Summary

Voter turnout has definitely improved since the institution of Moon Week. However, there is still quite a disparity in number of votes across the polls. Despite there being enough votes cast in at least one popular poll, less popular good proposals with majority voter support don't pass, and bad proposals with majority rejection are not definitively voted down, leaving the door open for those proposals to return. In order to incentivize voting further, I suggest a 1.25% karma bonus per additional poll in which a vote is cast.

Problem Statement

In the last round, there was a high of 13258 votes, a low of 4934 votes, and an average of 8040 votes. In the round before that, there was a high of 9542 votes, a low of 4116 votes, and an average of 6524 votes (Source). It's undeniable, based on the numbers, that there is a significant disparity in voter turnout across the polls, despite overall voter turnout improving compared with the institution of Moon Week. It's almost a certainty that many are only voting in one or two polls, while ignoring the others. This results in those other polls suffering the same low voter turnouts that were so frustrating in the past. The possible negative consequences of low voter turnout on a poll are 1) good proposals don't pass despite majority voter support, 2) bad proposals are not definitively rejected despite majority voter denial, which leaves the door open for them to be reintroduced, and 3) whales have significantly greater influence in such a poll.

Solution

My proposed solution is to institute a 1.25% karma bonus per additional poll in which a vote is cast. This means that the first time that someone votes, they will earn the base voting bonus (currently 5%), and all subsequent times that person votes during Moon Week will earn an additional 1.25%. So if someone votes in 2 polls, they will get a 6.25% bonus. If they vote in 3 polls, they will get a 7.5% bonus.

Concerns

A concern that was brought up is that this may pressure indifferent voters that would rather opt to abstain. In my opinion, the 1.25% additional bonus is small enough to not significantly impact those who truly wish to abstain from a particular poll so the pressure would be minimal, while also being a nice incentive to get more potential voters to pay attention to more of the polls. For this concern, I think the impact would more positive than negative.

Another concern that was put forth is that some may just vote blindly/randomly just to secure the extra bonus. In my opinion, it is more than likely that such voting already occurs but is currently isolated to one or two polls, and while implementing this proposal would not really improve blind/random voting, it would also not significantly make the issue worse. For this concern, I think the impact would be neutral to slightly negative.

​

To see the evolution of this proposal in r/CryptoCurrencyMeta, follow this link: Proposal: Incentivize Voting in Multiple Polls (Final Version)

​

TLDR: Vote more, earn more.

View Poll