Hello all, hope you are enjoying your weekend. If you follow football, go Pats! (Please don’t crucify me.)
Just some weeks ago, Aragon completed their first vote, aside from the ceremonial vote for AGP-1. While this marks a major step forward for useable and live projects, it did raise what I consider to be an alarming concern that we are all aware of: Majority Rule (through ANT).
Noting the voting results, AGP-18 (chosen because of the personal stake I have in it) follows a Pareto Distribution as follows:
AGP-1 follows an even sharper distribution:
The implications of this are clear in my opinion. Despite the ethos of decentralization, going by voting power, the minority hold the majority of power. While I am grateful for these whales passing AGP-18, as the Aragon Network scales it may run into improper representation challenges. One could argue that if these challenges arise, participants can fork the network after passing a tipping point, but it will end up resulting in a pareto distribution of voting power eventually. Luke Duncan made an excellent post about quadratic voting as a mechanism to combat this very issue. I propose a complimentary solution: Dividing proposal into buckets that have different voting structures. Similar to how the House of Representatives in the US is based on population density in each state whereas the Senate has two representatives from each state.
More specifically, I propose a division of proposal into those that fall into a “House” structure, based on ANT holdings and those that fall into a “Senate” structure where each voter has equivalent voting power. While I am not certain on the basis for division, I posit some of the following methods for discussion: (1) Basing the division on what is at stake for the network, (2) Setting limits on what is being asked for, eg large amounts of money, (3) Allowing the AA to decide on a case-by-case basis as part of the AGP process.
I believe this will distribute power more evenly amongst voters as opposed to it being dictated by the amount of capital held without creating insurmountable friction between ANT holders.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this model.