All - Activity - JonP - Algorand

A worked example of how governance stifles the growth of the network: Goracle

A rational economic actor will seek out the highest risk adjusted return. For instance if a country’s central bank offered 15% risk free interest on money then no one would invest in a stock market that offered 8% with risk, and over time all the companies would die due to lack of investment and capital.

GP7 Measures DRAFT - Liquidity Provision

One big question I have about this: how much of this liquidity is being borrowed and immediately put into governance? As yeah I feel there’s no point in offering liquidity if it’s just going to get immediately hoovered up and put in governance and then sit there for 3 months doing nothing else productive.

Governance Period 6 Draft Measures - Community Check In

Thanks for being open about the process and seeking feedback, that’s really cool! I think there is a risk of Algorand becoming a “Potemkin ecosystem” where the foundation tries to do everything. Take Gard as an example, all it does is provide a special way of taking governance funded by the foundation.

PPoS xGov Proposal

This is nice on the surface I think and it’s good of you to take the time to write it up. I think two issues with “1 coin 1 vote” are: Firstly I already think exchanges like Binance and Coinbase skew governance. Imo they don’t have the right to vote their coins but have to in order to get the rewards.

Feedback request on proposed Q4 2022 governance measures

Thank you for thinking carefully about this and taking on board all the community feedback, that’s really healthy and really appreciated. One thing regarding an official art gallery is that there could be an incentive system, like “if you send an NFT to the art gallery for free, and it meets our standards…

Feedback request on proposed Q4 2022 governance measures (duplicate)

I strongly disagree with the “illusion of choice” way that governance is being used here. Measure 3 is really “do you want to put your coat on inside or outside?” It’s not offering any meaningful choice to governors and it’s embarrassing for the foundation to pretend this proposal has been endorsed.

I propose adding an option C: Abstain from voting and get rewards, to each governance vote

Good point. That’s reasonable for retail but I don’t think Coinbase would be willing to put all their users' funds in Folks.

I propose adding an option C: Abstain from voting and get rewards, to each governance vote (duplicate)

I think that a lot of people are entering governance just for rewards and not because they want to vote on questions. I also think that big exchanges, like Coinbase and Binance, are holding a lot of ALGO and putting it in governance where they don’t really have the right to vote on behalf of their users.

Feedback requested on proposed Q3 2022 Governance Measures

I think you’re so right and this is one of the core points of the discussion for me. The foundation, IMO, should try to stay out of the market as much as it can, picking winners in DeFi and to pick which pools have a “substantial, open market” is bad.

Feedback requested on proposed Q3 2022 Governance Measures (duplicate)

Interesting points. "You can’t just tell people 'You have ALGO so that’s incentive enough.'" I don’t see why not? Or at least could we try a volunteer governance program and see what happens? We wouldn’t need 100% inclusion, we would just need a group of knowledgeable people who care about the future of Algorand.

Feedback requested on proposed Q3 2022 Governance Measures (another duplicate)

Rewards are not for voting. They are to incentivize behaviors that prove a sufficient engagement in the ecosystem, and skin in the game in the Algorand market, to be a governor. Staking is the most basic of these behaviors; it’s not good to have governors that bought 1M ALGO today to vote and will dump it tomorrow.

Feedback requested on proposed Q3 2022 Governance Measures (final duplicate)

I hope it’s ok to leave a response being a non-expert and just an average Algorand user. These are clear and well thought through proposals, which are an interesting idea for discussion. I am personally against the whole way governance is implemented at the moment, giving out 70m ALGO to ask 33k people for their opinions.