INTRO

The decision-making process in the governance model of Cosmos Hub

Each offer initially has an opportunity called the deposit period; During this period, which ultimately lasts up to 14 days, the proposer or other supporters must prepare and deposit at least 64 atoms. If this amount is deposited before 14 days, this period will be completed; Otherwise, if this amount is still not provided after 14 days, the provided amounts will be burned.

Then we enter the voting period. Participants can choose four options: Abstain (which means that the voter is indifferent to the provisions of the proposal), Yes (which means that he agrees with the proposal), No (which means that he opposes) and NoWithVeto (which means that he strongly disagrees with the proposal).

If more than one-third of the voters choose the last option (not with the veto), the bidders' deposit will be forfeited and burned. Also, if the voting does not reach the quorum (40% of all staked atoms), the 64-atom bond will still be burned.

If the voting reaches the quorum of 40%, more than 50% vote for the yes option and the number of "no with veto" voters is less than one third, the proposal will be approved.

GOAL

The purpose of creating this dashboard is to review the last completed proposal in the Cosmos Hub ecosystem, i.e. Proposal 98.

This proposal proposes the cooperation of the Cosmos ecosystem with the Alpha Growth team for the growth of the Atom token. AlphaGrowth is the leading destination for crypto projects to source funding and match to grants & investors.

My intention in this dashboard is to check the number of votes and the number of voters and to check the statistics of this proposal, which is the last closed proposal in the Cosmos ecosystem.

For a more detailed review of this proposal, go here.

METHOD

The cosmos.core.fact_governance_votes key table has been used to Call the data related to Proposal 98. We called the data of this table by filtering PROPOSAL_ID=98. We used the cosmos.core.fact_transfers table to call the data related to the atom balance in the voters' wallet, and by the difference between the withdrawal amount and the deposit of the atom token, we called the amount of the atom balance of the voters' wallet.

To call the type of votes from the case filter, it is used as follows:

when VOTE_OPTION=1 then 'YES'

when VOTE_OPTION=2 then 'ABSTAIN'

when VOTE_OPTION=3 then 'NO WITH VETO'

when VOTE_OPTION=4 then 'NO'

Daily and Total Stats

Insights

• More than 19k voters have voted for proposal 98 with more than 19.8k votes.

• The highest number of votes was cast on the first day of voting On the first day of voting, about 2,400 voters strongly opposed this proposal.

• On February 18, the highest percentage of votes were given with strong opposition to this proposal.

• Although about 2,700 yes votes were given to this proposal on February 14 and 15, however, this proposal was rejected.

• 60% of votes and voters strongly opposed this proposal.

• The yes vote in this proposal did not reach the quorum of 50% and led to its rejection.

• The participation of more than 19k voters in this proposal shows its importance for the Cosmos community and is also a reason for the decentralized nature of this blockchain.

• About 15% of the voters did not have an opinion about this proposal.

  \

Daily Average Stats

Insights

• The daily average of the most votes and voters for this proposal with more than 840 votes and voters was NO WITH VETO.
• On a daily average, the NO vote received the lowest number of votes and voters with about 21 votes and voters.
• The average daily vote of NO WITH VETO was more than 2.5 times of the YES vote.

Vote Change Stats

Insights

• 25% of the voters who did not have a particular opinion about this proposal strongly opposed this proposal and changed their vote from ABSTAIN to NO WITH VETO.
• The interesting thing is that 51 voters who voted in favor of this proposal strongly disagreed with this proposal and changed their vote.
• Contrary to the above line, 26 voters who were strongly opposed to this proposal, changed their vote and voted yes.
• More than 18.8K voters did not change their vote, which is about 98.8% of voters for this proposal, and 229 voters, which includes 1.2% of voters, changed their vote.

Distribution Stats

Insights

• About 47% of the voters who voted YES to this proposal, i.e. about 1,060 voters, had a wallet balance below 5 atoms.
• It seems that the voters whose wallets had a lower atom balance voted YES to this proposal.
• Voters whose wallet balance was between 50 and 500 atoms strongly opposed this proposal.
• Voters whose wallet balance was between 10 and 50 atoms had the strongest opposition to this proposal.
• About 4% of the voters whose wallet balance was above 1,000 atoms have opposed this proposal.
• More than 11k voters strongly opposed this proposal with at least one vote.
• 1 voter strongly disagreed with this proposal by voting 10 times and one voter agreed with this proposal by voting 11 times.

Top Voters

Insights

• Out of the top 20 voters who had the most atoms in their wallets, 15 voters strongly opposed the proposal, 2 voters agreed with the proposal, and the top three voters had no opinion on the proposal.
• The first and second highest voters in terms of atom inventory strongly disagreed with this proposal and the third person agreed with this proposal.

Top Voters Behavior

In this part, we are going to examine the behavior of the top 20 voters of Proposal 98. We are going to see how many proposals these voters have voted for so far and how many votes they have given so far and what Type of votes they have for different proposals.

\

• As we can see, the top 20 voters of proposal 98 (the last completed proposal), have voted for 56 proposals so far and have voted more than 600 so far.
• The adl29 address has given the most votes with about 60 votes and more than 64% of its votes were yes.
• The highest NO WITH VETO vote was given by c9cpn, which was more than 38% of its votes.
• The most abstention vote was given by adl29 address, which was more than 18% of its votes.
• More than 58% of the votes of the top 20 voters for Proposal 98 were YES, which is 350 votes.
• About 23% of the top votes were strongly opposed to the proposals.

Top Proposals voted by top #98 voters

NOTE

Click here to see the details of the proposals.

Conclusion

More than 19,000 voters for a proposal in the Cosmos network shows the decentralized nature of this ecosystem. The community of this ecosystem opposed the cooperation of this network and the AlphaGrowth team for the development of the Atom token, and as we have seen, the majority of voters, including voters whose wallet balances contain a large amount of Atom tokens, also opposed this proposal. It seems that decentralization is the first priority in the Cosmos network and the decisions of a blockchain network like Cosmos are not supposed to be made by a person or people, especially since in this process millions of dollars of atom tokens are in the middle and could be misused.