CIP-1694 After Town Hall

With Kenric Nelson (Photrek) & Stephen Whitenstall (QADAO)

PreviousIs Cardano Ethical ? - Remuneration in Project Catalyst NextABC of Governance - Decentralisation

Last updated 2 years ago

Was this helpful?

CIP-1694 After Town Hall

With Kenric Nelson (Photrek) & Stephen Whitenstall (QADAO)

A short presentation and subsequent informal introductionary discussion of the "Voltaire" CIP-1694

Selected Comments

This is a selection of comments relevant to the topic under discussion. The views of individuals expressed here may change.

Nori Nishigaya : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire

MJ IE : Interesting, Nori!

Nori Nishigaya : I was wondering why the odd CIP number. Now I know 🙂

Curtis Myers : Its been a while, a nice reminder lol

Jeremy B : iterative cycles taken to the extreme

Curtis Myers : 100% Jeremy

Nori Nishigaya : I have a feeling a majority of SPOs upgrade without a lot of thought on what the changes imply for the network.

Zoé Selina : good point

Curtis Myers : Replying to "I have a feeling a m..."

I agree, I think it is the few that really scrutinize and test before migrating. Many others just wait till last minute to get those to buy off first.

Vanessa Cardui : yup good points Shrimple

Stephen Whitenstall : Also there is a Swarm Session on CIP-1694 this Saturday February 18th - https://twitter.com/CatalystSwarm/status/1625537321905930257?s=20

Stephen Whitenstall : Thanks to Felix for organising XD

Kriss Baird : hmmm not sure about that

Zoé Selina : about what

Curtis Myers : Can anyone explain any form of governance in a single sentence?

But I agree simpler is better

Kriss Baird : that explaining governance in a distributed system can be done in 1 sentence

Felix [SWARM] : explain any governance in one sentence doesnt rly works ? XD

Shrimple Solutions LTD : I've said my part

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Arbritrary complexity: The proposal introduces several new concepts and mechanisms, such as the Constitutional Committee, DReps, and new types of voting certificates, which makes the system unneccisarily complex for stakeholders - this will reduce overall participation in governance.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Poor intentive structure: The proposal mentions that DReps need to be compensated for their work, but it is not clear how this will be done or what the exact mechanisms will be. It fails to leverage the existing incentive structures of the Cardano blockchain.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Bootstrapping problem: The proposal relies on the presence of sufficient DReps to transition the system from its current state to decentralized governance. It is not clear how this will be achieved in practice.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Perverse incentives: The proposal as put forward by IOG is designed to entretch existing powers rather than truly grant control over the Cardano Blockchain to the community.

Stephen Whitenstall : Great feedback Shrimple may I quote you ?

Stephen Whitenstall : Putting together a video on Comments and Critque

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Doesn't it make a lot of sense to just make SPO's Dreps?

Stephen Whitenstall : QADAO documentation on both of the (Catalyst) DRep workshops - https://quality-assurance-dao.gitbook.io/community-governance-oversight/dreps-delegated-voting/delegated-voting-drep

Vanessa Cardui : exactly Shrimple. Effectively SPOs WILL be functioning as dReps, no?

Kriss Baird : i imagine thats how it will play out

Shrimple Solutions LTD : I hope that's the case, but we can shrimplify it to make it easier for SPO's

Shrimple Solutions LTD : As the feeback from SPO's was that it was complex and difficult

18:38:34 From Nori Nishigaya : That could give SPOs extra power, to both vote, as well as to veto changes by not upgrading.

Stephen Whitenstall : Thanks to Vanessa for (Catalyst) DRep workshops documentation

Curtis Myers : Replying to "That could give SPOs..."

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Excuse me I get nervous when talking to really smart people

fries ulvedal : Replying to "Doesn't it make a lo..."

I think staking and choosing a drep were deliberately separated, as the two actions have (maybe) different rationales. What if my chosen drep has too high fees? Or doesn't help dogs or whatever I like in a SPO.

