Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 3, 2025. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@rororowyourboat
Copy link
Contributor

GM-04 added for conviction voting

@jackhack00
Copy link
Collaborator

@rororowyourboat

Abstract

(...) The mechanism incorporates a mathematically rigorous trigger function that determines proposal activation thresholds based on requested resources and available funds, creating a robust framework for decentralized resource allocation that naturally resists manipulation and encourages long-term community alignment.

Comment:
I don't think the trigger mech is required, even though most CV implementations do integrate it. I'm debating whether trigger functions themselves are valid enough as standalone components to discuss and research, where CV might "live" without the requirement for them (a proposal might just have a timelimit, at which conviction is checked against a general rule). This could leave "simple CV", with an extension to "trigger function based CV".

Motivation

Comments:

  • Most "traditional" vote systems would not allow vote switching - that is specifically a problem for those who do
  • Last minute vote allocation is primarily a problem for "token weighted" vote systems, where token holdings are quite centralized (as "whales can swing the outcome"
  • In general - for research - I prefer somewhat more sensitive language: "CV attempts to address these challenges (...)
  • For J. Emmet quote might be nice to link to reference
  • "The mechanism provides natural resistance against sybil attacks, collusion resistance, and mitigates many of the attack vectors present in time-boxed voting mechanisms, making it a valuable addition to the Governance Module Library." Again, would soften language a little (as I'm unsure if it provides "full resistance"). The sentence also says "resistance against collusion resistance".
  • "The concept of Conviction Voting is designed from mathematical first principles specifically for the allocation of funds. It was derived from the paper on ‘Social Sensor Fusion’ by Dr. Michael Zargham (https://github.com/BlockScience/conviction/blob/master/social-sensorfusion.pdf), where humans are the “social sensors” reacting to proposals in their communities, each broadcasting continuously evolving preferences that are “fused” into an aggregated social signal. The design and functionality of our Conviction Voting module draws on decades of research on multi agent coordination problems and behavioral economics, with all the mathematical rigor that BlockScience is well known for." Paragraphs / Sentences which are quotes from articles / other sources must be cited as such.

Trigger function:

(Also summoning @Jeff-Emmett in case wants to take a look)

@jackhack00
Copy link
Collaborator

also for author it might be easier to list yourself with your bsci mail

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants