I am not a programmer this is just a consept.I thought it might be useful so i wrote it down.
Governance.
Voting power right now is equal to the TIME tokens someone holds. Rebases are expected to stop in the future and be replaced by revenue sharing.
We have seen on the recent vote that investors that bought huge amounts of wMEMO on the current price 14-30k got huge power Even if they didn’t care about the protocol they had the right timing and the money to get huge voting power. Governance needs changes. The protocol almost got ruined of this governance flaw. Don’t get me wrong I am not saying that voting power and the amounts someone invests don’t matter , I am suggesting that voting power should be a mix of the money someone invested, the price he invested in and the time he is holding the tokens in his wallet.
I’ve read some say that we need to give more voting power to individual votes. In my opinion that makes no sense. First of all it is difficult to know if someone owns multiple wallets. For example giving (x(bonus) + holding)/2 TIME voting power to a wallet would be abusable as someone could make 100 wallets and multiply his voting power ( 100x + holding/2) to manipulate the vote.
So how do we keep anonymous and still give everyone the voting power he deserves (in my humble opinion)?
-
The way to do that would be to give voting power to the wallet by a multiplier that is based on the time you have been holding and the price you bought.
-
The amount of days you hold an asset can be calculated by a program that reads the wMEMO/TIME transactions someone had.
For example if someone bought some wMEMO tokens and held them for x days he would get his voting power multiplied with x , (x +100) or some constant plus x .(I think the exact multiplier can be figured out later as now I am explaining the mechanism).The important part of this is that we are not dependant on the rebases and the APR so it doesn’t matter if someone bought when they “APY” dropped or went up.Also rebases will stop at some point. The factor should be the actual amount time someone is holding.
What happens if I hold 1 wMEMO for 1 month and a month later I buy 10 wMEMO? Would that be equal to holding 11 wMEMO for 2 months. No! That’s because someone could buy a wallet that has been holding for a long period a small amount of wMEMO to buy voting power and stack it by adding money to the wallet.
For example a wallet holds for x days 1 wMEMO.A whale buys with or transfers to the wallet 10k wMEMO .But does the whale get 10K times more power generated (assuming the multiplier is x)? No he doesn’t because he wasn’t holding enough time to have that much power. The way it would work is by multiplying 1x and 10k1 assuming he held 10k wmemo for a day.So the program needs to read the period of time a wallet holds y amount of wMEMO (x days * y tokens + k days *c tokens)
What happens if someone sells his tokens would he be able to sell the wallet? Does the wallet have any voting power? No that would be a disaster. So… we need to calculate the voting power by the amount of wMEMO a wallets currently holding.
For example if a wallet had 10k wMEMO for 100 days and then he sold them all or transfered them all he would remain with 0*100 = 0 voting power.
What if someone sells 10 out of the 20 tokens after holding for 10 days would the wallet lose power. Yes it would lose half of its power as he would have (20-10)*10 power.
What if the owner of the wallet transferred 10 out of 20 Wmemo to another wallet one of his wallets. Would he lose half the voting power he earned though holding ? The answer is unfortunately yes , as there is no way of knowing whose the new wallet.
- voting power market.
Example
A whale is holding 10k wMEMO divided in 10 wallets for 1000days.If he wants to sell 1k wMEMO it is more profitable for him to sell his voting power too to another whale than swapping his tokens for stable coins(so selling 1/10 wallets)? The answer is yes , he could sell theoretically the wallet’s code and seed phrase to another whale while he would in return get for example double the amount of cash in stable coins for the tokens and the voting power. This though would be more risky and difficult to pull of than just sending to a wallet and voting token or anything else.
None should be trusted none HAS to remain loyal. Long term holders are more likely to remain long term.
Voting power will always be buyable there is no working around it in my opinion we can only make it harder. If the DAO keeps its value there would be no reason for the long term holders to give up their voting power. So this system is also a way to ensure that long term holders who are the foundation and the premiere reason the DAO exists will be happy. If the holders don’t find value in the voting power they have , and the sell I , this is the DAO’s fault for not making it have value for them to keep (their wallet).
5.The last and the easiest to compliment is the price in which you bought in comparison with the voting power. Voting power has nothing to do with the trading abilities of an individual.Someone who invested 100 dollars on the all time high invested the same amount that someone did investing after a 90% price drop.
That might be controversial. Someone might argue that someone buying on the all time high takes less risk which makes not sense to me as it’s the riskiest time to invest.
