I wonder if blind voting would have been best. Like elections.
Have the voting page, one only ANT account, and the vote page records which project was voted for.
Then the speculation or manipulation is not so easy to do. Keep the max %age in place so no one cannot just dump a ton of ANT for voting up one or more projects.
They could have a trusted member of the community able to audit the record kept of the votes to ensure no chance of manipulation by anyone.
Maybe in future voting event they could implement this. Removes any ability to claim gambling any more then a senate election is.
Assuming there are further IF campaigns,keep it simple and money free in the first stage.
Anonymous poll of the active community to select the top n projects to proceed to staking ANT
LOL simple polls are too easy to manipulate. Ever see a poll get 100,000 votes from 5,000 separate IP addresses by one person and a simple script.
No that will not work
And to use forum members, the 8000 of them many who have not visited for a long time, duplicate accounts from different IP addresses that we cannot know they are the same.
Too open for claiming people voted 2 or 3 times, as most have posted at one time or other
And logistically much harder than just a web site to vote from that records the vote in a log and the transaction receipt (hash)
Yep, but there is just one address. The actual vote is kept separate in a log that is tallied later. Blind voting is what it says blind and the only ones who see are the ones running it and maybe a independent person
Everyone who has subscribed to the discord or the Autonomi forum 30 days before the announcement and had made at least two posts in the last 30 days is eligible to vote
And to add, many people have not subscribed to the forum or discord prior to the voting because they had no need. They may have been reading the forum for years, just not joined because they don’t want to post, just read and keep up.
So then you exclude those. Simple to have a site you vote from and a log is kept. The blockchain is recording the fact a vote occurred and the receipt number (log entry #) for voting. The log is not public and the number of votes & project could even be encrypted with the public key of the voter and shown in a public version of the log.
No one knows prior to end of voting the results and the voter can prove their vote afterwards by decrypting the receipt if any disputes.
We don’t know who they are yet - but I am relieved that the leader board does seem to have my favourites in there and all of them look good to me (though I didn’t spend time looking into them or watching the talks etc).
The top 3 runners-up missed out by a very small margin indeed.
A less contentious voting system may (or may not) have sorted that out.
I’d like to see some leeway given if there is any chance that projects in positions 13-15 can be allowed to proceed to stage 2 as well.
TBH I’d like to see #16 AntAI move forward as well as I feel it complements rather than competes with QueeniAI (hate that name).
And I’d also like to see the lower-placed projects resubmitted if/when we have a Round 2 of IF. Much good stuff in there but other stuff shone just a bit more brightly right now. Your time will come. I suspect CanMan will be a commercial success whatever its IF prospects are.
