• General

  • Institute Minimum (s)Ohm required to make proposals in Snapshot Governance

The Olympus DAO Snapshot is filled with low quality proposals that don't meet the guidelines for binding Olympus DAO proposals. These proposals make it hard for those legitimately engaging in governance to filter out valid proposals from the low quality proposals that would not be considered binding. We should set a minimum amount of (s)Ohm required to be able to make proposals.

Note: I'm using (s)Ohm to refer to staked and unstaked Ohm. But I'll only use Ohm from here on out. The minimum would also apply to the OHM-DAI SLP.

I suggest 10 Ohm as a starting point. Because Snapshot governance is primarily used for approving OIP's, and should be used for OIP's that have first been proposed on the forum in the valid format, it should not pose a significant challenge if many individuals who engage with DAO governance don't have enough Ohm to make a proposal themselves. For the valid proposals, individuals with enough Ohm can propose directly, or a core team member of Olympus DAO should be tagged within the forum post along with a request to elevate the forum post to a Snapshot vote. Something like…

@Jawesome Based on positive initial feedback, and continued discussion, I'm requesting that we move to a Snapshot vote on this OIP.

A minimum required Ohm holding to make Snapshot proposals will improve the quality of the snapshot governance experience for all Ohmies. It will make it easier to find proposals that actually need your vote, and help to remove proposals that are made by spammers or individuals not following the OIP process. In practice, I think we should eventually aim for a higher minimum holding like 100 Ohm, as I don't think a minimum like this would prevent any OIPs from making it onto Snapshot, but it should provide a strong defense against spam proposals.

Open for initial discussion, and in a few days I will add a poll to this post to gain some initial signal around a desired minimum Ohm amount.

WAGMI Ohmies - MetaHayek.eth

Agreed, minimums are needed to really keep things clean.

For those who will argue that it makes it hard for the little guy to create proposals - if you put together solid proposal you will not have issues finding members with 10 OHM who will back it.

If you have something really good and cant find anyone to back it - PM me, if it is any good - I will back it.

    Frankly I think 10 OHM is a very low minimum bar for this.

    It's not like it costs 10 OHM to create a forum post or try to convince people in Discord that you have a good idea. If nobody agrees with you, what's even the point of going to a Snapshot vote?

    Not a good idea IMO. There are other filters we could add to submitted proposals to screen for value rather than just say a user's opinion isn't valuable because they can't afford more ohm. Seems like a highly arbitrary method to gate proposal submission when proposal votes are what validate or invalidate whether or not an idea has value and will be implemented. Ideas should be debated, not silenced.

      pizzaking69 Thanks for the feedback.

      2 points. Firstly, we have the forum here to discuss proposals before they reach snapshot, snapshot doesn't actually allow debate, only voting. So in terms of the notion that we would be 'silencing debate', it might actually encourage people with these low effort proposals that make it to snapshot, to first post them in the forum. Secondly, as mentioned in the post, Snapshot is meant to be used for binding votes on formal OIP proposals. Anyone can make an OIP but it must follow the correct workflow ie. forum discussion then move to snapshot. As mentioned earlier by Alinor, a minimum would be unlikely to stop any valid proposals from going to snapshot. Any decent proposal need only find a single backer with the minimum amount of Ohm to submit it to snapshot - I would argue that if no one with the minimum required amount of Ohm is willing to back a proposal then that proposal is highly unlikely to pass in snapshot anyway.

      The overall goal here is to make it easier not harder for users to engage in governance. Spammy snapshot proposals make it harder for users to identify what proposals actually deserve their attention and require their votes.

      I appreciate your thoughts, just thought I'd add some rebuttal.

            metahayek

            I think we are on the same page here, I said i will help anyone who has a good idea and need ohm to turn it in to proposal

              8 days later

              Although I'm squarely in the YES vote category for this proposal. I'm very confused on the Snapshot voting mechanics and think maybe I'm missing some important detail. I have almost 200 sohm now and every time I try to vote on a Snapshot proposal it zero ohm governance power or something like that. Does anyone have some insight into this that may help me out? Thank you in advance.

                4 days later

                I am a very low holder and do not even have 10 OHM. I agree I should not have the right to propose anything as I do not yet understand anything about governance. I also agree that there are likely people with understanding of the project that have valuable insight but also have limited amounts of OHM. What about the people with plenty of money and no there proposals and fail to meet binding OlympusDAO proposal. I would recommend a stricter requirement of 2 individuals with appropriate minimum levels to back. I personally believe, good ideas with flourish irrespective of the difficulty it is to "push them" forward, however, bad ideas will get snuffed

                10 days later

                metahayek I think a more democratic and less capitalistic way of screening out bad OIPs would be to solicit co-sponsors. Simply convince five other members to endorse your idea. This then allows the idea to flow onto Snapshot. Kind of like going from committee to a floor vote in a legislature.

                    Numiasma How do you define a "member"? A single person could create five Discord accounts, or five wallets, or whatever.

                    The only way anyone's yet figured to get around that is requiring a number of tokens. That can't be faked.

                      Numiasma Anyone can publish to snapshot and there is no ability to require endorsements of anything similar.

                        Write a Reply...