We have been seeing a lot of discussions lately regarding the CPS, it is clear certain aspects need to be improved. It is far from perfect however the kind of voting it is, makes it near impossible to be perfect however we need to try make it as perfect as possible.
So lets openly discuss some options and opinions on how we can improve the CPS, I will start with my opinions and thoughts.
This is not a dig at P-Reps but a few things I have noticed and am not a fan off in the CPS.
Voting with the consensus and not based on their own opinion, a lot of P-Reps seem to wait till the end of the voting round and simply vote based on what other P-Reps have voted, leaving zero reasoning.
Single entities running multiple nodes and participating in voting. I have no issue with people running multiple nodes however it becomes an issue when it comes to voting as one persons opinion is counting as multiple votes.
Not doing due diligence, this has been seen first hand with The Redemption proposal, which was in the ICON forum 2 months prior to voting. P-Reps do not get paid for CPS participation so I do understand why most do not vote with proper due diligence however I do not get paid and I have over 14 hours read time on the ICON forum and have read every single CPS application in detail, so not being paid is simply an excuse, a fair one but still an excuse.
Biased towards long established P-Reps/ projects over new projects. I do get that it is easier to trust these however, do we really want to become a gatekept ecosystem? I certainly do not and it is not exactly welcoming. (I do understand ICON funding pool is not as much at current prices)
In order to help prevent P-Reps voting based on the consensus, we should hide the visual voting bar and for it do be displayed once voting has been finalised. Yes, P-Reps could still check on chain data to see the votes but voting based on the consensus visual is a matter of laziness and taking the path of least resistance. I feel most would rather vote based on their opinion than go on-chain to try check what everyones else has voted.
Potentially putting a bond in place, so P-Reps that participate in the voting should submit a bond (nothing too crazy). If a single entity is seen running multiple nodes in the voting, they should loose the bond.
We can not completely blame P-Reps for not doing proper due diligence and taking the CPS seriously when it is not straight forward and they are not being paid, so here is my opinion:
We consolidate everything into the CPS by creating an open discussion page for pre-proposals. The pre-proposals to be submitted in the submission round to the forum alongside a 50icx fee, community are able to air their thoughts and opinions alongside a visual vote based on weight and % of voters. P-Reps would also need to sign a TX and leave some feedback/ request more info etc on the pre-proposal during the voting round.
By doing this, the community are able to air their thoughts and opinions on how/what the Community funds are being spent on. It also makes it easier for P-Reps to do due diligence while giving the proposal a fair chance to adjust and tweak the proposal for final submission.
- If more inflation goes towards the CPS i feel it should be split into two pools. 1. Core work/tools etc 2. Community which covers events like W3N, marketing, NFT projects, other community based proposals. This along with point 3 will hopefully help prevent more biased towards already established projects and hopefully result in a more welcoming platform for outsiders.
I am also not against paying P-Reps to vote, in return expect proper due diligence and to take the CPS more seriously, however if they are being paid there should be a bond in place, with the same terms as 2.
Also, I do not think this is as simple as “People should be adjusting their votes”, this is flawed for a few reasons
- We all know how many dead votes there are.
- Market conditions mean most voters are in hibernation.
- People voting, would rather vote on P-Reps which benefit them personally or financially which is more than fair.
We should not just hope voters wake up and start changing their votes, this will not happen, this is a much larger issue. So we need to discuss other solutions IMO.
Above are simply my thoughts, not saying they are perfect or the best way to solve issues, simply airing my 2 cents and hoping others do the same. Collectively, i am sure we can figure something out