Weighing Community Votes

As of now XIO is known as “Blockzero Labs” accomplished through community voting based on the amount of XIO.
I think its pretty odd to say that this rebranding was proposed by the community, hence the Voting Power depends on the total amount of XIO a citizen is holding. In my opinion that is kind of unfair, because the ones with more financial power wins.
I would suggest voting with the associated Adress and XID so you have a Proof-of-Adress and Citizenship. Maybe also a minimum amount, i.e. 100 XIO. That would be equally balanced and there wouldn’t be financial incentive for the ones having a bigger bag.
I know that digital governance is difficult and not predictable, but I am sure we can all decide with the same value.


That would feel better. I participated in the token contest and had a +70% majority by number of citizens but was shutdown in the last moments of the vote by 1 “core citizen” with 400k XIO. In a way the whole democratic vote seemed kind of pointless when it’s ultimately determined by a couple of the devs.
Maybe look to how the US allocates representatives to states-(2 senators, and representatives assigned by weight of population), so in this case could do a base weight of a vote say +5000 for every address holding any XIO, in addition to base token holdings. Although granted there could be issues of people making duplicate fake addresses to create added weight.

1 Like

i have an opposite opinion.

i had during this last year many big bags of xio, followed by periods with not so big bags…

this is a financial project, not the presidential or parliament election of a country. here your commitment to the community is weighted essentially with 3 things:

1- total xio hold
2- total liquidity pool participation
3- participation in social initiative

as in a listed company, your decision power should be given only from the percentage of the company that you hold.

if i’m risking 10k $ i don’t want a person “risking” 10$ to have the same power as me (otherwise i would get my money back and bye bye).

all daos are working the same way…

this is not a parliament election…

e.g. i hold a very small bag at the moment (less than 7000 xio). it would not be fair that my vote is the same as the vote of the man that has 400k xio. totally unfair.


It’s not unfair in any way shape or form, you get to decide the future of the project in accordance with the value of your investment in the project (and if you dont have any money to invest there is plenty of ways for you to earn tokens for bringing value to the project and thus your voting power increases). The bigger your stake is - the bigger is your voting power.

No and no.

I think this will become more and more important as we move ahead…I would propose the following:

  1. We should still make the voting power based on amount of XIO held, however, I would suggest that voting should be weighted …maybe:
  2. 1k- 5k XIO in your wallet gives 1 vote
  3. Every additonal 5k in the wallet also gives you one vote.

In such a scenario , 20 votes from smaller wallets (20 votes) would be equivalent to a whale wallet (100k wallet = 20 votes)

This would reduce the disparity of “whales” overpowering of voting.

1 Like

In my opinion the current system works fine. It’s like shares in a company - the bigger share you have the higher the vote. This is not unfair because people with bigger bags are taking higher financial risk so they should be able to have a bigger say.

So far I have not had any problems with the topics we’ve voted for proposed by the team although they could stand to be proposed in a less biased way sometimes.

I’m happy there’s voting at all, tbh

1 Like

With the system that we are using right now my voting power only depends on my XIO holdings.

That is fine but we can refine that.

We can add time and social credit variables into that.

Citizens with more XSI credits should have much more voting power than speculator whales that are looking for short term gains.

Also citizens that are holding their XIO token from the beginning should have more voting power.

I know my suggestions may hard to implement but I think they are worth it.


1 Like

My idea would be a weight/commitment calculations detailed below the picture. I think small ballances could have 100% middle 75% and big 50%, so the big wallets still would have bigger voting power but the difference wouldn’t be that big, but their higher risk and commitment would be still there. I think every wallet with the same ammount of votes wouldn’t work and definetelly unfair but weighting differently could be ballance this. I also think XLP tokens should have some more voting power because of the higher commitment. All the details and sample calulations are detailed on the picture, i hope it’s understandable, if you have questions ask in the comments👍


I see lot of comments about the way big and small bags should be counted.
I don’t think, like some, that xio should be a democracy, and I deeply believe the number of XIO you hold should be very important in the weight.

Something I wanted to bring into the discussion was the process of voting
In order to avoid some ‘accept or refuse as it is’ vote (like we had about the early launch of the flash pool) maybe we should have a process letting the community understanding and debating about something before having a vote happen.
I like the way Badger seems to do it.
1- they open a forum with a clear topic and ask for feedback
2- the community expresses it thoughts
3- a vote using the community feedback occurs (it can be a yes/no or an option#1/option#2/option#3

My feeling right now is that the team decides something and waits for the community to approve it.
It’s very weird for example to me that I’m asked if a rebranding should happen while so much work was done (naming,logo,iidentity…).It could have been asked before.

So, my TL;DR:

  • weight should rely on xio holdings/LP
  • debates should occure before the voting and might impact the things voted

Will thibk for more feedback later :slight_smile:


This was a conversation Coach and I had earlier. I think it is relevant. I understand your point about having an even stake. Someone with 100 xio can contribute just as much as 100k. Not often how it works because of financial incentives. For some people 100 coins is like 100k to them. The world isn’t flat. Democracy does function that way, but it hard to incentivize good governance. Really hard. And the less you have, the less of a vested interest you feel. The consensus across government protocols has not been a 1 for 1 vote which is also gameble. I guess the ultimate questions are how can we assume all citizens have the same interest in sustainability (even those with a single token)? Is larger financial liability not an important aspect of incentive? Should we award risk and give those in the xlp a higher vote? Should we allow those with smaller financial incentives (or anyone for that matter) to contribute in other ways to earn votes? Maybe participating itself is a way to gain more of a voting share?

Decision# from the core team:

Anything technical, really. Like, for example: which company should audit our code, the actual code writing, bug fixing, fundamental changes to tokens behaviour and optimizations of our dapss, website and social media platforms.

