Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

datadanne ↑ pfp
datadanne ↑
@datadanne.eth
I don't think this is a good solution since it makes delegation slow, but couldn't you work around the flaw by not allowing an NDT to vote until proposalUpdatablePeriodInBlocks + votingDelay + votingPeriod blocks has passed since it was minted? That way you can't swap -> mint -> vote for any prop that is created
3 replies
0 recast
3 reactions

Michael Gingras (lilfrog) pfp
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
Couldn’t you still mint yourself x NDTs from the pool and let them mature and if nobody back runs you then you have x voting power for the price of 1? Feels like improvement but not 100% there. I think nulling NDTs on noun transfer would help but needs hooks on transfer right? Which isn’t possible?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Spencer Perkins pfp
Spencer Perkins
@spencerperkins.eth
Interesting idea, but I don’t think it really solves. It just pushes out the attack by 1 voting cycle (which is good). To prevent the attack with this design, someone would need to actively swap and remove delegation for every pooled Noun before every prop.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

david pfp
david
@davidbr
I think it can work. So no snapshots, and an NDT can vote only after “maturing” for a prop lifecycle of blocks. Should an NDT be allowed to vote if the Noun owner has changed? eg mint an NDT and then transfer the Noun
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction