CIP-1694: An explainer
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 04. 2023
- CIP-1694 is a crucial step in Cardano’s journey into the Age of Voltaire, defining the future on-chain governance mechanisms of the blockchain, and helping to create a self-sustaining system built on community contribution and consensus. But what does this actually mean?
Join Matthias Benkort (Cardano Foundation) along with Addie Girouard, Jared Corduan, & Kevin Hammond (IOG) for an overview and discussion of CIP-1694. In this conversation, they discuss community-driven enhancements to the current governance scheme, the future roles and responsibilities of Delegate Representatives, the Constitutional Committee, and Stake Pool Operators, how to define and safeguard Cardano’s guiding principles, and the tooling and governance processes needed to get there.
Take a deeper dive into CIP-1694 and find out how it provides new tools to further facilitate decentralized governance that allows for even bigger changes in the future.
Useful Links:
CIP-1694 on GitHub: github.com/cardano-foundation...
Cardano Governance Forum pages forum.cardano.org/c/governanc...
Colorado Workshop video • CIP-1694 Community Wor...
Building with the community: on-chain governance and CIP-1694 video • Building with the comm... - Věda a technologie
I would like legal people to see what we are doing here. Well thought out, first governance system on blockchain.
Hell yeah! Good idea!
Cardano leading the future of blockchain innovation. Great summary.
Amazing work as always. I just hope we don't fall behind due to navel gazing and I hope we can make all of this more accessible.
So many blockchains simply do not care about this stuff
I am a bit skeptical about making the vote of no-confidence being implemented as a systematic No to all proposals. I can imagine situations where someone might want to express their lack of confidence in the CC while voting in favor of some specific proposals being made by the community. (Great overview btw. Very exciting to see this governance model getting refined and hopefully realized in a near future. Thank you so much for taking the time to prepare this video)
CIP-1694 is a significant step forward for Cardano's governance system. It would make Cardano's governance more democratic and inclusive and give the community a greater say in the future of the blockchain.
Go Cardano 🤴
❤❤❤
🎉
Thanks so much for this great summary!
Good overview and summary.
How do you change the constitution - impleented by CIP 1694?
When a CC member is voted out, can the decisions that person voted on be reversed?
There should be a cap on one ADA one vote to prevent imbalance (oligarchy).
Dreps should not be allowed to be on CC.
How do we know that what we vote on is tested and actually implemented as we wanted - audits?
Excellent point. You will find people in CC as well as in DReps and also being SPO giving them 3 powerful votes with different wallets!
GOOOOOO CARDANO!!!
greedy pig
On the balance looks good. I have no ADA, so no stake or vote, but it is a project that I currently endorse; and have recommended to others (who do have money, and not held hostage by state rail companies, that never pay up compensation).
5a Network or at least 5c Technical Group, should maybe include SPO? Since these are likely to being gained great technical expertise.
SPOs should be obliged to provide links to recent / upcoming decisions. So when peeps are checking their SP finances, they have an opportunity to see what Ada / Cardano is doing. Inviting those less active members, to get involved.
Update SPO with ´P´ requirement to Publish links, if required by Proposal, and endorsed by acceptance of proposal. Not every update is Major, so maybe limit to Top 5 or 10 proposals by vote (in the past), or for Upcoming by financial / hardfork impact / risk assessment.
The initial deposit to propose must be small. Take for example Nationwide Building Society. Owned by its users. You need £25000 GBP ($31,000 USD) just to run for office. So anyone other than the present board are ruled out. Further, you are not given a list of members, whereas the Board are. So guess who gets to write to all users, saying what a good job the board are doing (in the ajoining NW Company Annual Report). By all means filter, and escalate motions, on technical basis, on fiscal / financial basis, etc.
During Covid however, the new board has been exemplary in dealing with customers (for a change! OMG sympathy from a mortgage company).
Such alluring 😍😘❤️️
Ciao David mi fa sorridere sentire i tuoi discorsi di redenzione perché è ciò che io ho già passato in prima persona prima di te in Thailandia molti anni or sono....
Quello che il tuo inconscio ti sta dicendo e che devi evolverti per sentire e trovare la tua felicità e quella sensazione di pienezza non si raggiunge avendo tanti soldi e tante donne ma nella semplicità e nel amore....
Quindi stai andando nel verso giusto l'unico problema alla quale dovrai scontrarti e che oramai ti sei intossicato e dovrai passare per una fase di normalizzazione al contrario per essere sanoe ti assicuro che non sarà per niente facile.
Di sicuro avere un arem di per sé già non è già una cosa sana e normale.😅 comunque un passo alla volta.
Ti saluto buona giornata e buona fortuna.😊
Liquid Democracy is good, but you don´t want to have 1 LoveLace = 1 vote, and 1 ADA = 1m Lovelace. give Big Whales a Gazillion Votes. Take for example the qualms certain peeps had about less than tested updates. Having some 30+ years in testing software, they did not deserve IMHO some of the flack. Sure you want to advance ADA, but bringing it down inadvertently, would undermine that long-term growth. In a factory, you have test systems, you agree test results, only then do you update Production, In a factory, managers often want to BullDoze updates, even for insignificant things like "I am going on holiday, and I want it running before I go... " (Who gives a damn about your personal holiday?)
Scale votes may be possible?
But then you have an issue, with a Big Whale dividing their pot, and then faking a mass campaign...
The good news about ADA, currently, is the individual smaller holders own more ADA than retail whales. 8 - 10%, if they vote, would not make a huge difference. DRep system further discourages this.
I think that’s why there is a check and balance system between the three entities dreps, cc, and spo’s.