-
42 pages and no single direct word about ambassadors - only “people that contributed to Astar Network or the protocol with ideas and innovations. Anyone who adds direct value to the Astar Network through product development.”
-
So the main generational power for govASTR will be locked ASTR in DappStaking ?
-
Can you explain govASTR aspect more?
-
And Ambassadorship not counted in any kind of advantage in this Gov concept?
-
Are the Ambassador program renovating ? Are you going to discuss with Ambassadors this changes or you are going decrease the value of this institute?
2 Likes
@AlexPromoTeam There’s a simple answer for this. Ambassadors are considered as dApps. So, the voting power and involvement are the same as other dApps (and based on the current staking performance, the ambassadors will have top voting power).
For govASTR, it is an uncapped, non-transferrable, limited lifespan way of expressing voting rights. You lock 1 ASTR; you get 1 govASTR after a certain period. If you (ASTR holder) stake in a private dApp, the project owner can decide how it is distributed. If you stake on a public dApp (common-good dApps), the ASTR holder gets govASTR per ASTR every period.
The only nuance is that govASTR will NOT accumulate over time as there will be a burning period for unused govASTR. The reason why ASTR holders must stake and wait a certain period is to prevent a whale from impulse voting. If a whale wants to vote, they must put their ASTR holdings to a common-good dApp (which gives them 100% of govASTR tokens per staked ASTR), and all staking rewards will go to the treasury.
It also prevents the average trader or ASTR holders from voting on a whim. By introducing the B2V, the network will have a clear distinction between people who are participating in the governance, and who are not.
This system also means that two aspects determine voting rights on Astar Network:
- Your contribution to the ecosystem by creating a dApp (assuming high staking amount equals high dApp value)
- Your contribution to the treasury (voting for common-good dApps means you want to give all staking rewards to the treasury in exchange for govASTR)
@Maarten I believe this also answers part of your questions.
I am working with @Jaski and his team for a full model and a formal proposal to make this happen, so for an in-depth technical discussion, please wait until that is finished. But for a high-level discussion about the direction and the vision, this thread is the place for now.
2 Likes
Great to hear this progress, thank you for your effort @hoonkim!
1 Like
Great job you’ve done, good update, and keep working hard.
1 Like
Entering Decentralized World: Astar Network
In the world of Web3, the governance model is emerging as important structure. Decentralization is the biggest factor in the success of projects.
Today, we will talk about how dApp staking model can affect to Astar Governance.
Step 1.0: The Decentralization Concept
Decentralization is a term defined by many as a user’s ability to have ownership, transparency, and a say in matters. As we delve deeper into this topic, we can witness that decentralization is actually related to the concept of freedom, defining an area where users can express themselves.
In my extensive research on Web3, it wouldn’t be wrong to observe that this concept of decentralization is often associated with blockchain projects. Although the two concepts are different, the way projects naturally blend these two has led many users to misinterpret them.
When we carefully consider the concepts of decentralization and Web3, it is easy to see that this situation allows users within ecosystems to have a say, express ideas, influence changes through brainstorming, and provide direct clarity to issues compared to real-world governments in governance.
The biggest difference between the Web2 and Web3 worlds is that in the Web3 space, all users have the right to actively participate in governance systems, whereas in the Web2 world, we can select representatives for the parliament in democratic countries every 4-5 years as an example.
Upon a deeper examination of the concept of decentralization, although it encompasses many concepts, the biggest difference could be considered as a government process where users can actively express their ideas in transparent environments.
Step 2.0 Governance System in Astar Network
When we look at blockchain projects, we observe that most projects have a different governance system from each other. Some projects manage this system with the voting process influenced by the tokens they own, while others manage it with DAOs and representations.
Today, we will discuss how the governance system actively works on Astar Network and try to adapt two different governance models to our ecosystem, examining their positive and negative aspects.
Step 2.1 How does governance work in Astar Network?
Currently, the governance system on Astar Network is managed semi-centrally. One of the main reasons for this is that Astar Network is a new ecosystem, which requires decisions to be made more quickly and development to evolve with natural processes.
