Governance voting is one of the main features of Terra blockchain, Staking $LUNA let the Community members to tell their opinion about the decision making about the blockchain Terra and its ecosystem by voting on the proposals. In this dashboard I’ll take a look to the last 5 voting proposals published on Terra, but at first let’s find out how the governance voting works:

Introduction

Terra protocol is a decentralized public blockchain governed by community members. Governance is the democratic process that allows users and validators to make changes to the Terra protocol. Community members submit, vote, and implement proposals.

Proposals start as ideas within the community on Terra's Agora forum. After gaining support and feedback from the community, a proposer drafts and submits a proposal alongside an initial deposit.

After a proposal is submitted, it enters the deposit period, where it must reach a total minimum deposit of 512 Luna within 7 days from the time of its submission.

The deposit threshold is reached when the sum of the initial deposit (from the proposer) and the deposits from all other interested network participants meet or exceed 512 Luna.

If the minimum deposit has been reached before the end of the deposit period, then the proposal goes into a one-week voting period. While the proposal is in voting, holders of staked Luna can cast votes for the proposal.

The 4 voting options available are:

• Yes: in favor.
• No: not in favor.
• NoWithVeto: not in favor, and the creator should lose their deposit.
• Abstain: neither for or against. An abstain vote counts toward meeting quorum but does not count toward the threshold.

Delegators vote using their staked Luna. One staked Luna equals one vote.

If a delegator does not specify a vote with their staked Luna, their vote defaults to the vote cast by the validator their Luna is staked to. Delegators can override a validator's vote at any time during the voting period by voting with their staked Luna.

For a proposal to pass, the following conditions must be met:

1. Voter participation must be at least quorum. The current quorum value is 30% of all staked Luna.

2. The ratio of NoWithVeto votes must be less than veto. The current veto value is 33%.

3. The ratio of Yes votes must be greater than threshold. The current threshold value is 50%. Abstain votes are not included in the threshold tally.

   If a proposal meets all of the previous conditions, it passes. If a proposal fails to meet any of the previous conditions, it fails. Proposals that get rejected with veto do not get their deposits refunded

Methodology

There are 4 types of proposal on Terra:

> Text proposals: Text Proposals are used to create general-purpose petitions, such as asking core developers or community members to implement a specific feature. The community can reference a passed Text Proposal to the core developers or community members to indicate that a feature that potentially requires a soft or hard fork is in significant demand. > > Community pool proposals: Similar to text proposal but with an extra feature! Community pool is a special fund designated for funding community projects. Any community member can create a governance proposal to spend the tokens in the community pool. If the proposal passes, the funds are spent as specified in the proposal. > > Software Upgrade Proposals: This type of proposal requires validators to update their node software to a new version at a specified block height. > > Parameter Change Proposals: Parameter Change Proposals are a special type of proposal which, once passed, will automatically go into effect by directly altering the network's specified parameter.

First of all I looked to the all proposals published on Terra to find their types and compare the last 5 proposals with other ones.

After that I tracked to voting process of last 5 proposals to find the total votes, total voters, proposals success rate, and also to know if these proposals ability to bring new voters to the community or not.

Voters activity is the next parameter I checked in this dashboard and finally I compared the text of last 2 proposals to find out the differences between them and community members behavior in voting on them.

Sources

Proposal 3795: Terra Poker Grant Proposal (Updated) - ==Rejected ⛔

> Terra Poker is the first Texas Hold’em style Poker based Play-to-Earn protocol on the Terra Blockchain. Our mission is to leverage the game of poker to attract users to the Terra Ecosystem for its revival. The underlying proposal highlighted in the forum discussion in summary is: we have demonstrated with a track record of already working and highly used products, and continuously making progress to the next big milestones. The purpose of the fund is to help cover costs in the unexpected prolonged bear market. As one of the most significant contributors to the Ecosystem by all metrics, we are requesting a grant of 300,000 LUNA, vested over 3 months of 100K. The allocation of fund is 40% in Operational and Infrastructure, 60% in Wages.  > > full report:

