Is this like smart contracts? Sorry, not too technical, I know there was CHOICE coin and others.
Hi Silvio… pretending to not be THE Silvio… sure you’re not technical
Yes this will be smart contract based, which might sound technical, but the user experience will be simple and untechnical.
Also, we wont be releasing a token. So no pumping or staking tokens required. Just get yourself an Algorand wallet to sign txns and you’re good.
Just on the basis of that statement. I vote NO. A voting tool that gets made with xgov funds needs to 100% be open source so the community can help fix/spot any vulnerabilities. Otherwise, the whole system is trust-me-bro.
A previous commenter had asked us to explain “why existing projects don’t meet our current needs”. I believe he was referring to your project, but I refrained from criticizing while you have a proposal in this xgov round. Likewise, should you be promoting your token in other threads?
Regarding your points… we do not see DAOs as our primary customer; we plan to expand the user base into new areas, and support more use cases. We will likely not monetize voting as a stand-alone tool, but rather within a bundle of community-centric apps. We’ve built most of those already.
We know that the Algorand ecosystem is small and the only way to build a sustainable business is to expand outwards and drive user adoption of the network. We are ready to take on that challenge!
Regarding cooperation, I don’t know much about your project, but the under developed UI and your inactive roadmap (one update since Q2 2022) is not encouraging.
We’re currently not planning to utilize your token within the proposed voting system as it would add friction for users.
Hi, let me explain… The vote coin standard is the set of json schemas how to write data to the blockchain. We have few open source applications where the standard is implemented. The DAOs are not the only use for the onchain voting using the vote coin standard. We are working now for example on the voting solution for owners of properties so that the owners of the specific building can do more decentralized governance of their appartments. The heading of the vote coin standard is directed the way that it must be efficient also to handle millions of votes and be able to use for government elections. The scalability, cost efficiency and auditability are the main pillars of the vote coin protocol. I really suggest you do more research into it.
The vote coin token is not used for voting of other onchain communities. First of all it is a DAO token for vote coin DAO which main role is to manage the standard. It solves also the marketing purpose as it is one of the top tokens on algorand. It also helps the algorand defi ecosystem as we incentivize to hold the vote coin token in low lp fee amm pools.
In the xgov proposal we have the video tutorial on how to use the onchain voting tools, and also we have proposal to create the github pull request management by the onchain voting.
@scholtz The voting system that we are proposing will be integrated within a more expansive platform for the Algorand ecosystem, and leverage other synergistic functionalities – this platform is already built and will be released very soon. We also have core privacy features within the system, for example Agreement Signing. We are not optimizing the system for government elections or DAOs, but rather aiming to maximize our total addressable market and adoption within a broad set of use cases. Consequently we will implement a very bespoke solution. However as noted in the upcoming post, core aspects of this will be open-sourced.
Regarding vote-coin, as far as I am aware, this is not an ARC, so its not technically a standard as you describe it. It has not been subjected to a robust and necessary review process.
Looking at you app landing page, I see practically no adoption or activity across the whole ecosystem. Within your own project’s proposal list, most of the proposals are related to defi schemes around your token. And checking the results I see zero votes cast in most proposals.
Please note that we have already stated that we do not intend to utilize your token or ‘standard’, and that it’s not ideal that you continue to post about this. I will add that by listing the features of your token:
- "marketing purpose
- one of the top tokens on Algorand
- incentivize to hold the vote coin token
- low lp fee AMM pools."
…this is promotion of your token. It’s inappropriate to post this information within this xgov discussion thread.
We have reassessed our position of open-sourcing.
First of all, due to the public nature of the Algorand Network, the compiled TEAL in every deployed smart-contract is transparent to scrutiny. Some projects claim to be open-source and simply link to their TEAL smart contract. But as TEAL is not readable by non-technical users, and difficult to read even for tech savvy people, this is not truly open-source.
But you make a genuine and important point, to foster trust, the voting solution should be open-source.
