Conviction Voting
Loading...1-Bottoms-up decision making
2-Addressing voter apathy
Tokenized ecosystem
Immediate decision making
DESIGNED BY DR. MICHAEL ZARGHAM,
POPULARIZED BY 1HIVE
Conviction Voting is a decision-making process where participants allocate their voting power to proposals over time, with the intensity of their support increasing the longer they back a proposal. This system allows voters to express the strength of their preferences and aims to balance minority and majority interests by emphasizing sustained commitment over fleeting majority opinions.
Conviction Voting is ideal for decentralized organizations, cooperatives, and communities where long-term commitment to decisions is valued. It is particularly useful in environments where balancing minority and majority interests is crucial and where participants need a nuanced way to express the strength of their preferences over time.
1Hive recently launched Gardens v2, a tool that allows any
DAO to implement Conviction
Voting with their own governance token.
Gardens is a coordination platform that fosters vibrant ecosystems of shared wealth by
providing healthy funding
mechanisms to communities
in web3.
1Hive uses conviction voting to
allocate community funds to
various projects and initiatives.
This system allows members
to continuously express
their support, with proposals
gaining more funding as they
accumulate sustained backing
from the community
Voters can continuously adjust
their support, allowing for
real-time preference shifts
and more responsive decision-making. This is a strong
hedge against last minute vote
swings.
Encourages active and
ongoing engagement from
participants, fostering a more
involved and committed
community
It prevents transient majorities from dominating, giving
minority opinions a chance to
gain support over time.
Conviction Voting measures
the strength of commitment
rather than just counting votes,
reflecting true preference
intensity.
It has practical applications,
like in 1Hive, where community
funds are allocated based
on sustained support for
proposals.
In conviction voting systems like the one used by 1Hive, any member of the community can typically propose initiatives to receive funding from the pool. These proposals are then subject to the voting process, where community members allocate their voting power to support proposals. The eligibility to propose and receive funding often depends on the specific rules and governance structure of the organization using conviction voting.
In conviction voting systems any member of the community who holds voting tokens or has voting rights is eligible to allocate their votes to proposals. The specific requirements for eligibility to vote, such as holding a minimum amount of tokens or having a certain level of participation, depend on the rules set by the organization implementing the conviction voting system.
In conviction voting systems, voting weight is typically calculated based on the accumulated “conviction” or voting weight that accrues by supporting
a proposal over time. Here are some of the setup elements affecting this calculation:
Proposal Types: conviction voting systems can be used simply to signal community sentiment, or linked to funding pools where proposals can request tokens in discrete amounts or through token streams.
Conviction Growth: a parameter determining the rate that a voter’s conviction grows or shrinks over time. Typically logarithmic and set as a half life.
Threshold: Funding proposals must surpass a conviction threshold to qualify for funding. This threshold often depends on the total funds available and the relative support for other proposals.
Spending Limit and Minimum Conviction: additional parameters often used to limit the amount of funds going to a single proposal, or require a quorum of community support for proposals to pass.
Voting Weight System: separate from the time weighted element of conviction, various strategies can also be used to determine total weight, such as 1 token = 1 vote, quadratic voting, or equal voting power for all.The exact formulas and mechanisms can vary, but the core idea is that sustained and strong support increases the likelihood and amount of funding a proposal receives.
By nature, conviction voting systems are continuous,
allowing proposals to be created and considered
over time rather than in epochs or seasonal funding
events.
In this way, conviction voting sacrifices the ability
to make decisions quickly and resolutely, favoring
a more truthful representation of community sentiment uncovered over time. Pool distributions can
then happen either continuously or approved oneby-one as thresholds are met.
In Allo, the funds can be distributed to the accepted
projects in one transaction, or via stream protocols
like Superfluid or drips.
A DAO sets up a treasury of
tokens allocated to Conviction
Voting. Usually this is a DAO that
wants to incentivize and grow
its own ecosystem.
Community members submit proposals for funding.
Members allocate their voting power to proposals they support, with conviction growing over time as votes remain allocated.
Once proposals reach the required conviction threshold, they receive funding from the pool, with funds distributed proportionally based on the accumulated conviction.
Typically, a mathematical formula, such as a weighted average or a decaying logarithmic function, is used to calculate the conviction, ensuring that sustained support leads to higher conviction levels.
Conviction Voting emphasizes long-term commitment and sustained support for proposals rather than short-term, transient voting.
If you want to learn more about how you could use Conviction Voting on Allo Protocol to fund what matters for your community, reach out here.
