GIP-3: Should GnosisDAO lower the quorum threshold for required YES GNO?
- Lower threshold to 4% of circulating GNO supply
- Lower threshold to 5% of circulating GNO supply
- Lower threshold to 50k GNO
- Lower threshold to 75k GNO
- Make no changes
GIP: 3 title: Should GnosisDAO lower the quorum threshold for required YES GNO? author: @StefanGeorge status: Passed type: Meta created: 2020-12-08
Lower the quorum threshold for required YES GNO to increase the chance of acceptance of proposals.
The first GIP was not accepted as the required 10% of YES GNO was not reached (https://snapshot.page/#/gnosis/proposal/QmdjWuBnBnPUafW9jBNNsJJvaeQAVExGcFZ7zB38VtNuu4). Even if all GNO used for voting would have voted for YES, the required quorum would not have been reached. To make the acceptance of proposals more likely and to increase the speed of operations of the DAO a lower quorum threshold is needed.
Currently, the following has to be reached in phase 3 for a proposal to be accepted:
For proposals to be accepted in this final phase, there must be one outcome with a relative majority of GNO used for signaling on the GnosisDAO Snapshot poll accompanied by a quorum of a minimum of 10% of the circulating supply of GNO. If the relative majority of GNO used in signaling on the Snapshot poll indicates the result
Make no changes,the proposal will not be accepted and considered closed.
As Martin mentioned in this post (README: GnosisDAO Governance Process ) there are different ways to interpret this:
a) at least 10% of GNO is needed to vote and within those, there needs to be more yes than no votes.
b) the yes votes need to reach this quorum AND more yes than no votes.
From the text both interpretations are possible. b) is the better option because otherwise, a no vote could result in the decision being made. Imagine that yes is leading but overall the quorum has not been reached. Now - if you favor “no” it might be the better option to not vote at all.
The issue with b) is that the required quorum of 10% only counted in YES votes (ca. 150k GNO) is very high and difficult to reach. The first snapshot proposal had about 100k GNO used for voting in total.
Instead of the current 10%, the threshold could be lowered to 4% or 5%, as 4% is used in Compound and Uniswap’s governance models.
Using a percentage of circulating GNO to define the quorum has another issue:
As soon as we have more GNO in circulation, which is the goal, the quorum as a % of circulating supply based on our definition might be even harder to reach. GNO might be used in many ways, which would make it part of circulating supply but not eligible for voting (provided in liquidity pools etc.). This is why this proposal also includes two options to set a fixed amount of GNO to be required, which would possibly make it less likely to change this parameter again soon.
Update the official proposal guidelines.