While I don’t have any issue with the results of the vote, or even how the vote is decided (on-chain Governance has always been token-based, which has equal pros and cons), I do think more transparency on these larger wallets should be provided.
The two top voters appear to be delegates of some sort? Their Safe addresses seemed to have been created solely for this purpose, as they have no other activity.
https://app.safe.global/eth:0x7c3d54Be8dD9946dA59feD648bfAD294ae17105E/transactions/history
https://app.safe.global/eth:0xfB2aD9007F2D62a973f71Af206242eE4bD790b2C/transactions/history
I’m a bit shaky on the internals of Snapshot; is there a way to get a list of delegators to these addresses and what their effective holdings are?
Edit: I’m also doubly concerned, as their signatures do not pass validation on the associated signator.io link.