Presentation of what is plan for the new xGov’s version.
A. Becoming an xGov Member
Requirements: To participate in the xGov, operate an Algorand node involved in consensus processes. There is no minimum Algo stake requirement.
Voting Rights: Each block proposed by your node will accord you one xGov vote
Membership Rotation: A new cohort of xGov members will be selected periodically based on activity during a specific timeframe. Membership eligibility assessments will occur via snapshots taken every 1 million blocks, with 1 million blocks currently approximating one month.
B. KYC Requirement
Proposal submitters will now need to meet a KYC requirement. This change, established from pilot phase feedback, limits the number of active proposals to one per KYC-verified individual or entity at any time to ensure focused completion of proposals.
C. Voting Mechanism
Category
Requested Amount (ALGO)
Discussion time (at least)
Voting time (after discussion)
Small
10k ≤ A < 50k
1 week
1 week
Medium
50k ≤ A < 250k
2 weeks
2 weeks
Big
A ≥ 250k
3 weeks
3 weeks
Democratic Quorum
10%
15%
20%
Weighted Quorum
20%
30%
40%
Feel free to share your thoughts if you have any questions/comments.
Let me know if this is the wrong place to post this.
Is the grace period for xGov proposals being changed from 6 months? IMO 3 months is much more reasonable. Half a year is a long time to be late.
Hi Stephane, Thanks for the information. I have been participating to the Alpha phase of the xGov program but as I am not running a node, I believe that I cannot be a xGov anymore, moving forward with the period Algo governance No 12. Since it is the end of the road for me, could you let me know what will happen to my xGov current balance? Thanks for your help!
The xgov has been paused and is now in brainstorming by the AF how they should continue…
With the condition that I have to pay 100 algos per account with no effect on the voting (because my algos are locked in defi) I will probably not be the xgov in next period…
Not voting for a proposal isn’t the same as voting against? When a proposal doesn’t have the votes from de community is a gentle way to let the proponents understand that there’s still some work to be done.
Positive reinforcement is a more productive way to give feedback (rather then negative reinforcement, that often leads to a negative outcome).
Best.
Good afternoon. Probably this isn’t the current situation, but a few months back, the number of validators was very small (compared to today). So, me and a few other members opted to distribute our $ALGO for different nodes, creating a more resilient network (in case of some of the nodes weren’t working properly, network communication issues…). In the new xGOV model, the voting power is proportional to the number of blocks proposed; will the different nodes that an individual is managing be considered or just one of the nodes? Thank you.
For solo node runners or those staking in a pooled node tool like Valar, each address will be considered individually. For example, if you have two nodes with 3 online addresses each and want to vote using all their voting power, you’ll need to register them all on the xGov platform and vote once for each address.
Thanks for the clarification. It’s a great approach; until Algorand has a greater community of node runners (and this will happen), the stake concentration to a lower number of machines might not be in the best interest of the network.