Someone might argue that people are taking a big risk catching a falling knife when the price drops and they support the project. This is not the case as if we assume someone had no tokens and bought in for example below backing he is in fact buying to benefit (even short term) from the price action when the asset recovers. (The famous buy the dip). The DAO tries to ensure equality. This means everyone needs to have power not depending on their skills to read the market but depending on the capital they allocate in the first place to the project.
I suggest a second multiplier that works the same way with the previous one that gives you the voting power depending on the price you bought in comparison with the all time high.
For example if someone bought at 100.000 per wMEMO assuming the all time high at he time was 100.000 he would get a multiplier equal to 1 (100%). If someone bought at 20.000 per wMEMO he would get a multiplier equal to 0,2 (20%).
This mechanism is intended to prevent someone gaining voting power while buying lower and reward-protect someone holding though negative price action (as if the tokens were sold he would lose the extra voting power from this multiplier too).
I need to be clear on one thing. The multiplier is calculated at the all time high at the time someone bought so if someone bought early at 40k when the all time high was 50k he would have a multiplier of 0,8 but if someone bought at 40k when the all time high was 100k he would have a multiplier of 0,4.
What happens to someone who buys the dip after a crush like this. Is he not important? He surely is because he helps the project recover but he gets the power analogically to the usd he spent for the project. The timing should benefit his pocket not his voting power. That’s why he is investing on the first place to make money…If I invest 100 dollars I should have the same voting power I bought with someone invested 100 dollars at a better price(excluding the time factor). Of course this currency doesn’t have to be usd and it can be whetever currency prevails in the future…Right now unfortunately this is what is used to buy stuff in our everyday life.
This whole system tries to prevent people selling their whole bag while taking profits and gives value to holding in a different way than token rewards do.
EXAMPLE 1 (SPENDING THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY AT DIFFERENT PRICES)
BUYER 1 bought 1 wMEMO at a price of 100.000 while the all time high was 150.000 and has been holding for 100 days
BUYER 2 bought 5 wMEMO at a price of 20.000 while the all time high was 150.000 and has been holding for 20 days.
BUYER 1 has a mulitpler of 100 for the days and a multiplier of 0.67 for the price. 100*0,67 = 67
67*1=67 voting power
BUYER 2 has a multiplier of 20 for the days and 0,13 for the price. 20 * 0,13 = 2,6
2,6*5 = 13 voting power
ANALOGY 67/13 = 5,15
If we add a constant to the multiplier we would have less of an effect on the days someone is holding.The bigger the constant the less the effect on the days someone is holding to his voting power.
IF the multiplier of time was different let’s say x plus a constant of 1000 days the difference would be smaller.
BUYER 1 1000+100=1100 => 1100*0,67=737
737*1= 737 voting power
BUYER 2 1000+20=1020 => 1020*0,13= 132,6
132,6*5 = 663 voting power
ANALOGY 737/663 = 1,11
So as you can see the bigger the constant the less the difference. I don’t know what’s the sweet spot in this but I guess it can be figured out…It might have to change depending on how much the project has been existing.
EXAMPLE 2 (SPENDING THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY AT THE SAME PRICE IN DIFFERENT TIMEFRAMES WHILE HOLDING)
BUYER 1 bought 5 wMEMO at a price of 20.000 ,way back, when the all time high was 30.000 and has been holding for 300 days
BUYER 2 bought 1 wMEMO at a price of 100.000 while the all time high was 150.000 and has been holding for 2 days
BUYER 1 has a multiplier of 300 for the days and a multiplier of 0,67 for the price
300*0,67 = 201
201*5 =1005 voting power
BUYER 2 has a multiplier of 2 for the days and a multiplier of 0,67 for the price
2*0,67=1,34
1,34*1 = 1,34
BUYER 1 has a multiplier of 1000+300 for the days and a multiplier of 0,67 for the price
1300 * 0,67 = 871
871 * 5 = 4333 voting power
BUYER 2 has a multiplier of 1000+2 for the days and a multiplier of 0,67 for the price
1002 * 0,67 = 671
671 * 1 = 671 voting power
So you can see how not selling your bag while being an early investor benefits you in voting power.
I just thought the topic was interesting so I tried to address it.
Give me your thoughts… This is by no means done and it for sure has many issues.
You can point out the issues below and discuss them.