Ask AI
Skip to main content

Proposal Process

Deposit Period​

The deposit period lasts either minutes or until the proposal deposit totals , whichever happens first.

Deposits​

Deposit amounts are at risk of being burned. Before a governance proposal can enter the voting period (i.e., before it can be voted on), a minimum amount of KYVE must be deposited: for standard proposals and for expedited ones. Anyone can contribute to this deposit, and the deposits for both passed and failed proposals are returned to the contributors.

In the past, people have viewed contributions differently, but it's generally agreed that the decision to contribute is personal. Supporters can show their backing by adding to the deposit, so proposers may leave room for others to contribute by depositing less than . However, it's important to remember that all contributions are at risk of being burned.

Burned deposits​

Deposits are burned when the proposal reaches the voting stage and more than of the participants (excluding Abstain-voters) vote NoWithVeto.

Voting Period​

The voting period is currently a fixed -day (-minutes for expedited proposals) period. During the voting period, participants may select a vote of either Yes, No, Abstain, or NoWithVeto. Voters may change their vote at any time before the voting period ends.

What do the voting options mean?​

  1. Abstain: Indicates that the voter is impartial to the outcome of the proposal.
  2. Yes: Indicates approval of the proposal in its current form.
  3. No: Indicates disapproval of the proposal in its current form.
  4. NoWithVeto: Indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting No. If the number of NoWithVeto votes is greater than of total votes excluding Abstain votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are burned.

As accepted by the CosmosHub community in Proposal 6, voters are expected to vote NoWithVeto if a proposal leads to undesirable outcomes for the community. It states “if a proposal seems to be spam or is deemed to have caused a negative externality to Cosmos community, voters should vote NoWithVeto.”

Voting NoWithVeto provides a mechanism for a minority group representing a third of the participating voting power to reject a proposal that would otherwise pass. This makes explicit an aspect of the consensus protocol: it works as long as only up to a third of nodes fail. In other words, a third of the validators are always in a position to cause a proposal to fail outside the formalized governance process and the network's norms, such as by censoring transactions. The purpose of internalizing this aspect of the consensus protocol into the governance process is to discourage validators from relying on collusion and censorship tactics to influence voting outcomes.

What determines whether or not a governance proposal passes?​

There are four criteria:

  1. A minimum deposit of is required for the proposal to enter the voting period
    • anyone may contribute to this deposit
    • the deposit must be reached within minutes
  2. A minimum of of the network's voting power (quorum) is required to participate to make the proposal valid
  3. A simple majority (greater than ) of the participating voting power (except the Abstain-voters) must back the Yes vote during the -day voting period
  4. Less than of participating voting power votes NoWithVeto

Currently, the criteria for submitting and passing/failing all proposal types is the same.

How is voting tallied?​

Voting power is determined by stake weight at the end of the -day voting period and is proportional to the number of total $KYVE participating in the vote. Only bonded $KYVE count towards the voting power for a governance proposal. Liquid $KYVE will not count toward a vote or quorum.

Inactive validators can cast a vote, but their voting power, including that of their delegators, will not be counted if they are not in the active set when the voting period ends. This means that if you delegate to a validator who is jailed, tombstoned, or ranked outside the top 100 validators at the end of the voting period, your stake will not be counted in the vote.

While a simple majority "Yes" vote (i.e. 50% of the participating voting power) is required for a governance proposal to pass, a NoWithVeto vote of or more can override the result and cause the proposal to fail. This allows a minority group with more than of the voting power to block a proposal that would otherwise pass.

How is the quorum determined?​

Voting power, whether supporting a Yes, Abstain, No, or NoWithVeto vote, counts toward the quorum. Quorum is required for a governance proposal to be considered valid. If the proposal fails to reach quorum (i.e., less than 33.4% of the network's voting power participates) within 7 days the proposal outcome will not be considered valid.