordingly.

Conclusion:

This proposal aims to transform how governance in Polkadot functions, making it more inclusive and participatory. By rewarding voting, we not only enhance community engagement but also ensure that the governance reflects a broader spectrum of the community’s interests. This move towards increased participation and transparency could set a precedent for other DAOs in how to effectively manage decentralized decision-making.

Call to Action:
Please vote in favor of this proposal to foster a more engaged and decentralized Polkadot community. Remember, your participation in governance is what truly drives our ecosystem forward.

I can’t seem to find this proposal on Polkassembly or Subsquare, so I’m not sure how to vote for or against it–have you actually issued a proposal or is this just the discussion phase? (If the latter, Polkassembly’s Discussion track might be appropriate.)

Conceptually, paying ( let’s not use the euphemism of rewarding ) to an individual or entity to cast a vote, is my opinion an atrocious aberration in a (liberal) participative system which will introduce perverse decision mechanisms ( similar or worse to the ones in the system where to vote is obligatory, which in that context to cast a vote is a right) , bot farming, and other degenerations.

Maybe we can randomly reward someone.

To tackle bot farming, it’s common to implement a threshold. For instance, a minimum of 100 DOT.

Additionally, since we use the conviction vote, we might consider adjusting the reward ratio based on conviction levels. For example, starting at x3, with a higher lock duration increasing their chances…

But anyway, I’m also hesitant about whether we should introduce a reward mechanism.

What about the idea to base reward rates not on the amount of individual DOTs used in governance voting, but on collective total DOT used in governance.

Instead of the following
If Alice and Bob both have 100 DOT, and only Alice votes with her 100 DOT then only Alice receives rewards and Bob receives nothing

Consider
Alice and Bob both have 100 DOT. Between them 100 DOT should be used for voting to allow maximum reward. It is up to them to decide how to split the voting participation.

This sets an ideal governance participation rate but does not individually penalize or incentivize any one actor. Careful market study would need to be performed to identify an ideal voting rate.