The governance system of Astar is actively managed through the Astar Forum, as mentioned in our previous article. Here, users can express their opinions on important updates and write proposals. However, only Ambassadors of our ecosystem and users at Trust level 2 can participate in the voting process.
Current Governance Model’s Positive Aspects:
1- Fast governance.
2- Protection against attacks on governance.
3- Faster adaptation to new updates.
Current Governance Model’s Negative Aspects:
1- Lack of voting rights claim by users.
2- The inability to verify a decentralized and transparent environment.
3- Failure to foster Web3 awareness within the ecosystem.
While decentralization is an important factor in a blockchain project, it is observed that a semi-central system has the greatest advantage for the sustainability of a new project and adaptation to new updates.
In our next section, we will examine how the dApp staking model could function effectively and healthily if there were a completely decentralized governance model on the Astar Network.
Step 2.2 Influence of Projects on Governance
On the Astar Network, there is a dApp staking model that brings together projects and communities.
Users stake their ASTR in projects they support and trust, allowing these projects to earn rewards.
In this governance model, we will discuss how projects involved in dApp staking have a say in governance.
Firstly, this system involves projects within dApp staking and the Core team’s pools participating in the voting process.
1- Declaration of ideas process:
Any user can write their proposal and express their thoughts on the Astar Forum. Every user can write their ideas and create discussions.
2- Discussion of ideas:
After proposals and ideas are posted on the Astar Forum, users engage in a discussion about these thoughts. Everyone enters a discussion process where they can express both positive and negative ideas.
In this process, transforming the @AstarBulletin into a Hub environment where a governance discussion will take place is a significant factor. The creation of a setting where users and developers can discuss ideas together through live broadcasts and meetings will also pave the way for sociological development within the ecosystem, while encouraging users to be more active.
3- Voting process:
Projects involved in dApp staking participate in the voting process with the amount of ASTR they hold.
• For example, if Project A has 300 million ASTR in its pool, it uses 300 million ASTR in favor when it votes yes.
• For example, if Project B has 200 million ASTR in its pool, it uses 200 million ASTR in disfavor when it votes no.
During this period, the pools belonging to the Community and Core team are evaluated as follows:
Community Pool:
Let’s assume there are 200 million ASTR in the Community pool. The Astar Ambassadors engage in a voting process among themselves. Let’s assume there is a group of 10 ambassadors. The majority vote given by these ambassadors determines how the ASTR in this Community pool will be used in the voting process.
• If 6 ambassadors vote yes, 200 million ASTR are used to vote yes.
• If 6 ambassadors vote no, 200 million ASTR are used to vote no.
Core Pool:
Let’s assume there are 400 million ASTR in the Core team’s pool. Here, a similar voting process to the Ambassadors is conducted to defend decentralization and influence. The people in the Core team vote on the proposal through a secret and transparent voting process, and the majority in this voting process determines the use of 400 million ASTR.
Upon deeper examination, it is observed that this governance model has both positive and negative aspects. Some of these include:
Positive aspects of project participation in the Governance model:
1- Helping to address the shortcomings within the ecosystem as projects can closely monitor their own deficiencies.
2- Ensuring power separation and changing power ratios of projects due to the resetting of ASTR in the dApp staking pool every three months.
3- Strengthening the bond between the community and projects, and facilitating sociological development.
Negative aspects of project participation in the Governance model:
1- The possibility of projects participating in voting processes in line with their interests.
2- The potential to affect decentralization due to the majority held by the Core and Community pools.
3- Having a slow governance model.
Although it seems that the negative aspects of this model are significant, establishing an important sociological infrastructure with the project and community creates a strong positive effect. Additionally, setting up a decentralized environment for live broadcasts is a crucial condition for making our ecosystem’s user base more active.
The ideas here are solely for the purpose of sharing thoughts and creating a simulative brainstorm, and do not include my personal opinions. Let’s discuss together in the comments how we can have an effective governance model.
Best regards
Leo, MSc Psychologist
2 Likes