Use Shielded Voting for SafeDAO Governance Voting

Should SafeDAO use Shielded Voting on Snapshot?

More info about Shielded Voting by Shutter Network below.
Shutter brings shielded voting to Snapshot

6 Likes

good question, I’ll have to look more into shutter!

at face value it looks neat and useful

3 Likes

Shielded voting seems like a promising idea.

4 Likes

I’m in favor of using a shielded voting scheme.

I found Snapshot’s write-up helpful to understand what this looks like for the voter.

5 Likes

gM @0xSafeUser, thank you for bringing this up i do belive that there should be privacy for voting on snapshots.
Based on my experience from the 1inch DAO snapshot and 1ip 10 the Shutter implementation isn’t worth a try now there were several Bugs during the voting, which haven’t counted our total delegated voting power. So I would wait for implementing changes to a critical infra of the DAO

2 Likes

The question of whether we would want to build SafeDAO’s governance on the Shutter implementation is a good point that has also been raised by Guardians before: The network of nodes that is used to decrypt voter choices is currently not really decentralized, but mostly run by Shutter itself. This poses the question whether this adds a risk of centralisation, single point of failure, attack vectors or other risks. It also brings up the question of when we would consider the Shutter solution to be ‘sufficiently decentralised’.

Another aspect to consider which was also brought up before by Guardians is that shielded voting would prevent us from (easily) seeing whether a proposal has met quorum yet. Especially in the early days of SafeDAO (and when a proposal is less controversial than SEP-2), we may struggle to reach quorum at times and may risk missing quorum by not seeing it before the end of the proposal and not activating others to vote. On the other hand, you could argue that others will be more likely to vote if nobody can be sure whether quorum has been met, so that voter participation may in fact be higher than if the quorum was visible. Technically, it would be possible to calculate whether quorum has been met, but that is currently not natively supported in Shutter’s/Snapshot’s UI.

@0xBaer already mentioned this helpful blog post by Snapshot. This post by Shutter is also quite informative.

Given all that, what’s everybody’s take on the risks and opportunities, pros and cons?

3 Likes

Personally, I still need to weigh the pros and cons. But, I do think the concept appears rather smart and would be beneficial to SAFE governance.

1 Like

Thank you for outlining tradeoffs @theobtl!

Given this seems to be a nice-to-have feature and the multiple important questions posed above I’d be in favor of holding off until more research is done on the centralization of the Shutter ecosystem.

  • I’d need to to research how the Shutter nodes governance works in order to develop a strong opinion one way or another as I’m not well versed with this team and the node ecosystem running it.
  • Theoretically there doesn’t seem to be a reason why anonymous voting can’t also display the quorum progress publicly so I’d estimate this will be a future feature potentially worth waiting for. Quorum visibility seems like a more important feature than anon voting at this point in order to move proposals forward.