KIP-8: Lower Default Voting Period to 3 Days

KIP: Lower Default Voting Period to 3 Days

kip: 
title: Lower Default Voting Period to 3 Days
author: lapras <lapras@keeperdao.com>
status: pre-draft
created: 2020-10-17

Preface

Proposal

Lower the default voting period from 7 days to 3 days.

Background

Governance is thriving as well as gaining interest, but it is also accruing a backlog of KIP drafts. The overall cadence of the governance process is slowed by a 7 day open no objection voting period, while it seems nearly all participation occurs within the first 48 to 72 hours. If our goal is to be frictionless with agreement, and slower-moving with more opaque consensus, we should lower the default period for a vote to 72 hours, while letting Sophons choose to use the customary week for more hotly contested subjects.


Specification

  1. Lower Snapshot voting periods to 72 hours by default, while allowing Sophons to choose a 7 day period where consensus is less clear.
7 Likes

Yes daddy, I don’t see a reason we should opt for 7-day consensus unless objections have been voiced

1 Like

Is there a way to have snapshot voting be a bit more dynamic? As in, it defaults to a 3 day span, but if there are objection votes, it extends a day per objection and caps at 7 days.

To be clear though, I support this initiative.

1 Like

I don’t like the idea of overcomplicating this. As @hazard says with consensus, “you’ll know it when you see it”.

Opening up run time adjustments makes it not only complex, it also opens up surface area for sybil attacks that may have very real consequences.

Let’s keep it simple. 7 days in every situation.
There are many new kips now, but this rate will show down in the future

I am fine with a uniform “every situation” timeframe. But I ask, why 7 days as opposed to 3 days?

The problem with a 7-day timeframe in my opinion, is that the data shows that >~80% of the votes are submitted in the first 3 days of a new KIP vote. This makes the extra 4 days redundant and only slows down progress on the implementation of new KIPs. I am a big fan of the idea that sophons can decide the voting period based on how “controversial” a KIP can be. This ensures that every KIP has the optimal time spent on consensus as opposed to having a default 7 days.

3 Likes

Your first point is my same line of thinking.

I am talking from personal experience: I travel a lot and am busy for work and have 5 kids. Three days is a timeframe I may quite easily miss. I imagine that I am not the only one with a similar situation (although maybe not 5 kids :slight_smile: :upside_down_face: )

1 Like

To this point though, and I feel for you, there are multiple phases of governance before voting. I don’t see the overall lifecycle of a KIP becoming less than a week, just the final vote, which defaults to a “No objection” vote. If there is something you object of, that KIP draft, sophon review, etc. will have taken several days.

I am just thinking about how >90% of voting we’ve seen has been in the first 2 days and many KIPs are time sensitive. Which is why I liked giving Sophons the choice in duration - controversial and/or non-time-sensitive ones can take 7; time-sensitive ones (like market purchases of assets) could be 3 days.

That is a fair point. ok

agreed, lets vote, 7 days is a bit of a pain.

1 Like

Just want to note that for KIP5 (CVX) we did kind of need the 7 days

There are several studies concluded that there’s such a thing as an urgency effect: We’re more motivated to complete a task on short notice than a longer one, even at our own expense. Longer deadlines could hinder us from getting work done because we think of them as more difficult.