What is Hadeswap?

Hadeswap is an AMM-based NFT marketplace that launched on Sept. 26 on Solana. Since then, the platform has experienced outsized growth to become the second-largest NFT marketplace on Solana. An NFT AMM like Hadeswap allows collectors to create liquidity pools and instantly sell their assets, a feature that common NFT marketplaces like OpenSea and Magic Eden currently don’t have. 

$HADES is the Hadeswap governance token that is used for Hadeswap proof of concept, Bonding, Staking, and Providing Liquidity. Users who have staked $HADES in Hadeswap governance have the ability to vote on Hadeswap DAO proposals.

What is a DAO?

a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) is a community with a shared bank account. Members of the DAO make decisions in a transparent and decentralized fashion, with smart contracts executing these decisions. For instance, a member can create a proposal suggesting an investment of the treasury or a program upgrade. The DAO members then come together to vote on the proposal. If a predefined quorum votes for the proposal to pass, the proposal is accepted and executed by a smart contract.

As a result, the DAO structure provides a “flat” organizational structure. Each DAO member has a voice in the community and the opportunity to drive the direction of the organization. (Read More)

What is Realms?

Realms is a tool to help the community thrive on Solana DAO creation, voting, and treasury management, all in one fully on-chain product. Whether managing a multi-sig or a billion-dollar protocol, Realms has the tools to enable the community to reach its full potential. Realms provide a platform for builders on Solana to create a DAO, manage their members, vote on proposals, and allocate their treasury. Whether you are running a multi-sig, NFT community DAO, or community token DAO, Realms has the tools and integrations to help your community flourish. Realms serves as the frontend for SPL Governance, a DAO-type and asset-type agnostic standard for building and maintaining DAOs on Solana.

According to the above data, there are 374 votes cast on Hadeswap DAO governance by 138 Unique Voters. The total number of executed proposals (those with public participation of voters) is 20.

However, based on the Hadeswap Governance page on Realms, This governance has 154 members but according to the above data, 138 of these 154 members have participated in governance voting.

On the left chart, we can see a full list of all executed propsals on Hadeswap Governance and their voting engagement.

As we see, the proposal address “AjAwZWWMiNe5pUXbJqkuoFiLhr3rcVGuJyZwuNzKpKmG” ("Transfer of SMB IP and Ownership to MonkeDAO") is the most popular executed proposal on Hadeswap with 68 votes cast on it.

This proposal was finally defeated with 93.5% rejection.

Hadeswap Governance Activity

According to the above charts, the voting activity on Hadeswap Governance has started since Jan 27, 2023. There are not many executed proposals (So, voters & voting activities) on Hadeswap on some days. However, during the recent days after March 1, 2023, we can see some increasing governance activity on Hadeswap over time. March 2, 2023 is the day with the highest participation of voters (& their votes) on Hadeswap governance while the most number of proposals were executed on March 3, 2023.

Based on the left charts, the majority of voters on Hadeswap governance are just one-time voters who have voted only on 1 single proposal.

The second rank belongs to the users with 2-5 votes who participated on 2-5 proposals in this DAO.

There are only 3 voters that have participated in more than 10 Hadeswap proposals with more than 10 votes cast.

Selected Proposal Stats

In this part, you can enter the address of your desired Hadeswap “Proposal” in the provided parameter above (login to your Flipside account before that), in order to see an analysis of the specific proposal.

How does Hadeswap governance compare to other DAOs on Solana.

How concentrated is the voting power in Hadeswap?

According to the above-left pie-chart, the voting power (which is also accessible on the Hadeswap governance members page), the wallet address J9TtRc2AUnxBh3uA6uxqL1BBbm6qXEPfEFF9o2teeMzm has by far the highest voting power (almost 86% of total delegated $HADES) in Hadeswap governance! This means that the voting power of this wallet is way way more than all other Hadeswap voters (which is not normal at all!).

But, based on the right chart, this top wallet address has only participated in 2 governance (based on the Hadeswap governance members page, both of them were “Test” proposals), maybe this wallet address belongs to the Hadeswap governance itself. So, we can say that despite big difference between voting power of top wallet vs other voters, this wallet address was not effective in changing the result of proposals since he/she did not participated in major proposals on this governance.

Totally, we can see that the participation activity of voters with rank #50 - #100 (based on their voting power = delegated $HADES) is more than other types of voters. top 10 powerful voters on Hadeswap have only participated on 15 proposals and totally voted 53 times.

How often are wallets transferring $Hades before casting a vote? What about purchasing $Hades to make a vote?

In this part, firstly you can see the number and volume of transferred & swapped out (purchased via Solana DEXs) $HADES tokens as well as the creation date of Hadeswap governance proposals.

