Sort by popularity and number of vote:
Sort by number of votes:
Sort by popularity:
Check out the Impossible Futures!
4 Likes
in this view sorted by popularity (number of different wallets that participated in the voting) not by the vote count
there’s a ranking by votes too in one of the screenshots
that theres different ranking variants screenshotted was a bit confusing for me at first tbh xD
1 Like
How Program Rankings Work
Popularity
Popularity is determined by the number of unique wallet addresses that have voted for a program.
If a wallet votes multiple times, it still counts as one unique vote.
Global Definitions
-
Total Unique Voters (Global):
The total number of unique addresses that have voted across all programs. -
Program Popularity:
The number of unique addresses that voted for a specific program. -
Program Votes:
The total number of votes received, including duplicates from the same address.
Sorting Modes
By Popularity, Then by Votes
This is the default sorting mode.
Items = Items
.OrderByDescending(x => x.Count) // First by unique voters
.ThenByDescending(x => x.Votes) // Then by total votes
.ToObservableCollection();
Example: If 3 programs each have 21 unique voters, they are ranked by their total number of votes.
By Total Votes Only
Programs are sorted by total number of votes, regardless of how many unique wallets voted.
By Popularity Only
Programs are sorted only by unique voters, regardless of how many times each wallet voted.
Rule Violation Checks
Programs that violate these rules are flagged in red.
Rule 1: One Wallet Controls Over 50% of the Votes
public string GetMajorityVoter()
{
if (Logs == null || Logs.Count == 0)
return string.Empty;
int totalVotes = Logs.Sum(log => log.Votes);
if (totalVotes == 0)
return string.Empty;
var voterGroups = Logs
.GroupBy(log => log.Voter)
.Select(group => new
{
Voter = group.Key,
VoteCount = group.Sum(g => g.Votes)
});
var majority = voterGroups
.FirstOrDefault(v => v.VoteCount > totalVotes / 2);
return majority?.Voter;
}
If the function returns a wallet address, it means one address holds the majority of votes → the program is flagged.
Rule 2: Below Average Unique Voter Count
var averageVotes = Items.Sum(x => x.Count) / Items.Count();
Items.ForEach(i => i.IsBelowAverage = i.Count < averageVotes);
Programs with fewer unique voters than the average across all programs are marked as below average and visually highlighted.
5 Likes
3 Likes
so with colony one of the most popular projects dropped out last second - right? 
7 Likes
Why “Colony” Is Protected
We believe it’s unfair for programs with very low popularity — for example, only 5–7 votes from a few wallets — to make it into the Top 12,
while highly popular programs like Colony (with many unique voters) get pushed down.
That’s why our sorting method doesn’t rely on vote count alone.
We include popularity (unique voters) as a key ranking factor — not just total votes.
This ensures programs with real community support get the visibility they deserve, not just the ones with a few aggressive voters.
4 Likes
My alternative idea of this statistic would be to compute votes/popularity coefficient, and drop projects with top value. But let’s see what algo will the team come up with, and if it will be open as well.
4 Likes
private void UpdateVotes()
{
Votes = Logs.Sum(x => x.Votes);
Count = Logs?.Select(x => x.Voter).Distinct().Count() ?? 0;
if (Logs != null)
{
PopularityCoefficient = Count > 0 ? Math.Round(Votes / (double)Count, 2) : 0;
}
}
4 Likes
This is going to make things extremely complex. And to be fair, it’s what I was afraid of from the start of the IF without proper rules at the start.
Something to keep in mind in your popularity is that since the 1 ANT limit has been removed (and the adjustment of price per vote according to votes in general), is that whenever a project gets the support of a whale, it automatically discourages other people to vote for it.
We go and learn from this phase 1 voting and I really hope that going into the next phase it’s less of a competitive project vs project type of thing, but something that will let us support each other again.
Edit: And to add: I really would not want to be the person at Autonomi to make the judgement calls on this because one way or the other, people are going to feel left out, not heard, or neglected. One way or the other.
2 Likes
Some other question I have about the IF, perhaps anyone here can shine its light on it. The last 24 hours, cost of voting went up with a multiplier. If my assumptions are correct, that would mean that votes cast in the last 24 hours actually make the foundation money. As before the 24 hours, the cost of voting and the payout would even out. But with the multiplier, more ANTs are being spend then votes received. Can anyone confirm this? And if so, was this as intended from the team?
2 Likes
There have already been several proposals to allow more projects. That would have a very unifying effect.
Check out the Impossible Futures!
Yeah, I was actually looking at the same thing. If we’d have 16 projects qualify and go through, I think everyone can see that as fair and would indeed unify. Perhaps it also solves the earned ANT token from the multiplier by the foundation (if my assumption is correct). Time will tell, let’s see.
2 Likes
Popularity is measured by unique voting addresses?
If so, how do you prove that those unique addresses are not controlled by a single user?
7 Likes
It is unprovable, but we hope that the addresses controlled by 1 person are sufficiently diluted from the real ones. In the above statistics we have not filtered out the addresses that transferred ANT from 1 address to another and voted again, at least I saw one such, but it is too much work to check all, which explains why the MaidSafe team needs 4 days for the results…
In principle, we can also check when they were loaded with ETH for transactions fee, it is unlikely that addresses loaded months ago belong to the same person, because at that time we did not know about IF.
Check out the Impossible Futures!
4 Likes
Some people might also have used several adresses, not to cheat the system but because they had funds on various adresses.
2 Likes
Next time, above all - KISS.
Cos that last effort was trying to be way too clever for its own good.
first stage: anonymous poll of recently active (discuss) forum and Discord participants, one vote per handle (@tobbetj and @27poke get ONE vote - others with differing forum/Discord names treated similarly - I imply nothing here, simply that @tobbetj/@27poke was the easiest example there) just OMOV as far as we can ensure that without wrapping ourselves in knots.
No cost, no profit to be made on 1st round voting.
Its a popularity contest, not a casino.
After we select the top N most popular projects, then we again move to stage 2 where ANT can be staked and money talks.
3 Likes
If you insist 
3 Likes
No tongues though…
6 Likes
Are non-“whale” voters who voted for red row projects in the Top-12 going to lose ANT? I voted for a red row project because I think there is a significant need for it (and I didn’t know it would be considered a red row). I backed it when it wasn’t in the top 12 (but near it). I don’t even know if a whale caused it to be red, or if it was just not more “popular” than “average unique voters”.
In total, I voted for two projects and both finished in the Top 12 of the leaderboard. I think I contributed around 10% of each projects’ votes. I have no association with the developers of any of these projects. The project that I voted for using two wallets is a white row, and the project I voted for using a single wallet is a red row.
I’ve had my ANT stored in multiple wallets long before impossible futures was announced, and I spent all the ANT of these two wallets with voting. I didn’t realize wallet addresses were going to be treated like people, and if that were the rules, cheaters could probably launder votes through multiple addresses.
3 Likes