Secret ballot for POA governance model


This is why validators participation in the voting process is highly encouraged. With or without secret ballot 3 people can still make a decision and all the group will have to stick to it. If validators don’t want to be unrepresented they should simply participate in the ballots. I believe having the secret ballot will help with political privacy of validators, decrease personal risks and increase overall network security. I believe not participating in governance where validators votings records are publicly available helps to reduce personal risks for individual validators and, therefore, discourages them to participate. I believe having the secret ballot will actually encourage validators to participate in POA governance model.

Ballots are not for general public to create or to vote on. I don’t see what checks and balances POA community has in our current governance model. POA community is highly encouraged to share their point of view that might resonate with validators which they can later propose.

I agree that validators have an incentive to vote in the best interests of the validators and POA Network rather than the public. What exactly you don’t like about it? This is what validators are being rewarded for. Are you being rewarded by some public and, therefore, feel obligated to act in their interest?


The irony. I’m off to bed.


I would suggest to look at the solution that BANKEX team proposed for this problem on ETHDenver Hackathon this February. They were awarded 1st place by POA foundation. and the Github:


I don’t think this is accurate today. Current ballots do not have “abstained” option and therefore the only option for validators that want to abstain is not to vote. If you say voting is mandatory, what mechanism is used today to enforce this requirement?


Correct. Today, the only option to abstain is not to vote. Voting, while strongly encouraged, is not mandatory.