The third round of voting for Jupiter LFG will begin. Are there any changes to the platform rules?
Original title: "Jupiter LFG third round of voting is imminent, 3 minutes to quickly view the platform rule changes"
Original author: Wenser, Odaily Planet Daily
On May 22, Jupiter Launchpad LFG's third round of voting is about to begin. The candidate projects for this round are cross-chain interoperability protocol deBridge, betting platform Divvy.Bet and NFT market Exchange Art. Compared with the 5-6 candidate projects in the first two rounds, the number of candidate projects in this round is nearly half. It is worth noting that based on past voting activities and community feedback, the LFG platform officials have also made certain changes to the voting rules to better play the role of the platform. Odaily Planet Daily will introduce the changes in the LFG platform rules in this article and give a brief interpretation.
Benefits from one source: fewer projects, only one winner
1 Vote, 1 Winner (one vote, one winner). —— Changes in LFG voting rules for the third phase
According to the Jupiter LFG first and second phase voting pages, a total of 201 million JUPs participated in the voting in the first phase, and Zeus Network eventually received more than 58% (about 117 million votes), while other projects received votes ranging from 2% to 20%; a total of 230 million JUPs participated in the voting in the second phase, and Sanctum eventually received more than 64% (about 146 million votes), while other projects also received votes ranging from 2% to 20%.
So, from the voting results of the first two rounds, we can see that LFG Launchpad voting is a "winner takes all" platform activity. Because communities with more members and more votes can often gain a huge amount of attention in the early stage, and then gain the first-mover advantage of the voting interface, so as to ensure that the corresponding project can get the first place in the final vote.
So, in a sense, other projects are just "accompanying the prince to study". Although they can get a certain amount of attention, they still cannot get the opportunity to be listed on LFG Launchpad, and in disguise, they also waste other votes of varying numbers.
This point was mentioned in previous community discussions and proposed changes to the resolution. LFG official Slorg also said, "Ensuring a single winner will help the LFG platform pay closer attention to them after the project goes online to provide them with the best online experience. In addition, when the vote is very close, the platform is willing to accept exceptions. For example, in the case where the first and second place votes have 45% and 44% respectively."
Of course, it can be seen from here that the main issue involved is the "vote following operation" during the voting process, so the next change is obvious.
LFG first phase voting results
Avoid following the crowd: process blind selection mechanism to ensure the authenticity of the results
Blind Voting (blind voting is very necessary). ——Changes in LFG’s voting rules for the third phase
In the description of the changes in LFG’s voting rules for the third phase, the official explanation is:
“In the two previous votes of LFG, the voting process was publicly visible in the voting interface. What we have observed is that projects with a leading advantage will see their leading advantage build over time, which in turn prompts more people to vote for them. We have tried to display the voting results many times and think it is worth trying to hide the voting results in this vote. Blind elections will (to a certain extent) eliminate the bias of voters to vote for the projects that are currently leading in the votes because they expect to get more rewards.”
It has to be said that the real-time visibility of previous voting results, although to a certain extent it guarantees the openness and transparency of the voting results, does make it easy for voters to follow the crowd and choose the advantaged projects with the leading votes. On the one hand, this design may lead to the phenomenon of “vote brushing”. Whether it is the project party, the giant whale holding a large number of chips, or the ordinary voter, they will choose the ones that are more likely to be listed on Launchpad. On the other hand, when it comes to voting, which may lead to the "tragedy of the commons", there are indeed many people who blindly vote without understanding the voting rules and the specific information of the voted projects. Therefore, the introduction of a blind selection mechanism in the voting process can indeed ensure the authenticity and validity of the voting results to a certain extent.
In other words, the third phase of LFG voting with the introduction of a blind selection mechanism will keep the suspense of the final winning project until the moment the voting ends. During the voting stage, voters will participate in a subtle "psychological game" - not only need to consider the impact of their own votes, but also need to consider the voting tendencies of the majority.
Of course, the community's views on the addition of the blind selection mechanism are not completely consistent.