Then, you can see the activity of $HADES transfers & purchases of voters with a maximum time difference of 14 days between their purchase/transfer activity and their vote date on Hadeswap governance proposals.

According to the above charts, the number & volume of $HADES transfers and also receivers before casting vote on Hadeswap governance proposals is more than swap actions, meaning that the majority of voters are receiving their $HADES by transferring rather than swapping them out in DEXs.

Also, we can see there is an average time difference of 6 (for swaps) - 7 (for transfers) days between the date that the voter has swapped out/ received $HADES token and his/her vote date on the Hadeswap governance proposal. So, it seems the majority of voters are getting ready for voting on Hadeswap proposals 1 week before casting vote on them.

Hadeswap DAO Possible Bribe Activity

There are various ways in which voters can be bribed to vote a certain way in DAO proposals. Some possible methods include:

1. Direct payments: One way to bribe voters is by offering them direct payments (in $HADES). For example, Voter-A sends some $HADES (as a bribe) to Voter-B in order to make him/her (Voter-B) vote for the desirable option (YES/NO) of Voter-A.
2. Incentives: Another way to bribe voters is by offering them incentives that are not directly related to the proposal or the DAO. For example, a voter may be promised access to exclusive events or services, or they may be offered discounts on products or services.
3. Social pressure: Voters may also be bribed through social pressure or influence. For example, a voter may be part of a community or network where certain voting behaviors are encouraged or rewarded. In such cases, voters may feel pressured to vote in a certain way to maintain their status within the community.
4. Information manipulation: Lastly, voters can be bribed by manipulating information or spreading false information. This could involve spreading rumors or misinformation about a particular proposal or candidate to sway the opinions of voters.

It's important to note that bribery is generally frowned upon in DAOs and other decentralized systems that prioritize transparency and fairness. Many DAOs have rules and guidelines in place to prevent bribery and other forms of manipulation, and violations can result in penalties or expulsion from the DAO. Additionally, reputation-based voting systems that prioritize contributions and actions within the DAO over financial stakes may also help reduce the impact of bribery and other forms of external influence.

In this part, I am going to investigate the possible bribe activity on Hadeswap Proposals which are done via “Direct Payments” (because other methods are not detectable really!)

According to these charts, Despite the young age of Hadeswap governance (Compared to the other DAOs), the activity and proposal participation of voters on this governance is more than the average activity & engagement on other DAOs’ proposals on Realm.

During the high peak of governance voting on Hadeswap (since 1st March 2023) the voting activity on this governance has almost more than 40% share (50% on March 6th!) of all Realms DAOs voting activity which is a quite satisfying result for this community!

So, we can definitely say that there is more active voting participation on Hadeswap, relative to the typical governance behavior we see on Realms.

Methodology

The main tables that I have used for this analysis are Flipside’s solana.core.fact_proposal_votes (for governance voting activity analysis), solana.core.fact_proposal_creation (to extract the creation date, creator & the title of created proposals), solana.core.fact_events & solana.core.fact_transactions (to analyze $HADES delegation activity in order to calculate the voting power of voters), **solana.core.fact_swaps (**to analyze $HADES swapping activity) &

**solana.core.fact_transfers (**to analyze $HADE transfer activity which is also used for possible bribe activities).

• Hadeswap Governance ID in Realms = “HgcYAkXFT1ENpUCjBZWc1TjAAFacUwdGZRNhTHx9cuo”. (Meaning that we should filter the realm_id column to this address in order to analyze Hadeswap governance proposals)
• $HADES token mint address = **‘**BWXrrYFhT7bMHmNBFoQFWdsSgA3yXoAnMhDK6Fn1eSEn’

One of the major challenges in this dashboard was calculating the voting power (delegated $HADES) of Hadeswap governance voters. For this purpose, Firstly, I have investigated the activities of some Hadeswap voters on the Solana chain (using Solscan and also the fact_transactions table) to see which contracts they interacted with before executing votes on proposals (since they need to delegate $HADES before being able to vote on Hadeswap proposals). So, I have extracted the Hadeswap governance vault address which is used to delegate $HADES to it. I have extracted the tx_id of transactions that have interacted with Hadeswap governance program_id (GovER5Lthms3bLBqWub97yVrMmEogzX7xNjdXpPPCVZw) using solana.core.fact_events table. this program_id is used to delegate $HADES. Then, I extracted tx_id of transactions that the $HADES token was a part of them (pre_token_balances[0]:mint ilike 'BWXrrYFhT7bMHmNBFoQFWdsSgA3yXoAnMhDK6Fn1eSEn'). Then, I extracted the delegated amount of voters from solana.core.fact_events from instruction:parsed:info:amount column, considering that $HADES token decimal is 9 (so we should divide the extracted amount by 10^9 in order to get the actual delegated $HADES)

I have only considered the successful votes cast in all steps (SUCCEEDED = “TRUE”)

On the left table, we can see the list of proposals that both bribe receivers & senders have participated on them, and also the vote choice of senders & receivers on the executed proposal.