Jose M De Gamboa : Replying to "That could give SPOs..."

Vanessa Cardui : so one thing I'm curious about is what differentiates the voting role of dReps AND SPOs ?

Stephen Whitenstall : You were great Shrimple :)

Daniel Ribar : dReps aren’t bound to be just an SPO

Shrimple Solutions LTD : No, but they should be because you can leverage the incentive mechanism of operating a stake pool

Eystein Magnus Hansen : I think most will agree dREP should be for anyone as a stakeholder in the ecosystem SPO or not.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : I disagree

Eystein Magnus Hansen : Good thats why we can have a democractic vote on Chain :)

fries ulvedal : Replying to "dReps aren’t bound t..."

But there are different rationales for staking and voting?

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Are there? Aren't the intrisically aligned?

Shrimple Solutions LTD : If you *really* think about it

Vanessa Cardui : @fries ulvedal good point re "what if my chosen dRep has too high fees"...

I'm interested in how far an SPO's voting record will become part of people's rationale for delegating to them...

(and ofc that info needs to be discoverable, not just transparent/available)

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Too Clamplicated, please shrimplify

Stephen Whitenstall : @Danny - That is right a Voltaire DRep is not tied to being an SPO - but you can be both ?

Zoé Selina : dcreps : d cardano reps

dcreps : d catalyst reps xD

fries ulvedal : Replying to "dReps aren’t bound t..."

@Shrimple Solutions LTD I don't think they are necessarily, what if a drep I like or agree with has high fees, or is not a single pool or whatever else I prefer in a SPO

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Then you don't agree with them

Daniel Ribar : @Stephen - yes.

Stephen Whitenstall : Yup

Joey Chessher : vRep Voter Rep

fries ulvedal : Replying to "dReps aren’t bound t..."

Maybe I agree with them on protocol updates, or one specific vote.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Make it too clamplicated for the seniors (and everyone) and it will a far less accessible system.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Resulting in less participation

fries ulvedal : Replying to "Make it too clamplic..."

Seniors are pretty smart lol

Eystein Magnus Hansen : I like the way the catalyst drep system will allow dREPS to disclose information such as expertises or interests so it is easier to get informatio on a dREP. We will need some form of way to understand the dREPs

Shrimple Solutions LTD : There is literally a problem statement on accessibility for seniors

Stephen Whitenstall : I think there is scope for steamlining the communication of CIP-1694. At least QADAO and the Swarm community will work on that.

Daniel Ribar : In F10 proof of life is expected for Catalyst dReps first iteration

Jeremy B : Replying to "That could give SPOs..."

If you parse the ratification requirements, you can get a sense that SPOs are being held in check...dReps really seem to be the main factor here (except in the case of hardforks)

Zoé Selina : i asked in workshop and pseudonym is ok but proof of life required, right ?

Shrimple Solutions LTD : Or we could reject CIP-1694 in favor of a non-tyrannical alternative

fries ulvedal : Replying to "Make it too clamplic..."

longer conversation, don't want to derail the chat 🙃

Stephen Whitenstall : You mean the plutocratic voting element Shrimple or the Constitutional model ?

Vanessa Cardui : Could we, tho, Shrimple? I feel quite unclear about the CIP process tbh, and how/whether "we" can reject or accept any CIP...

Stephen Whitenstall : Details of the Fund 8 CGO DRep Whitepaper - https://quality-assurance-dao.gitbook.io/community-governance-oversight/

Shrimple Solutions LTD : I'm not sure we have any power to vote down CIP-1694, but it's desiged to permanently entrech existing power structures and make it fucntionally impossible to change moving forwards.  The way this has been achieved in CIP-1694 is though abritrary complexity to disenfranchise stakeholders like yourself Vanessa.

Shrimple Solutions LTD : It's a very clever way of having absolute tyranical control over Cardano while appearing to be decentralized governance.

