Voting rewards MINE

Fellow Pylon investors and friends,

As a long time MIR staker, and active voter with governance in MIR, I was wondering if Pylon team is discussing this topic of giving voting rewards to active Pylon voters.

With rewards for voting, this will get more investors active on the project, when more investors are active on a project, the higher the chance of keeping them as investor for long time, the better it is for project and price.

I was wondering if the dev team is thinking about this, so far as I can see, there is no rewards for voting on the governance polls till now. Perhaps a small part of the Pylon treasury can be used to reward active Pylon investors.

Anyone have thoughts on this, or some other potential idea?

Love Pylon, and keep on the good work!

2 Likes

Same! It gives a kind of premium to active governance.
Obviously, if we are planning to create the treasury, part of the mine buyback redistribution will not happen as the UST will be redirected only in a fraction (TBD) to MINE buyback, but could be good to redistribute x% to stakers as now and 100-x% to active stakers.

I am against having a reward for voting.

Why?

  • People are inclined to vote yes without understanding/reading what they are voting for. By incentivising people to vote, we will be encouraging more people who don’t understand/read the proposal to vote, thus creating a heavy yes vote bias.
4 Likes

My idea is:

  • people learn to click abstain … at least in mirror i am doing it.
  • For very relevant polls there is enough voting power to avoid a bad decision.
  • Since polls are appearing i see much more partecipation in the forum.
  • I don’t think that reducing options is a good choice in general. Rewarding activity makes user more conscious of their decisions and create the active, know what i am doing, user base.

I know the first effect is vote yes to all. But we will go through it. It is necessary to deal with that if the project aims to become a DAO as we will even reach a stage with some part of the governance triggered by smart contracts, ideally everything.

2 Likes

the reward that is your vote actually matters
Your vote actually implies that you can change the protocol

I see no reason for extra financial incentives just for voting

1 Like

don’t you like mirror model? Or astroport one? I would not write them off. I suggest to watch them and eventually change your opinion (or mine … not the token :smiley: … i mean my opinion).

I don’t know if people will behave the same way as you though.

For example. I believe within hours of the Nexus Protocol proposal for Liquid pools going to vote there was already around 5% yes votes. At that point, nobody was aware that Nexus Protocol was behind the vote. People were voting yes to impose something on a party outside of Pylon without their consent. This seems irresponsible and irrational.

Another example is within Mirror. My understanding is that they passed a vote to list an asset that was already listed.

Although these things happen without rewards, I think rewards will only increase this problem, not help to reduce it.

I’d also say no to voting rewards. As long as we have enough voting power there is a big chance, people using that right actually do care and are not after free money.

1 Like

Also a nay-sayer for voting rewards.
Taking active part in the shaping of the protocol must (and should) be rewarding enough in and on it’s own.

I approve of voting rewards, because currently voting costs UST.
At minimum, receiving back the equivalent of the UST value in MINE, would be good, to make voting a lossless activity.

If we can make voting free however, this is not necessary.

1 Like

Good point. Out of curiosity, do you think having a small fee is useful to help stop people voting who haven’t actually read what they’re voting on?

No. I think not making it profitable already prevents that, because time = money.
But making it cost money disincentivizes small holders from engaging.

What point is there even if you hold 10k MINE (±$1k USD right now) to vote, when each vote costs you $0.25, and the total number of MINE weight in voting goes into the millions.

If you want real democratised participation voting needs to be lossless.

3 Likes

I would support a zero cost voting system, where the rewards would be equal to your cost to place the vote. What discourages the small fish from voting is the cost to vote. They just assume and let the whales handle the voting.

Providing a no loss voting system would encourage active and loyal participants, and the small fish wallets.

Adding straight voting rewards for profit then you get people voting for the sake of voting for $$.

Just to add to this - I think it would be best if we could reward “Staked MINE” to the value of the cost of voting in UST, so that the voting person does not have to then spend UST to stake the rewarded MINE (which is going to be a very small amount).

Benefits to the user: less friction, staked right away generating rewards
Benefits to the protocol: staked MINE is less likely to be traded away

I kinda stopped voting, dont get me wrong, but I check progress, if a proposal i find interesting is getting enough votes I leave it, if not then i vote.

now if this system had a small extra, i personally would vote to all proposals.

why i started this post is, with MIR voters get a little extra vs non voting stakers, this helps getting people involved due to the extra rewards on top of your normal staking APY.