It was mentioned in the previous community discussion and the proposed change resolution that the blind selection mechanism -
On one hand, arguments for the pros include:
It reduces herd behavior;
· May reduce the number of people who "strategically vote" (i.e. make voting choices based on voting conditions);
· Increase voter confidence and encourage more thoughtful voting.
On the other hand, arguments against include:
· Reduced transparency;
· May reduce participation (people just vote instead of discussing projects);
· May produce unexpected results;
· In fact, the voting results on the chain are not hidden;
· People cannot give feedback on real-time usage.
In any case, the addition of the blind selection mechanism in the third round of voting can be regarded as an active attempt by the LFG platform, and further adjustments and regulations should be made in the future based on the voting results and community feedback.
LFG Second Round Voting Results
Flexible Voting: Partial Staking, Look Before You Vote
In addition to the above two rule-level changes, LFG's third round of voting has also made two more flexible details based on community feedback:
Partial Unstaking Function is Now Available
Some voters want to unstake some JUP tokens instead of all tokens, and this function is now available.
Note: When partially unstaking, users can only vote with JUP tokens that are still staked. Tokens that are partially unstaked will have no voting rights at all, which is different from the linear decreasing function of voting rights with maximum unstaking.
Voter Informed Timer
A good voter should understand the content of the vote before voting. In order to help users understand the relevant information before voting, LFG officials have set a new timer on the voting page. Any voter will need to wait a few minutes after opening the voting interface before they can vote. During this period, voters will be reminded to study the content of the vote in depth, and all voters will receive active staking rewards regardless of which project they vote for.
It can be seen that the LFG platform officials want to encourage voters to make prudent judgments and exercise their voting rights after having a certain understanding of the project, rather than simply to obtain staking rewards or other potential token incentives.
Summary: The third round of voting may affect JUP staking participation
In addition to the above relatively large changes in rules and functions, Jupiter has also made a lot of optimizations to the workflow and external information disclosure of LFG Launchpad, including:
· Launching JupiterDAO as an announcement channel for subsequent DAO information and voting-related information;
· The UI interface of Active Staking Rewards (ASR) will be explained and optimized in the future (note: all people who participate in the vote can get this reward);
· Change the AMA of the previous online projects on Discord to Twitter Space;
· Give unique role identification to candidate projects (and related personnel) in Discord;
· Create a calendar of related events to more accurately display LFG Timeline of platform workflow.
Jupiter official event calendar
Not only that, considering the form and channel of external publicity content of the voting candidate projects, the LFG platform officials are also considering whether to add voting video explanations (such as 30-second introductions of candidate projects, in-depth explanations, interview dialogue videos or clips of candidate project interviews, etc.) to facilitate voters to quickly understand the candidate projects and make voting decisions.
In terms of the launch of the Launchpad project, the LFG platform has also updated and iterated the anti-Bot function, which will be implemented with the help of the dynamic liquidity DeFi protocol Meteora in the future, and is expected to be used when the UpRock project is launched in the future.
Finally, according to the latest news released by JupiterDAO, the third phase of LFG voting will start at 1:00 on May 23 and will last for three days. Users who have previously participated in JUP staking can participate on time.
According to the social media platform data of previous AMA tweets, compared with the betting platform Divvy.Bet and the NFT market Exchange Art, the cross-chain interoperability protocol deBridge is expected to become the winner of this round of voting. After the introduction of the blind selection mechanism and the flexible voting function design, whether the third round of LFG voting can once again attract the attention of the market, the active participation of users and lay a good foundation for the subsequent project launch, let us wait and see.
Original link
欢迎加入律动 BlockBeats 官方社群:
Telegram 订阅群: https://t.me/theblockbeats
Telegram 交流群: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App
Twitter 官方账号: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
Phantom issues emergency patch after update knocks users from iOS wallet app
This app introduces new DeFi strategies, including those powered by RWAs
U.S. money market fund assets exceed $7 trillion for the first time
SEC Chairman Gary Gensler Makes Final Lobbying Call for US Crypto Regulation