Thank you to everyone who participated in the coinholder practice vote. With the test poll now complete, we’re preparing for coinholder polling on funding model ZIPs, which is scheduled to begin on Thursday, April 17, alongside the ZCAP and ZAC polls.
We’re reopening the registration period to allow more users to participate. For this vote, the registration window will run from Block 2,663,885 (September 30, 2024) through 5:00 PM Pacific / 8:00 PM Eastern / 12:00 AM UTC on Wednesday, April 16. If you already moved all your ZEC into the Orchard pool for the practice vote, there’s no need to do it again. If you haven’t registered yet, or have additional ZEC you’d like to include, now is the time to move those funds into Orchard.
We’re also looking for community members to help run voting servers for the upcoming poll. The Coin Voting 2.0 system relies on a dedicated blockchain secured by CometBFT and maintained by a group of validators, known as voting authorities. If there’s only one authority, there’s a risk that votes could be selectively included or excluded. However, with at least four independent validators, the system becomes resistant to manipulation, so long as two-thirds are honest. This ensures results are finalized through consensus, rather than by a single centralized operator.
If you’re interested in running a voting authority or have questions about what’s involved, please respond below or reach out to @dismad or me. We’ll be sharing more details about the upcoming governance poll soon.
There doesn’t appear to be an user-friendly way to participate in a transparent coinholder poll. In previous transparent polls (before a shielded coinholder voting mechanism existed) users would transfer ZEC from a shielded address or another transparent address into a transparent address using Zecwallet Lite. They would then include their vote in the memo field of a small transaction sent to the poll address. It was a rather straightforward process. However, now that shielded voting exists, that process is no longer relevant since you can now vote using your Orchard notes. Transparent-only wallets like Trust Wallet don’t support the memo field, so they can’t be used for this kind of poll.
Given those constraints, the best path forward seems to be the process outlined by @outgoing.doze below, which involves signing a transaction. In addition to what he outlines, it will also be necessary to check the signature. Also, we should consider how to implement this in a way that avoids unnecessary deanonymization of wallets.
Given there is little interest for it on the forum, and none of the wallet are broadcasting the vote to ZEC holders at large, I assume the number of transparent votes will be low.
However, in addition to protecting the anonymity of wallets, we need to protect the transparent vote from a Sybil attack. That is because the reviewing method is manual so it is important that the time of people reviewing the vote is respected.
To protect the anonymity of wallet holders, I suggest votes (signed messages) are sent to a shielded wallet where the viewing key is shared with the community so anyone can review the votes. The character limit being 512 if not mistaken, should be plenty. The format could be as simple as this:
$voteDetails
$address
$signature
The extra line in between will make it easier easier to review visually.
Example (ignore invalid signature):
1A; 2E Let’s make more Zcash Swag; 3Y
t1VydNnkjBzfL1iAMyUbwGKJAF7PgvuCfMY
ICrKSQjLORZP/aUTluyf2sZXXK+HuKtxdBLt2RRCn2j5CxgZlccNmiMC2K104JuhHnvHd5cXgSzdZtGh9vgWAYA=
To protect from a Sybil attack, I suggest a payment of 1 ZEC is sent along with the vote. Anything less than 1 ZEC would therefore be ignored.
The wallet would be generated and controlled by a trusted member of the community, same person that would share the viewing key with the community. Would you accept this role @aquietinvestor ?
Just like the shielded vote, we’ll need something like four independent reviewers.
The accumulated ZEC of the vote could be split between the selected reviewers as a stipend for their work; it’s probably not going to be much. Hopefully the vote gets Sybil attacked with 10,000 votes, making super worth it to be a reviewer.
I would like to apply myself but I have now created a conflict of interest, as I could earn ZEC out of this. I am therefore applying as a reserve reviewer. Hopefully we can find four people to review this vote, but if we’re short, then I’m here.
Ideally, there is a clearly defined voting protocol implemented in all of our wallets and people can therefore vote in their wallet of choice. That would definitely raise the curiosity of our userbase and increase their interest for the details of the project.
This could for example be reserved to shielded tokens. Voting with transparent tokens should be a bit of a hassle. Ultimately we want to discourage that, while still having the option because for many reasons it still makes sense to offer it.
At very bare minimum we should have had that before the vote that has followed the end of the founders rewards. I don’t blame the wallet developers here though, but the planning and execution of that first vote that I am sorry to have to call a sham.
Nice bonus, sure, but far from the most important imho.
I should be able to, but give me a couple of days to confirm. I’ll be traveling for the rest of April and want to double check the polling timeline to make sure I can be available when needed. Thanks!
