Please describe your proposed solution.
How we perceive the problem we are solving
In November 2022 the Voltaire era of Cardano was initiated with the submission of CIP-1694. A Tripartite system of governance was proposed between a Constitutional Committee, Delegated Representatives and Stake Pool Operators.
Subsequently, as part of a wide ranging process of consultation and feedback, Photrek and QA-DAO produced a paper “CIP-1694: Can Decentralized Communities make Superior Decisions” which highlighted four quadrants of threats to decentralized communities. The most significant vulnerability for Cardano was identified to be its dependence on corporate-style voting of one-coin one-vote (1c1v). This is a threat to decentralization because with widely held coins and a power-law distribution of wealth only 10%-20% of the coins are necessary to establish a near dictatorship of decision-making influence.
Fortunately for the Cardano Community, the Catalyst program has funded Snapbrillia to develop Plural Voting (F8) and Sybil Resistance methods (F9).
The Catalyst program has provided leadership in the experiment of decentralized governance. As Cardano transitions to Voltaire, Catalyst must stay at the fore-front of improving the ability of the Cardano Community to evolve a healthy ecosystem. Implementing Plural Voting and determining the requirements for Democratic Voting is a critical component of Catalyst System Improvements.
Our solution
Photrek in partnership with QA-DAO & Snapbrillia intends to deliver a prototype secure system for voting based on the principle of democratic pluralism. Democratic in that, participants in the Cardano community have a reasonable expectation to be treated equally and fairly. Plural in that, individuals with significant ADA holdings have the ability to use those holdings to express strong opinions at fair price for influence. This will comprise a testnet design and experiment together with a research paper on security systems for a flexible voting system that can adjust between corporate (current Catalyst), plural (quadratic), and democratic voting. Our solution will include non-identity and decentralized identity security systems.
The reasons for our approach
A community developed test net solution will demonstrate the maturity of the Cardano ecosystem and the capability of its stakeholders.
Who we will engage with our solution
Our solution is in the spirit of Catalyst experimentation and includes a broad collaborative effort across a range of skill sets. This includes Photrek (technical theory and design), Snapbrilla (test net development) and QADAO (extensive documentation and tracking). More broadly we are engaging with experienced contributors such as Wolfram and other community members who wish to participate.
How does your proposed solution address the challenge and what benefits will this bring to the Cardano ecosystem?
The Photrek proposal team aims to address this Challenge by demonstrating improvements in the following areas -
1) Engineering of decentralization and/or distribution of decision-making advances for the Catalyst Voting System
We will engineer an approach that provides a full range of voting approaches. This will be achieved by setting the votes for a wallet to ADAx, where the power x is 0 for democracy (1 wallet 1 vote), ½ for pluralism or quadratic voting, and 1 for corporate or the current Catalyst approach. Furthermore, research will be completed to determine the requirements for the Plural Voting to facilitate a voters ability to express degrees of preference rather than simply yes or no. The engineering design will focus on the Sybil resistance needed to enable non-plutocratic voting.
2) Systemic improvements (Technical or Procedural) that streamline or otherwise enhance Project Catalyst processes.
We aim to systematically improve the security of Catalyst voting by designing a suite of approaches to Sybil resistance. Whilst there is no silver bullet to governance security and cybersecurity we believe a layered defence can provide assurance that democratic plural elections can be held securely and safely.
3) Academic research that clearly defines a known Catalyst-specific problem-space
We intend to submit an academic paper to a peer reviewed journal that clearly defines a known Catalyst specific problem space.
The Photrek team has led research projects for the Catalyst community for two-years. We will now bring those efforts together with QA-DAO and Snapbrillia to consolidate an academic understanding of the insecurity of corporate voting and the Sybil resistance methods necessary for plural and democratic voting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change has been identified as a candidate journal for the submission.
4) Community assent to promote a previously completed Catalyst System Improvement project
Photrek intends to achieve community assent by submitting follow-on proposals that will support the transition to pre-production testing and production implementation.. The goal is to demonstrate the feasibility of implementing Plural Voting and to assess the security requirements for Democratic Voting.
How do you intend to measure the success of your project?
We intend to measure the impact on Cardano’s productivity and growth by widening the franchise of meaningful voting in Catalyst. This will be done via the following quantitative and qualitative metrics:
- Use the Banzhaf Power index to provide accessible metrics of the distribution of influence in the Cardano Community; [Metric = distribution of influence];;
- Document conversations with the community to understand the significance of democratic principles and how that translates into voting design; [Metric = qualitative documentation];
- Leverage the Banzhof Voting Power and the principles of Pluralism to provide a determination of qualitative and quantitative measures of the price of influence; [Metric = determination of qualitative and quantitative measures of the price of influence];
- Utilize the cost of influence to evaluate the security of different voting solutions; in other words, is their a common metric to evaluate the difference between 1c1v and Sybil attack other voting methods?; [Metric = cost of influence as proxy for security];
- Provide an assessment of which security measures (non-identity and identity) provide the highest cost on influence for the lowest development cost; [Metric = assessment of security measure cost / benefit];
- Gather feedback on these metrics from reviews of our presentations and publications. [Metric = Qualitative documentation].
Please describe your plans to share the outputs and results of your project?
Our outputs and results will be captured using the Open Source solution of capturing high level deliverables as issues on a GitHub project board. (See this example of the SingularityNet Archive Working Group project board here - <https://github.com/orgs/SingularityNET-Archive/projects/1> ). A public board will allow for full transparency and accountability as the project progresses. As well providing a means of referencing specific milestone deliverables.
Quantitative measurements -
Quantitative outputs for all the following milestones will be captured in the first instance in each deliverable issue (on our Project Management GitHub repository). This information will then be refined for presentation in our Project’s GitBook (mirrored to a backend repository). This will provide ease of access to the outputs and results of our project in a digestible format.
We intend to measure the success of our project by recording the following outputs and results (for further detail on outputs see the [CAPABILITY/ FEASIBILITY] “Please describe the deliverables, outputs and intended outcomes of each milestone” section below ).
A - Engineering Milestones
1 - Non-identity Sybil Resistance Design => GitHub repository [code] / or Whitepaper / project Issue / GitBook presentation
2 - Identity Sybil Resistance Design => GitHub repository [code] / or Whitepaper / project Issue / GitBook presentation
B - System Improvement Milestones
3 - Testnet code developed => GitHub repository [code] / project Issue / GitBook presentation
4 - Testnet experiments completed => GitHub repository [data] / project Issue / GitBook presentation
C - Research Paper & Close Out Milestone
1 - Research paper drafted, reviewed and completed => GitHub Issue / Research paper / GitBook presentation
2 - Research paper submitted to journal => Research paper
3 - Close-out report submitted => Close out report
Qualitative measurements -
- Assessed by community review and engagement with our test net results and research paper. Significant milestones will be shared with the community at After Town Halls where community feedback will be sought and documented.
- We may also monitor informal community discussion in relation to this project in channels such as Discord, Telegram and Twitter.