As we see, on the majority of proposals, the senders & receivers have casted the same vote which increase the possibility of bribe activity in Hadeswap governance.

Summary & Conclusion

The governance activity on Hadeswap is increasing over time and especially since 1st March 2023 when we have seen many participating voters on proposals and also the increasing number of executed proposals during this timespan. This DAO is well-performing compared to the other DAOs in Realms, the %Share of Hadeswap governance voting activity during March includes almost 50% of the total %Share of voting activity in the Realms app which is very high and satisfying result!

The voting power in Hadeswap governance is mainly concentrated by the wallet address J9TtRc2AUnxBh3uA6uxqL1BBbm6qXEPfEFF9o2teeMzm (more than 86% of delegated $HADES belong to this account), but since this wallet has not participated in any major Hadeswap proposals’ votings, by excluding it from results, we can say that the voting power is well & fairly distributed among voters which shows the semi-equal voting power and impact of voters on this governance.

$HADES transfers & purchasing activity usually increases before casting votes on Hadeswap proposals. The majority of voters become ready (receive/purchase $HADES) 1 week before casting votes on proposals.

in every governance, there is possible bribe activity and the Hadeswap governance is not exempt from this. We have seen that there were more than 20 voters that had possible and submucous bribe activity. The possibility of bribe activity has even increased more after we have seen that the vote choices of the majority of these bribe participators was the same!

**Discord: Ali3N#8546 Twitter: Alik_110 Email: Alik110.72@Gmail.com Check out My Other Dashboards at: **

Dashboard Introduction

Hadeswap's governance has taken a turn for the dramatic after their purchase of the SMB IP. Since then, the DAO has hosted notable governance proposals.

On the occasion of this event, In this dashboard, I am going to:

• Analyze The Overall Hadeswap Governance Voting Activity
• Compare Governance Activity on Hadeswap vs Other Solana DAOs in Realms.
• Analyze The Decentralization of Voting Power Among Hadeswap Voters. (In order to be able to vote on Hadeswap governance, users have to deposit (delegate) their $HADES into the Hadeswap governance vault. The delegators with a higher volume of delegated $HADES have more voting power than other voters).
• Check How often are wallets transferring/Purchasing $Hades before casting a vote?
• Check the Possible $HADES Bribe Activity Among Hadeswap Voters. (For example, voter A sends some $HADES to voter B in order to make him (Voter B) vote for the desirable option (YES/NO) of Voter A.

According to the above charts, we can see some increasing number and especially volume of both transfers and purchases (especially purchases on the last chart) of $HADES token around the creation date of different proposals on Hadeswap governance.

This means that users often try to buy/transfer $HADES in order to deposit it into the governance vault and be eligible for voting on Hadeswap governance proposals.

Based on the above data, there were 84.4k $HADES being transferred among Hadeswap governance voters. The participators of these possible-bribe activities were 23 unique senders and 20 unique receivers.

According to the left chart, the vote-choice of bribe senders & receivers in 86.7% of proposals that both of them have participated in, was equal to each other! (the more possibility of bribe activity).

There are only 2 proposals that $HADES sender & receiver have casted non-equal vote options on them.

In the “Hadeswap $HADES Bribe Paths” table, you can see the total number and volume of $HADES transfers between governance voters. These voters can be the participators in the possible bribe activity in Hadeswap governance voting.

How do you envision the "bribe wars" continuing to shake out?

The concept of "bribe wars" in DAOs refers to the practice of competing groups offering financial incentives to other members to support their proposal over others. This phenomenon has been observed in several high-profile cases, maybe the most famous of this case is the battle between Uniswap and SushiSwap DEXs for control of the decentralized exchange market in 2020.

In the short term, it is likely that we will continue to see such "bribe wars" in DAOs, as the financial incentives of controlling a DAO can be significant. However, as the cryptocurrency industry matures and DAOs become more commonplace, we may see a shift towards more collaborative decision-making processes that prioritize the long-term interests of the DAO and its members over short-term financial gains.

One potential solution to mitigate the impact of "bribe wars" in DAO proposals is the use of reputation-based voting systems, where voting power is based on an individual's past contributions and actions within the DAO rather than their financial stake. This would incentivize members to act in the best interest of the DAO rather than their own financial gain.

Overall, the future of "bribe wars" in cryptocurrency DAO proposals is uncertain, but it is likely that we will continue to see competition and financial incentives playing a significant role in decision-making processes within these organizations in the short term.