Please note that the Dev Fund coinholder poll has not yet opened. Details will be shared later today. The poll will run from today through May 1 at 11:59 PM UTC.
In November 2025, the current Dev Fund established under ZIP 1015 will expire, and 100% of block rewards will be allocated to miners. This poll is intended to assess whether there is community consensus to create a new Dev Fund and corresponding funding model, and if so, which proposal is preferred.
This coinholder poll contains two questions:
The first asks which Dev Fund proposal you support, or whether you believe the Dev Fund should end and all block rewards should go to miners. Read more about the proposals here.
The second asks whether you support prioritizing a new Dev Fund and the implementation of a new funding model, even if doing so delays NU7.
Shielded ZEC
You can download the app to vote shielded ZEC here:
The poll will remain open until Thursday, May 1 at 11:59 PM UTC. Results will be shared after the poll closes.
Please note that there is a separate URL for each question.
First, the safest way to participate now that the registration period has ended is to move the ZEC out of the wallet you’re using to vote. That way, when you enter the seed phrase to vote, the wallet will be empty, eliminating any risk of losing funds.
Second, when you create a new election, you’ll see a switch for “Internal Wallet” that allows the app to scan for funds stored in internal accounts, like those used by Zashi, Edge, eZcash, and other wallets that follow ZIP 316. This is to address an issue where users of these wallets did not see their full balance available to vote. If you hold ZEC in both internal and external accounts, you’ll need to cast your vote twice: once with the switch turned on, and once with it turned off.
Please use this thread to let us know if you run into any issues or to provide feedback on the overall process and user experience.
Transparent ZEC
If you want to vote ZEC held in a transparent address, follow the instructions outlined by @outgoing.doze:
To be eligible to participate, you must have moved ZEC into the Orchard pool or refreshed your notes during the registration period that ran from Block 2,663,885, which occurred around September 30, 2024, to Block 2,892,057, which occurred on Wednesday, April 16 around 11:59 PM UTC.
Why is there a registration period?
The registration period exists because it would be too computationally intensive to scan every Orchard note ever created. “Proof of balance” relies on the halo2 circuit, which, like Orchard itself, requires the wallet to compute witness data. Allowing participation from all Orchard notes since inception would mean downloading and processing the entire chain, which involves several gigabytes of data and would be impractical for most users. Limiting it to a registration window keeps the process efficient and accessible.
Is there a minimum amount of ZEC needed to vote?
Yes, you’ll need at least 0.01 ZEC to vote.
Can you provide an overview of the election process?
The Coin Voting 2.0 application differs from the previous voting system that was integrated into YWallet. This is a standalone application that is not currently integrated into any wallet, meaning users will need to download it separately. Each election consists of four steps: creation, hosting, voting, and auditing. The creator defines the vote parameters, including the question, answers, and eligible block range. The host runs the election logistics, providing a trustless online service for voters to submit ballots. Voters participate using their Orchard funds, with the option to delegate votes. Finally, auditors verify the results once the election concludes by using a revealed seed phrase to validate the ballots and report the final counts.
Where can I download the Coin Voting 2.0 app?
Is there a demo or walkthrough that explains how the voting process works?
Yes, check out this video explainer from @dismad of ZecHub:
Are there any technical resources available for those who want to understand how the application works under the hood?
Here are a couple resources that explains how the mechanism works:
Why does the app show more votes than the amount of ZEC I hold?
In the Coin Voting 2.0 system, the number of votes you receive corresponds directly to the amount of ZEC you hold. The system is designed to assign votes in whole numbers by multiplying your ZEC balance by 1,000. So, if you have 10 ZEC, you receive 10,000 votes. This approach makes vote counting and display simpler, while still preserving the proportional relationship between holdings and voting power.
Is it possible for the voting authority to manipulate votes?
The Coin Voting 2.0 system is designed to be secure and tamper-resistant, but like any system, it depends on how it’s deployed. Votes are submitted to a dedicated voting blockchain that runs using the CometBFT consensus engine. This blockchain is maintained by a set of validators, which are called voting authorities.
If there’s only one validator, a malicious operator could suppress or selectively include votes. However, when deployed with at least four independent validators, the system becomes resistant to manipulation—as long as two-thirds of them are honest, no single party can control the outcome. This approach ensures that votes are collected and finalized through a consensus mechanism, rather than relying on a centralized server.
How many voting authorities are there for this poll?
I guess I’ve been under a rock for a while. As much as I love this option, I seriously do not know anything about the opportunity to delegate and what it entails in this vote.
I’ll add an FAQ to my post to address your questions about the app. Working on that now.
Regarding the transparent vote, you outlined the process above, which I will update my post to reference. Also, I will create a new Orchard address and share the view key with the community.