Vanessa Cardui : "I'm not sure we have any power to vote down CIP-1694" - I'm not sure CIPs are adopted or rejected by a vote at all, tbh.

Can anyone explain quickly how they are agreed? There are CIP editors, ofc, but they do not decide

fries ulvedal : Replying to "I'm not sure we have..."

I don't know how much choice there is either... Are there other options, or is it this framework or nothing? Also I would love some documentation of how this CIP arose, I know there were workshops. But who was there?

How do people get invites to this Colorado thing? Will it be documented. If this is going to last for decades we need to understand who made decisions and why in the formation of the framework.

Stephen Whitenstall : For background on Cardano Treasury - https://quality-assurance-dao.gitbook.io/community-governance-oversight/parameters/governance-parameters/cardano-treasury-with-kevin-hammond

Jeremy B : Replying to ""I'm not sure we hav..."

I think the idea is that CIPs are released into the wild after enough development and if they are adopted, they are adopted, kind of like standards...in the case of 1694, it requires a hardfork, so that is kind of like a vote.

Vanessa Cardui : totally agree, Fries. Documentation needed...

(QA-DAO is always here for that lol. Things may break... but "lack documentation"? Not on my watch lol

Eystein Magnus Hansen : constitutional comitee can have a vote of no confidence

Joey Chessher : LUV the "Not on My Watch" You are Awesome!

Shrimple Solutions LTD : All I have to say is this, CIP - 1694 is the IOG suggestion for how we start the governance process.   Let us heed the words of Voltaire:  “It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”  Fear of that danger will result in this tyrannical CIP passing.

Dan Verowski : Constitution: living doc, founded on meaning (1st layer) (what needs are met); values abstracted from that meaning (2nd layer), events and examples exemplifying positive and negative impact on values form the last layer.

Changing layer 3 is easy, changing layer 2 takes more deliberation, layer 1 cant be changed

Vanessa Cardui : that was Charles's final address at the end of Summit where he said constitutionalism is not a done deal

Zoé Selina : yup!! and now we are taking a constitutional Committee as a given?

Dan Verowski : Why is a comittee needed??!! This can be fully decentralized (what i proposed above) as an open system.

Vanessa Cardui : @Dan Constitutions are often not living documents tho. They often become fixed and static, and lead to a focus on the equivalent of statute law rather than case law

Shrimple Solutions LTD : I outright reject the tyranny of CIP - 1694

Stephen Whitenstall : The Committee administers parameter changes Dan

Dan Verowski : @Vanessa thanks for reminding where we came from. Should we fall back to that framework?

Jeremy B : @Dan I would put values/meaning as a constantly-on cycle of discovery from surfacing the needs of communities. COnstituion can be derived from that cycle, and be foundational in creating mandates to reduce risk to participants.

Zoé Selina : that's constitutions, dan

Vanessa Cardui : I was picturing a constitutional committee as a group that look at submitted governance actions to "check" they are constitutional before they go any further - no?

Dan Verowski : Founded on what values and meaning Stephen? Arbitration with a side of selected community input?

Stephen Whitenstall : At present founded on no values. It is an interesting bootstrapping problem

Jeremy B : Replying to "I was picturing a co..."

these checks are the key to the committee. They have the job to "Enusre the constitution is respected"...that is a rabbit warren of things to consider....

Stephen Whitenstall : What comes first 1) the machine or 2) what it processes ?

Dan Verowski : What’s the goal if this deliberation? I

Vanessa Cardui : I dunno about "founded on no values". At present, with what I would call a notional, distributed constitution in place (i.e. different people have different approaches) we are founded on 1,000 values, and we fragment and grow accordingly

Stephen Whitenstall : The CIP enables the technical processing of Governance Actions as transactions - but says nothing on a consitution. That is earmarked as a seperate conversation or CIP

Jeremy B : Replying to "What comes first 1) ..."

structure(determinism) - autonomy of actors -change structure -

But it is a cycle...where we jump into it defines the nature of the experiment?

