Governance

Currently, decision making in web3 largely relies on token-based governance (one token, one vote), which excludes some people from participating as it creates a plutocracy. One in which those with the greatest financial allocation retain the greatest say in the protocol’s decision making. Not too mention, we are seeing extensive issues with Bots and the ability to verify humanhood leading to solutions like Gitcoin Passport, WorldCoinID, and PoH to be developed.

On the other hand, the meat space suffers from issues of vote count transparency and tampering is possible (look at the 2020 election concerns). This also can be improved as we transition to a digital world and need a cost efficient and accessible way to enable people to vote directly from their mobile devices.

How Gateway can improve web3 based governance?

Sybil Resistance - Rather than the one token one vote system we see, a DID system that prioritizes the usage of data assets and a mobile app (biotmetric verification and user custody of keys) to authenticate humanhood ensures that we can build governance systems that are based on one person, one vote.

Weighted Systems - There is no doubt that when it comes to decision making there are active players who have a greater influence, understanding, and relationship to the problem an organization is solving. This includes people who are staking capital, people contributing/building products, active community members, and representatives with experience in a knowledge vertical. This is why Gateway’s PDA system enables organizations to increase voting power based on the data they hold.

Proof of Reputation - Beyond weighted voting systems, DAOs and web3 teams will now be able to verifiable prove reputation for access to grants, community events, and direct contributor roles. For example, teams can verify if a user has been an active governance participant (voting history), staked (financial alignment), and has used products (quest completions) as a basis for hiring within a working group or to serve as a delegate for community initiatives.

What does change in the Traditional world look like?

Credential Verification - Voting Applications or centers can push data requests directly to a user’s mobile device. Given that all schemas are queryable on a public registry, a requestor can ask users for specific information from verified sources such as a driver license from the DMV, proof of bank account ownership from a bank, or a SSN from the Social Security Administration. If and only if users meet the requirements, then they will be able to vote. Decreasing the likelihood of voter fraud and tampering.

Verified Proofs - The Federal Election Commission will receive a data copy of information shared with them by person. In theory, given the trail of consent and information made accessible, the organization can work on reviewing data and checkin for irregularities and vulnerabilities to create even more tamper resistant data requests or voting systems.

Auditable Trail - One the Gateway Chain there will be a clear track of data requests and proofs generated. Why is this important? There is now a publicly verifiable way for anyone to check how many people verified their data on voting data, total votes tallied by the electoral college, and discuss voter turnout with real data points. If we believe in a voting system that allows all citizens to vote, then all citizens should be able to authenticate participation in a public manner.

Live Use-Case (Insert Link to a blog for POKT Governance)