Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow asset participation in governance to be configurable #50

Open
3 tasks
javiersuweijie opened this issue Nov 21, 2022 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #131
Open
3 tasks

Allow asset participation in governance to be configurable #50

javiersuweijie opened this issue Nov 21, 2022 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #131
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@javiersuweijie
Copy link
Member

Not all assets should be allowed to participate in governance as there might be conflict of interests in some cases.

  • Wrap the governance module (x/gov) Tally method with a modified implementation that checks if assets should be part of the voting power calculation.
  • Update SDK initialization to wire the modified x/gov module
  • Update docs on how to integrate
@javiersuweijie javiersuweijie added the enhancement New feature or request label Nov 21, 2022
@javiersuweijie
Copy link
Member Author

An alternative solution is to make sure that the alliance module votes abstain on all proposals that are IN_VOTING this way the alliance will not be able to affect the results of a vote.

This solution loses the ability to allow individual alliances to be configured with governance and also might potentially allow all proposal to pass quorum even when there are low voter participation.

@phamminh0811
Copy link
Contributor

Should we configure this module in a fork version or directly add a gov module into x folder?

@emidev98
Copy link
Contributor

@phamminh0811 the module can be created inside the /custom folder from alliance module, similar to the bank module implementation and it can be merged into the main branch

@phamminh0811
Copy link
Contributor

great, I'm working on that

@phamminh0811 phamminh0811 linked a pull request Feb 21, 2023 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants