@PFC : great thoughts here which have made me dive deeper:
Should LP and b-asset holders have voting power?
I want to break this down between:
- B-asset ANC gov voting
- B-asset specific underlying collateral gov voting
I don’t believe that simply having b-assets should allow platform users to vote in ANC gov. It undermines the reason for holding ANC. Moreover, the ANC rewards paid to these platform participants give them voting power if they stake and don’t sell those rewards. Therefore, I believe it would put further selling pressure on ANC tokens to offer this.
The counterargument is that these users have skin in the game and are affected by the governance of the protocol. Therefore, I still think they have to buy ANC if they want to have a vote.
2. Non-ANC voting for B-asset:
So now let’s dive into the border picture seen through this lens: b-assets such as b-LUNA, b-ETH, b-ATOM etc. have voting rights that would can be exercised. I see two (possible third hybrid) options from your ideas here:
- Allowing ANC protocol to vote on b-asset gov proposals
- Coming up with some form of delegated voting whereby ANC re-delegates voting power back to the b-asset holders
Point 1. Allowing ANC protocol to vote on b-asset gov proposals
Extrapolating on @PFC idea, sub-proposals for b-asset proposals could be added by ANC stakers. For example, ANC stakers could have created a sub-proposal for prop ID 132: Luna incentives on OSMO, whereby they direct the overall ANC protocol vote for all the staked LUNA assets in ANC towards as yes, no, abstain, or veto. Simply put, this allows ANC gov to vote for what is best for the platform. A great example would be if prop ID 132 had included a ANC-UST pool as in part of the LUNA liquidy rewards on OSMO, ANC gov could have helped direct that vote with a sub-proposal. Moreover, this could also allow ANC gov to create vote to create a proposal on b-asset gov.
This would need more in-depth thought as one issue that comes up is that minority votes for abstaining, veto, and no would be silenced on a yes vote and vice versa, whipping out minority positions that would have come through with some other form of delegated voting.
Despite this and other possible downfalls, the key reason why I would support this idea is that ANC protocol is taking the staking risk. Governance should be able to vote in a way that best protects and supports value-added proposals for positive feedback loops into ANC.
The flipside to this, is the actual core asset holders lose the vote that could affect the future value of that asset in which they will more than likely redeem, arguably a trade-off that might be worth the borrowing and fungibility value provided which can be deployed for additional yield.
Point 2. Delegated Voting:
This is a very new concept and as far as the research I’ve seen, there is no type of delegated voting on Cosmos yet. That said, I do believe delegated voting will surface in the future as some promising eth DAO projects are working on this (mainly, Common Stack, TEC, and Blockscience). The idea here would be to re-delegate voting shares back to b-asset holders so they can direct ANC gov on how to vote on their behalf. On top of building a delegated voting mechanism, it would require building sub-governance voting for each b-asset, whereby b-asset proposals are voted on by b-asset holders which thereby directs the ANC vote for this.
This would be hard to build and perhaps the cost-benefit wouldn’t be worth it, especially if the community thinks ANC gov should have the vote while it is holding these staked assets. I just lay this idea out as something to think about for those that think b-asset holders should have voting power. I do think that delegated voting for other reasons is a needed feature of any good decentralized governance model.
3. Lastly LPs
LPs take IL and bot arb slippage risk (FIFO meme pool front running, back running etc) to provide a very valuable service to the protocol. Allowing LPs to directly vote would be messy because of the x*y=K function. Therefore I think we should explore the possibility of having some form of liquid staking. This would allow the issuance of liquid-ANC with a corresponding LP L-ANC-UST LP pool. This would give fungibility to staked ANC token holders allowing them to use their ANC in other yield generating ways outside the ANC ecosystem. There are some technical details to work out on this as well, such as how the xyk rebalancing would be addressed, which I have thoughts on but won’t go into here. This is a huge opportunity to alleviate the voting tax and hopefully increase gov participation.