Alternative Dev Fund Sentiment Polls

aquietinvestor · July 15, 2024, 11:12am

The results of the Zcash Brazil poll are now available. There were 16 participants in total. You can view the results here: Zcash Dev Fund Proposals (Zcash Brazil). I’ve also included the results below. Thank you to everyone who participated!

Question #1: In a Non-Direct Funding Model, funds are locked in a multi-signature wallet and allocated by trusted community participants through major and minor grants. Individual entities’ wallet addresses are removed from the protocol, and a percentage of block rewards go into the multi-sig wallet. This grants-based model requires those seeking funding to contribute to Zcash to submit proposals and compete for funding. State your support for a Dev Fund that uses a Non-Direct Funding Model.

Strongly Approve [4]
Approve [6]
Neutral [5]
Disapprove [1]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #2: A Direct Funding Model, similar to the current Dev Fund, allocates block rewards directly to specific entities or organizations, embedding their wallet addresses into the protocol for a specified period of time. State your support for a Dev Fund that uses a Direct Funding Model.

Strongly Approve [4]
Approve [5]
Neutral [6]
Disapprove [1]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #3: The Dev Fund should end and 100% of the block reward should go to miners.

Strongly Approve [0]
Approve [0]
Neutral [5]
Disapprove [5]
Strongly Disapprove [6]

Question #4: Manufacturing Consent (Draft noamchom67-manufacturing-consent: Manufacturing Consent; Re-Establishing a Dev Fund for ECC, ZF, ZCG, Qedit, FPF, and ZecHub): This Dev Fund would last for four years and consist of 15% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 5% for the Zcash Foundation, 4% for Bootstrap Project (parent of ECC) for the first year only, 4% for Zcash Community Grants, 2% for Qedit. Following the first year, when ECC will no longer receive their 4% allocation, those block subsidies will be distributed as 1% to ZCG, 1% to ZecHub, 1% to the Financial Privacy Foundation (FPF), and 1% to ZF.

Strongly Approve [2]
Approve [8]
Neutral [5]
Disapprove [1]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #5: Lockbox For Decentralized Grants Allocation (50% Perpetual Option) (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would allocate 50% of the block rewards to a lockbox in perpetuity designated for future decentralized grants funding.

Strongly Approve [2]
Approve [5]
Neutral [6]
Disapprove [3]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #6: Establishing a Hybrid Dev Fund for ZF, ZCG and a Dev Fund Reserve (Draft zf-community-dev-fund-2-proposal: Establishing a Hybrid Dev Fund for ZF, ZCG and a Dev Fund Reserve): This Dev Fund would last for two years and consist of 20% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 6.4% for ZF, 8% for ZCG, and 5.6% for a Dev Fund reserve that is stored in a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding.

Strongly Approve [1]
Approve [7]
Neutral [5]
Disapprove [3]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #7: Hybrid Deferred Dev Fund: Transitioning to a Non-Direct Funding Model (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for one year and consist of 20% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 12% to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding and 8% to Zcash Community Grants.

Strongly Approve [0]
Approve [8]
Neutral [5]
Disapprove [3]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #8: Lockbox For Decentralized Grants Allocation (20% Option) (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for two years and allocate 20% of the block rewards to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding.

Strongly Approve [0]
Approve [8]
Neutral [5]
Disapprove [3]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Question #9: Masters of the Universe? (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for four years and allocate a 25% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 17% to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding and 8% to Zcash Community Grants.

Strongly Approve [1]
Approve [5]
Neutral [9]
Disapprove [1]
Strongly Disapprove [0]

Dodger · July 15, 2024, 11:58am

Here’s a combined view of the ZecHub, Zcash Espanol, and Zcash Brazil poll results:

You can see a the individual poll results in the same format by clicking the s below.

ZecHub Dev Fund poll results

Zcash Espanol Dev Fund poll results

Zcash Brazil Dev Fund poll results

noamchom · July 15, 2024, 2:56pm

Are these 46 unique voters? (Or is there some overlap? i.e. some ZecHub voters were also Brazil or Espanol voters)

zerodartz · July 15, 2024, 3:00pm

there can be overlap. its just to see difference in different smaller communities imo.

Jovan · July 15, 2024, 5:20pm

This results means not good news for investors as I can Understand…

peacemonger · July 15, 2024, 6:04pm

The results of the ZAC poll are now available. There were 55 participants in total. You can view the results here.

dismad · July 15, 2024, 6:54pm

@Dodger @peacemonger can you both help me understand exactly how these percents are calculated, I dont see it.

16/46 != 57%

and

22/55 != 60%

Appreciate the insight.

aquietinvestor · July 15, 2024, 6:56pm

They’re cumulative percentages. So 11/55 = 20% and 33/55 = 60%…etc…

dismad · July 15, 2024, 7:07pm

And why is it presented this way? Appreciate the insight!

nuttycom · July 15, 2024, 7:09pm

The counting methodology is MCA-M, described here: Majority Choice Approval - electowiki

The objective is to find the option that has majority approval. So in the ZAC poll, the hybrid deferred fund is preferred over the pure lockbox 20% proposal because it has 2 more approvals; fewer people are neutral about it.

aquietinvestor · July 15, 2024, 7:10pm

The methodology was included in the description of the poll:

The outcome of the poll will be determined using the MCA-M (Modified Bucklin) voting method with a 5-point scale (Strongly Approve, Approve, Neutral, Disapprove, Strongly Disapprove), which works as follows: Respondents rate each proposal on the 5-point scale. First, only the “Strongly Approve” ratings are counted. If one or more proposals is rated “Strongly Approve” by more than 50% of respondents, the proposal with the highest number is the preferred proposal. If not, the number of “Approve” ratings is added to the “Strongly Approve” counts. If a proposal now is approved of by more than 50% of respondents, it is regarded as the preferred proposal. If there is still no clear consensus, “Neutral” ratings are added, then “Disapprove” if necessary, and finally “Strongly Disapprove.” The proposal with the highest combined total in each step is regarded as the preferred proposal if it reaches more than 50%. In the event where two or more polls garner majority support, but there is no clear community consensus, there will be a runoff poll.

dismad · July 15, 2024, 7:11pm

Seems overly complicated IMHO. Keep it simple?

peacemonger · July 15, 2024, 8:31pm

ZURE Dev Fund Survey results are now available. See highlights below.

nuttycom · July 15, 2024, 9:17pm

Unfortunately, voting systems aren’t simple, and bad voting systems (in particular, systems where vote-splitting is a problem, such as choose-only-one voting) obtain bad results. We considered using straight approval voting, but MCA-M (which is categorically an approval system) provides voters the ability to express greater nuance.

The objective was to have a polling method that would (a) allow voters to accurately reflect their preferences, (b) obtain a majoritarian result, and (c) fit within the constraints imposed by what is supported on Helios. MCA-M was the simplest system that satisfied all of those criteria, and having seen the results I think it served admirably for that purpose.