Web-App Voting App + ANT-Voting Tokens

Transferable voting tokens (the voting power from a snapshot) is a very bad idea. It reduces the cost of attacking the network see here and here amongst other issues

It’s worth noting this functionality is already possible by having your ANT in an agent app within a DAO. you can then mint DAO specific tokens for your various devices and control the agent that way.

ok then like this :slight_smile: So I could put my ANT in the ANT-Voting Agent app and mint ANT-Voting-Tokens and send those tokens to my metamask app which i can control via my phone to vote with those new tokens on AGPs?

so there has to be some kind of ID system to make sure I am the same holder ? Perhaps by creating a personal DAO which i create with my wallet where all my ANTs are in (motherDAO) and out of this DAO i create another ethereum address with ANT-Voting-Tokens which are controlled by the motherDAO but the privatekey is sperated an can be imported into for example metamask. In this way when the tokens get lost the ANT-tokens are not effected and the ANT-Voting-Tokens can’t be send to other people.

No, the agent can’t vote it’s self. It’s basically an account the DAO controls. More technically, it’s a vault-app that can interact with arbitrary contracts. The flow goes something like this

  1. Create a new mainnet DAO with a democracy template
  2. install the agent app
  3. Grant the execute action permissions to the voting app
  4. Mint tokens in the tokens app for your devices
  5. Deposit ANT tokens in your agent app.

You can now vote using any of your devices. The agent is only useable from the cli at the moment but a front end is on its way.

If you follow this tutorial you can learn to do this workflow on rinkeby.

But if i can mint tokens for my device I could also mint tokens for other devices which are not my devices. Why shouldn’t I sell those minted tokens for the voting app to other people?

It’s your DAO and there your ANT tokens, you can do what you like.

I don’t understand step 4. Mint tokens in the tokens app for your device.
Does this mean that i mint like ANT-Voting-Tokens I can use to vote on AGPs and send those Voting-Tokens to any address I like?

Why are transferable voting tokens a very bad idea? I can destroy them at any time so why would anybody buy those tokens if they are not 100% in control of them and if it’s illegal to sell those? It would be much easier when aragon implements delegated voting to give money to voters in order to get votes from them (eos problem)

No, all these apps are in Your DAO. the voting, token and agent app are all in the DAO you set up. the ANT you want to vote with you put in the agent app in the dao you set up.

If you have 1000ANT and put it in your agent app, you can only vote with 1000 ANT. the tokens you mint are for your own DAO that controls the agent. Your tokens are used to vote on the actions of your agent.

So if you have 5 devices and you mint 5 tokens you can vote with the 1000ANT using any of your devices (if support is 20%)

If you sell your DAO tokens your only selling rights to Your voting power in the agent.

I suggest following the tutorial. You will grock the workflow, furthermore, you will learn something about the CLI which is far more powerful than the web app

1 Like

thank you for this answer. I will check out the tutorial thank you for that too. Just for clarification:
I think I understand now. the agent is controlled by my personalDAO. The personalDAO is controlled by the personalDAO-Token which i can mint and sell to anybody. The personalDAO-Token controls everything in the DAO. I can set the permission for the agent so that the agent only controls the voting. Every time someone wants to do anything in my personalDAO like sending tokens, minting new tokens, creating a new vote and also using the agent for voting they need the approval of for example minimum 50% yes from 25% of all the personal-DAO-Tokens. If they have they can vote if not they don’t. This way it makes sure that nobody would ever sell their personalDAO-Tokens for less then what the ANTs and other tokens in the DAO are worth.

But the problem is that if I have only 1 personalDAO-Token and I mint 1 more Token and sent this token to my metamask wallet and i lose my wallet then i lose access to my DAO. This is a big problem. Thats why I propose to create a separate token which is only there for voting and can be destroyed at anytime. Sure I could send tokens to 5 different addresses but then I have to manage 5 different private keys. This is a mess! and then the more addresses hold my personalDAO token the more addresses have to approve every transaction. That doesn’t make voting simpler.

@Aaron @Mouyou voting delegation will solve the problem raised in the first post. You can delegate your vote from your cold wallet to your mobile wallet for example. Then you can vote with your mobile wallet even though your ANT are still stored offline. Hope this help!

1 Like

nice do you have details how this works?
Have you checked eos how they are doing it? There I have a owner key and a active key.

https://developers.eos.io/eosio-nodeos/docs/accounts-and-permissions* owner authority symbolizes ownership of an account. There are only a few transactions that require this authority, but most notably, are actions that make any kind of change to the owner authority. Generally, it is suggested that owner is kept in cold storage and not shared with anyone. owner can be used to recover another permission that may have been compromised. active authority is used for transferring funds, voting for producers and making other high-level account changes.
Every permission name has a “parent.” Parents possess the authority to change any of the permissions settings for any and all of their children.

https://www.publish0x.com/cryptodigest-and-updates/eos-owner-key-and-active-key-why-disparity-when-both-perform-xjjpjj One major striking difference between these two keys is that; the owner key represents the ownership of an account. It is the most important and powerful key. The owner key can overwrite itself and all other keys. Whereas, the active key is permission-granted-key which can perform all higher functions of an account except that it can be changed, destroy and overwrite. It is not a claim of ownership to an account.
In real-life assumptions, the owner key can be compared to a master key of an entire house which is able to open all rooms. In the other light, the active key can be regarded as room(s) specific key.

will the aragon delegation be similar how eos is doing it?

do you think aragon will have issues regarding vote buying?

See this thread: Voting v1 single delegation