Decisions that should be taken by the community:
Anything regarding tokenomics : max supply, apy, inflation rate, liqudity rewards% and rewards and yield in general, which tokens go to who etc etc

That being said, I think that the voting system should only be an advice to our core developers team, and that the team should actually make the final decision. People often only look at their revenew and not always make the best decision for the whole ecosystem. But I think that could be proven wrong by a large enough community and the game theory. Maybe.

The actual platform we are using to vote is amazing, and it should work always like that (the more xio you have, the more your vote weighs), but I think that we should develop our own voting platform, with ui and graphic that is well suited to the blockzero brand

1 Like

I understand your point. Maybe, as you noted, we can have two forms of voting. Non-binding votes for those that deal with topics the Core Citizens/“team” handle while using the Snapshot forums for issues we TRULY want to be decentralized. There will be decisions some of the community hate…but that’s democracy.

Are there aspects that should be democratic? Would it be good to have any components that are not decided by the Core? I do believe those with the most stake in the game should have the most say. Maybe we can also rewire what is most important. Hard to say that those of us who have consistently earned our stripes through debate, dialogs, positivity, and critical feedback don’t actually deserve more of a say than a whale who only intends to sell when the price spikes. Could this metric be added in some way? Community participation/participation in governance?

Love this equation based formula because it allows for some degree of differentiation. 1000 XIO does not mean the same to everyone. We should allow small holders to feel like they have a stake. Wonder if governance participation or community participation could be included in this equation. For every vote of forum you participate in, you gain +1?

Yes, we can include XSI in this equation, I would include like a bonus (Bonus votes=XSIscore*10).
Sample detailed in the picture.

The percentages(100%/75%/50%) and the XSI muliplier (x10 in the calculation) could be changed if needed anyway for the voting system can be ballanced differently, but I think this numbers would be pretty okay maybe some small changes, like XSI can be 25x.


Because it is very easy for anyone to take their XIO tokens and split them up into multiple wallets, making any type of voting based on Citizenship IDs or 1 vote = 1 wallet with a capped XIO token amount per wallet, this is asking for trouble. The only fair way that has no risk in being gamed (that I’m aware of) is based on total XIO tokens held.

Because we are also tracking metrics like XSI points earned over time and total XLP earned over time, this does give us extra variables to play with that could allow us to use those variables to create some hybrid voting power system.

I’m NOT saying this is the right answer, only suggesting an example to illustrate my point:

Variables to play with

  • WALLET = Total XIO in wallet (over a period of time, let’s say a 365 day moving average)
  • XLP = Total XIO in XIO/ETH UniswapV2 liquidity pool (could also be a 365 day moving average)
  • SOCIAL = Total XSI points earned to date
  • DAYSOLD = The date citizenship was created (“days old” is how many days since citizenship was created for XID)

Voting Power = [ (WALLET + XLP) + (SOCIAL * 100) ] * ( 1 + (DAYSOLD / 365))

All of the above are things we could track and provide.

The issue becomes: all of the above variables would need to be be defined, parsed, stored into, and then provided by a central database via an API. Are we okay to let voting power be defined by a central database instead of decentralized data (decentralized = total tokens in XIO wallet right now + XIO in XLP right now = voting power like Snapshot.Page website)

^^ Just because we can doesn’t mean we should. A point I’m constantly reminding myself when debating topics :slight_smile:


To date, the decisions proposed to the community and the decisions the core team has made, to me, has felt balanced. Sometimes executive decisions need to be made. Sometimes there are issues better suited for the community to decide.

I am hoping to learn from the comments here about what other governance strategies may be beneficial to us.

I do think we should consider having some type of “super voting power” for some community members or team members who are heavily involved and educated on all aspects of the Blockzero ecosystem, that we need EDUCATED votes, not just “1 token = 1 vote”. If half the community of votes is uneducated and don’t know what they are truly voting for, they will vote on greed and fear and what is best for them in the short term = the death of the everything. I’m not suggesting our community is that way now or will be later, but it is a risk, and I’ve seen other communities degrade overtime. This can also be an issue if we have a flood of new members due to a hype bubble cycle that all of a sudden our community has gone x10 in a month. If that means all those new people have bought XIO tokens, if 1 token = 1 vote, that can really screw up voting results by all those people that are new and don’t fully understand the entire ecosystem yet and the full scope of what a particular vote could be about or for.

I like the example of “Diablo 4” video game: the developers listened so strongly to their fans on what they wanted, they didn’t think about what was best for the health of the game. They developed a shitty game: the fans got exactly what they asked for and then complained about it afterwards. You can’t always do exactly what everyone wants. Some leadership must exist that can make decisions that goes against the majority sometimes when it is important.

Just an idea to consider: we could also have proxy votes. Let people assign their voting power to a community leader or team member they trust the most. For example: I don’t think we should let the entire world vote on science issues since most people don’t know enough about science to make informed decisions, instead citizens should assign their votes to a scientific leader proxy they trust will make a better decision than they could. Also proxy voting helps prevent absent null voting: if I forget to vote, but I establish that my proxy votes should go to some other person or address, if I forget to vote, my vote will count towards how that proxy person voted instead.

Ranked choice voting: I hope we can find a way in the future to implement this type of system instead of the current way snapshot.page works that is winner takes all “first past the post”. I love sharing this video, great way to teach why first past the post is very flawed:


I believe voting via snapshot.page is the right way to go about it and the current system of 1 XIO = 1 vote is fine as those who take a higher financial risk should have a larger vote share.

I think Blockzero labs should have a governing page where anyone from the community can create a poll suggesting a proposal. If the poll is popular and has community support, then Blockzero team can put this proposal onto snapshot.page for a deciding vote.

All proposals suggested by the core team should be put directly to a vote by the community on snapshot.page