Exploring Shielded Voting: Enhancing Governance on Optimism

0xDonPepe - No Role
Aug. 24, 2024, 6:50 p.m.

Hey Optimism Collective! I wanted to start a conversation about a topic that’s been on my mind lately: shielded voting. :shield: For those unfamiliar with the concept, shielded voting involves encrypting votes during the voting period and decrypting them only after the vote closes. This approach can bring several interesting benefits to our governance processes: Mitigates Bandwagon Effects: By hiding votes until the end, shielded voting prevents people from being influenced by early voting trends. This could encourage more independent and thoughtful decision-making. Reduces Voter Apathy: When voters know their vote counts equally, regardless of when they cast it, they might feel more motivated to participate. Prevents Last-Minute Strategic Voting: With shielded voting, there’s no way to game the system by casting a vote at the last minute to sway the results. While shielded voting sounds promising, I’m curious to hear from you all: Could shielded voting improve our decision-making processes in Optimism? Are there potential downsides or challenges we should consider? Should shielded voting be applied to all proposals or only to specific ones, like elections? How could we implement this in a way that aligns with Optimism’s values and goals? Your thoughts, concerns, and ideas are all welcome. The more perspectives we have, the stronger our governance can become. Looking forward to hearing what you all think!

The post discusses the concept of shielded voting, which involves encrypting votes during the voting period and decrypting them only after it closes. It highlights the benefits of shielded voting, such as mitigating bandwagon effects, reducing voter apathy, and preventing last-minute strategic voting. The author seeks input on whether shielded voting could improve decision-making in Optimism, potential downsides or challenges, whether it should apply to all proposals or specific ones, and how to implement it in line with Optimism's values and goals.

Likes: 5 Replies: 0

Likers: noobman, Pumbi, Sator, eugenia, 404DAO

No replies yet.
Sator - No Role
Aug. 26, 2024, 2:42 p.m.

Some risks that I see: since votes are masked, malicious actors can congregate and vote in a certai… Some risks that I see: since votes are masked, malicious actors can congregate and vote in a certain directione (i.e. the recent Compound Gov Attack 1 ), and good actors are left without knowing any context on existing votes.

Likes: 3 Replies: 0

Likers: Oxytocin, 0xDonPepe, dmars300

No replies yet.
Sator - No Role
Aug. 26, 2024, 2:42 p.m.

Some risks that I see: since votes are masked, malicious actors can congregate and vote in a certai… Some risks that I see: since votes are masked, malicious actors can congregate and vote in a certain directione (i.e. the recent Compound Gov Attack), and good actors are left without knowing any context on existing votes.

Likes: 3 Replies: 0

Likers: Oxytocin, 0xDonPepe, dmars300

No replies yet.
Oxytocin - No Role
Aug. 26, 2024, 2:48 p.m.

Personally not a fan of shielded voting, all the points you bring up are valid, but it also means t… Personally not a fan of shielded voting, all the points you bring up are valid, but it also means that we might not even know if quorum has been reached on multichoice options where 1 + choice is valid (eg. electing 5 members with 20 nominees). Additionally, with the current on-chain voting system someone could possibly miscast their own vote and not know until the vote has passed with no chance of knowing it. It’s already happened to me in other shielded voting systems, and feels like a tangible downside for an upside that’s not guaranteed

Likes: 3 Replies: 0

Likers: Sator, 0xDonPepe, Pumbi

No replies yet.
Bunnic - No Role
Aug. 27, 2024, 11:40 p.m.

I see the value of not ‘following the trend’; However, I find the point as a whole a bit conflictin… I see the value of not ‘following the trend’; However, I find the point as a whole a bit conflicting. While it could prevent bias from popular opinions, it also eliminates the potential benefit of understanding the rationale behind others’ votes. Reading others’ reasoning before casting your vote can enrich your thought process by introducing new angles or considerations that you might not have initially considered (and even make you reconsider your initial stance).

Likes: 2 Replies: 0

Likers: 0xDonPepe, dmars300

No replies yet.
Leuts - No Role
Aug. 30, 2024, 3:56 a.m.

Gm! Shielded voting has been discussed and tested amongst a few larger DAOs in the industry in the … Gm! Shielded voting has been discussed and tested amongst a few larger DAOs in the industry in the past. Aave for example performed a shielded voting trial 2 and found it to be a negative experience and thus did not carry-on using it. Aavegotchi most recently 1 voted down a proposal to enact shielded voting as well. I presume you are only considering this being used on offchain signalling via Snapshot, as shielded voting at scale doesn’t exist onchain? Although it’s something that could be built.

Likes: 0 Replies: 0

No likes yet.

No replies yet.
Leuts - No Role
Aug. 30, 2024, 3:56 a.m.

Gm! Shielded voting has been discussed and tested amongst a few larger DAOs in the industry in the … Gm! Shielded voting has been discussed and tested amongst a few larger DAOs in the industry in the past. Aave for example performed a shielded voting trial and found it to be a negative experience and thus did not carry-on using it. Aavegotchi most recently voted down a proposal to enact shielded voting as well. I presume you are only considering this being used on offchain signalling via Snapshot, as shielded voting at scale doesn’t exist onchain? Although it’s something that could be built.

Likes: 0 Replies: 0

No likes yet.

No replies yet.
lavande - This user is a moderator
Sept. 2, 2024, 12:18 p.m.

Interesting conversation! There are different trade-offs and attack vectors that come with public v… Interesting conversation! There are different trade-offs and attack vectors that come with public versus private versus shielded voting. All of these considerations need to be evaluated in the specific context of the governance questions to which they are applied. Shielded voting may be appropriate for a specific type of governance question or scenario but not another (and the same applies to the other types of voting.) Creating a more robust framework to reason about the full set of tradeoffs for public versus private versus shielded voting is on our research roadmap for 2025 . All of these options should be considered in relation to how they provide a solution to specific problem statement(s) with a holistic understanding of the impact implementation would have on the governance system as a whole. cc @elizaoak

Likes: 5 Replies: 0

Likers: brichis, dmars300, Bunnic, Pumbi, Tane

No replies yet.