Shrimple Solutions LTD : @ Stephen the CIP does enable the technical process of governance actions, but the arbritrary complexity prevents meaninful governance actions

Stephen Whitenstall : See here - https://github.com/JaredCorduan/CIPs/blob/voltaire-v1/CIP-1694/README.md#the-contents-of-the-constitution

Felix [SWARM] : I would think tools are most needed

Tevo saks : I would even say we have solved transparency, but we don't know yet how to understand the impact and relation to the mass of contributions done from different groups

Shrimple Solutions LTD : @ steven I've seen that, see CIP-1776

Stephen Whitenstall : @Shrimple - Possibly - I interpret it as a kind of technocratic neutrality. Although the question of whether a Governance Action can be separated from its content is an interesting issue.

Dan Verowski : Values are just a containers to align intent and make collaboration more efficient

Dan Verowski : If we have 1000 it becomes less efficient to align

Vanessa Cardui : Often a constitution simply polices things and makes change less likely. If a constitution is based on "our" values, should we not be at least looking at who is included in "us", and what barriers there might be to people becoming part of "us"? And be a little circumspect about setting something in stone that freezes "our" values in terms of who is here now?

We might not want to align as much as fragment and diversify and spread

Dan Verowski : @Vanessa on point. Currently people who don’t speak English have no say in what values should be uphold

Jeremy B : Replying to "@Shrimple - Possibly..."

The issue can be thought of as considering whether the technical limits of structure (ratification and implementation of gov actions) constrains or limits the values/first principles they are supposed to be in support of.

Vanessa Cardui : yup exactly

lots of groups are massively underrepped @Dan

Dan Verowski : @vanessa striving for balance is amicable

Jonathan Adjei : @Dan +1

Dan Verowski : After we find out what we need (value).

We need to find out what IOGs needs are otherwise we can’t move forward with a win-win.

Vanessa Cardui : @zoe yup interesting this determination to push people to choose this OR that.

Eystein almost no values are "universal"

Zoé Selina : Replying to "@zoe yup interesting..."

not even words are universal, let alone concepts and their specifications :)

Dan Verowski : Precisely Vanessa! But needs are (;

Dan Verowski : https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Manfred_Max-Neef's_Fundamental_human_needs

Vanessa Cardui : we are so scared of fragmentation. We should be celebrating it, not seeing it as a problem

Vanessa Cardui : it's powerful

Jeremy B : rather than universal values, maybe consider "coherent" values...they don't contradict each other, can be held in common and make sense together, etc.

Zoé Selina : Replying to "Precisely Vanessa! B..."

some might be, yeah - but they are also highly culturally determined/shaped

Stephen Whitenstall : Anyone who does not want their comments documented ?

Jeremy B : those differences that define fragmentation are where all the innovation and potential are stored...homogenizing them will be as bland as it sounds.

Eystein Magnus Hansen : Im fine With that Stephen but my viewpoints might change as I deep dive into the cip the follow 10 days

Stephen Whitenstall : Sure - I will add a disclaimer

@Eystein

Zoé Selina : appreciate the question ,stephen 🙂 i personally consent to documenting all i said

wrote

Stephen Whitenstall : Thanks Zoe

Dan Verowski : Layer 1&2 of the approach i proposed would make up less than a page for a constitution. Layer 3 content would be hyperlinked in a separate doc

Jeremy B : "I wouldn't give a fig for the simplicity this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity the other side of complexity." Oliver Wendell Holmes

PreviousIs Cardano Ethical ? - Remuneration in Project Catalyst NextABC of Governance - Decentralisation

Last updated 2 years ago

Was this helpful?

A short presentation and subsequent informal introductionary discussion of the "Voltaire" CIP-1694

Selected Comments

This is a selection of comments relevant to the topic under discussion. The views of individuals expressed here may change.

Nori Nishigaya : TIL: Voltaire was born on Nov. 21, 1694: