Quote from: diffract on September 15, 2022, 07:20:13 PM

has anyone actually tried to dabble in the governance of some PoS chains?
i find it a total shit show, and i'm slowly thinking it might be a buzzword to get you to buy in. here are some of my issues:

1. people who write proposals and people who vote are only the ones who know english. that means non-english speakers are excluded from deciding the future of a project.

google transate is free for eveyone.

Quote

2. some proposals are badly written and lack clarity or data. example: there was a proposal on Juno to hold lots of money from the treasury and fund developers with it who migrated from Luna after the Luna collapse. no mention of who these devs are, how many there are, what projects they'll be working on. yet everyone voted yes because it sounded good.

Vote against if proposer did not make enough effort to explain well what he meant

Quote

3. someone who doesn't want to be involved in governance and just liked the principles of the crypto project has to accept the fact that the project might be totally different in about 2 years after some proposal he/she doesn't agree with. This makes people micro-manage their money. Not everyone got the time or energy for that, especially if they're invested in more than one crypto and need to follow and read proposals for each crypto.

Its even worse in real life. You vote for gouvement and then they do whatever they want for 4 years.

Quote

4. voters need to pay a fee to be able to vote. this means early adopters decide the rules for late adopters who are just observing the space before they get in. that's not inclusive/universal.

Most often its small network fee. Like few cents.