Our initial plan was to not open-source the code for business reasons. Additionally, the voting system will be embedded within a bigger system with additional functionality unconnected to this proposal. We plan to first release a public voting solution, followed by private voting later. We are still exploring the optimal architecture for privacy.
However, we anticipate primarily achieving privacy via encryption of the vote content and not from hiding the algorithm or system.
So we will change the proposal to make the voting smart contract open-source. Additionally, of course the crucial parts of these systems will be audited by third parties. And we can commit to documenting necessary steps for creating the privacy layer also, to make this accessible by the public as well.
Sure, its just because you mentioned it, it seems you still do not understand that actual voting standard does not have to do anything with the token. (Except that the DAO approval is required to change the voting standard)
I understand that you have developed something, did not released it yet, and you want to get a grant for it… If this is supposed to be retroactive grant, perhaps you should release it so that people can see how it works, and what are your capabilities.
No feedback to our voting standard means that you want to do it in different way. I have no problem with this and when you release it i will be happy to learn how you think your voting system or community management is different or better.
When you come to the conclusion that there is opportunity for cooperation, I will be happy to explain you how it works in more details or we can modify and evolve the standard together.
@scholtz You just deliberately misquoted me by omitting the words ‘or standard’ from the quote. Then you used this omission to justify additional comments. My actual words were: “Please note that we have already stated that we do not intend to utilize your token or standard”
You are being deceptive and misleading. It’s not appreciated and definitely not in the spirit of cooperation, or helping people understand our proposal.
Additionally, we are not requesting retroactive funding for something that is already built. We only mention the broader platform that we have built, to give context to this proposal. I believe that previous commenters understand this very clearly.
Your comments are now a major distraction from our core message. No reply is needed.
Can we get back to discussion the actual goals of this proposal
The proposal is not related to a new voting standard or a new token. It’s about creating a useful and highly user-friendly product that has mass appeal. We aim to solve key problems that many users, teams, and brands face related to decision making, agreement signing, and immutable record keeping.
Blockchain is the obvious solution to these issues, however most business people do not currently realize this.
By building an intuitive tool that solves these problems in a way that no web2 solution can, and then communicating the value proposition, we can help bring many new users to Algorand. Users that may not care about the network, the token, or other technical details, they will simply care that their life is made easier.
To add some specificity to the use cases that we aim to address…
We’ve spoken with founders that are in need of an easy way for their teams to record consensus on internal decisions. Other contractors want to immutably record their client conversations, change logs, signed pdfs, etc. These use cases and those of pure public voting are interconnected and overlapping.
Meanwhile, separate to this proposal, we have built a platform for community and creator commerce. This platform is integral to the voting and signing solution as it provides a hub for users and teams to organize their web3 and business activities.
We’ve updated the proposal text in GitHub to include more details. We’ve also changed the title to emphasize the Agreement Signing feature ahead of Voting. This is just a change in wording, and does not change the scope or deliverables of this proposal in any way, it just better reflects the project’s vision.
Although most comments focused on voting, we see agreement signing as a larger and more impactful use case compared to voting. Every P2P or enterprise collaboration and transaction requires agreed upon terms, but only some of these cases require voting.
We’ve also changed to: Open_source: Yes
And added more info on this within the “Additional information” section
Thanks to the people that asked questions in the Reddit AMA!
Check out the answers below to get more context around the goals of this proposal:
Here’s a sneak peak (small section) of the upcoming Everyone platform beta sign-up page!
Once funded and built, the proposed doc signing / voting tools will be integrated within this platform (the voting contract will also be open-sourced).
The proposed tools will work synergistically with other platform features to enable any user, brand, team, or community, to efficiently manage their business and community activities.
The Everyone beta sign-up page will go live in the coming days, providing much more context and visuals of what is being built. We believe that the quality of UX and sophistication of features is what is needed to attract new users to Algorand.