Yes. I did.
Will a bigger window size prevent that? No.
The idea of a tiered model is good, but creates new problems like
A tiered motion model doesn’t solve the underlying “problem”: a majority is a majority.
Whether the majority lets the motion pass in 2,000 blocks, 10,000 blocks or 50,000 blocks doesn’t matter.
I’d see that differently if we were talking about extremely short periods. Say a motion were to pass with 11 votes in a rolling window of 20 blocks.
I can clearly see the risk there. Pure luck could make it possible to let a motion pass although only a minority is in favor of it.
But we are talking about 1,001 out of 2,000 here.
And we are still talking about motions and not grants.
This is the first time I’m glad that Nu has no ternary voting system.
Unless a vote is configured in favor of a motion, it’s configured against it. Full stop.
For a motion to pass you need a majority of votes to be cast in favor of the motion.
This is an active process that can be done manually or assisted by registering to a feed.
If you do nothing, you will never help a vote pass. Never.
You don’t need to convince people to vote against anything.
If you want to see a motion pass, you need to convince them of the use of the motion.
This motion here speeds up the voting process.
I can hardly think of a scenario in which this would really be necessary as motions initiate actions which will need to be taken after the motion has passed.
In most cases this action will take longer than the motion needed to pass.
One question is: is it really necessary to save (in best case) 80% of the time the motion needs to pass (1,001 blocks instead of 5,001; not considering that it takes time until there are more than 50% of the blocks carrying votes for the motion)?
I don’t know. Do you? Can you for sure say that there will never be a day at which it a quick passing motion could be missed? How can you prove that?
Another question is: does it hurt to reduce the rolling window size?
This is something that can be mathematically or logically analyzed.
Maybe somebody with more practice in statistical topics wants to chime in to calculate at which minimum window size the variance is sufficiently small to have close to no effect compared to a 10,000 block large window size.
Because this is the main difference.
What seems to disturb many is that with a smaller window size the effects of a majority deciding can be seen sooner than with a bigger window size.
The refusal might be rather related to psychological topics than to security. Seeing a motion pass very quickly, a motion some don’t like, creates a feeling of helplessness.
If the window were bigger you could nourish that feeling a little longer…
…in the end the motion would pass anyway.
>50% is >50%
I don’t want to step onto anyone’s toes with this post. At least not harder than necessary to direct the focus to the gist of the matter 