On the Governance call June 24, 2024 @Griff brought up an interesting topic related to how we should handle voting power in our Snapshot.
He proposed we should make 2 changes:
- Consider only GIVpower, not unstaked GIV tokens to be worth voting power.
- Remove rGIV from being considered in our voting power calculations.
Let’s breakdown the first proposed change.
Only GIVpower
This change would mean that your GIV tokens will need to be stacked and/or locked in GIVpower in order to be used in our Snapshot as voting power. This would be similar to how the original GIVgarden was designed for voting. However using GIVpower also has an interesting new feature, the longer you lock up your GIV in GIVpower, the more voting power you have!
This change would give GIVernance preference to those who are invested in GIV and Giveth for the long-term and help build upon the utility of GIVpower to not only boost projects but also to govern the Giveth DAO!
Some cons we identified were 2 things:
- GIV tokens on mainnet will never have voting power, because GIVpower is not available on mainnet, and probably will never be.
- Potentially we will have a smaller pool of eligible voters on Snapshot proposals since holders are required to stake their tokens.
Despite these minor disadvantages I still believe this would be an interesting change to how we handle voting power.
Remove rGIV from Snapshot
This second proposal would be to remove any voting strategies we use to calculate someone’s rGIV holdings on Optimism. Effectively this would mean that rGIV has no voting power in Snapshot.
The rationale behind this change is that all rGIV holders have received GIV tokens in the form of vesting, and future opportunities to acquire GIV through Equity and hopefully praise rewards will give sufficient opportunity for community members to acquire voting power.
Coupled with only using GIVpower in Snapshot this would simplify our voting calculations, our governance processes, while boosting the utility of GIV and GIVpower.
However, removing this utility of rGIV means rGIV has no real utility and likely as a result we will halt any distribution process of rGIV for the foreseeable future.
Next Steps
I’d like to open this conversation up to the Giveth community. What are some pros and cons that were not discussed here? Do you agree or disagree with this proposal? Now is the time to have your voice heard! This post will remain up for advice process for minimum 5 days and will move to a Snapshot vote for final voting & ratification.