**Proposal 3796: ERIS Protocol Revised Grant Proposal - ==Accepted ✅ **

> ERIS is a liquid staking and slow burn arbitrage protocol. We will provide the Terra community with a product suite for a stable LSD economy, a fair delegation and governance framework and a Liquid Staking Derivative Liquidity Hub on Terra. Over the last six months we have built: Amplifier, Amp Extractor, Amp Compounder, Manual Arb We would like to continue building and shipping with our focus on Terra and are requesting 312,500 LUNA (@ $1.60 = $500,000) for finishing the product portfolio around our LSD. The $500,000 will be used as follows: $100,000 for audits $35,000 for marketing $15,000 for infrastructure $350,000 for salaries The funds will be payed out to a 4-out-of-5 community multi-signature wallet and be distributed milestone based. Milestone 0: With passing of the proposal Milestone 1: Launch of Amp Governance Milestone 2: Launch of Arb Repeater Milestone 3: Integration of Warp Protocol With passing of the proposal 50% of the funding will be paid out to cover audits, marketing, infrastructure and a small part of salaries. The remaining 50% will start vesting when all milestones are reached. > > full report:

Findings

• Text type proposals have the most share on the Terra with 58% share but unlike the overall trend in the proposal types, 3 of the last 5 Terra proposals were community pool spending ones, which shows the creator of these proposals have counted on the community to use its special fund for their projects, by publishing the proposals in this type.
• In the heatmap chart we can see the highest activity of voting were in September and October 2022, as, many proposals were in voting stage during that period, and recently since 10th January 2023, Terra community has boosted its proposals submitting activity, after spending the last days of December 2022 silently. (Last 3 proposals on Terra have been submitted in recent 2 weeks while there was no active proposals from 24th December until 10th January 2023)
• Although the Terra community has been active in submitting proposals in last 2 weeks but the gap between proposal 3665 and proposal 3794 has shown its effect on the average time between the last published proposal and the next one! For the last 5 proposals the average gap between publishing 2 proposals is 7.8 days, while for other proposals this gap was 4.62 days, showing that new proposals were published quicker before.

Findings

• A total of 1048 votes have been cast by the Terra community in the last 5 proposals.
• Averagely, there are 111 votes per proposal in the last 5 Terra governance proposals, while for past proposals this amount was 84 votes per each. This shows that the activity of the Terra community in voting has increased recently.
• With 332 votes, proposal 3796 has gotten the most attention from the Terra community among the last 5 ones. This proposal is about ERIS Protocol’s  (a liquid staking and slow burn arbitrage protocol) grant request to develop the product. you can find out more about this proposal here:

Findings

• As we see, vetoing the proposals is hugely decreased in recent 5 proposals compared with the last ones, as only 1.5% of votes are “No with veto”, while in past proposal 25% of the votes where of this type. Also, the rate of ‘Yes” votes has been increased in recent 5 proposals compared with past proposals, showing there is more positive vibes about these proposals in Terra community.
• Terra Poker (the first Texas Hold’em style Poker based Play-to-Earn protocol on the Terra Blockchain) with 2 rejected proposals have the worst performance among last 5 Terra proposals, and the Phoenix Software upgrade proposal has the highest agreement level with 98% positive votes.

Findings

• 555 unique members of terra community have voted in recent 5 Terra proposals.
• Terra community members are participating in governance voting more than before, as the average number of unique voters per each proposal in recent 5 ones is 111, while for past proposals this amount was 84 voters per each.
• ERIS Protocol’s proposal (3796) has gotten the most attention from the Terra community among the last 5 ones with 304 unique voters.
• Votes in recent 5 proposals are more decentralized than before, as in these proposals the average power of votes are decreased comparing with the past ones. (Lower voting power means the impacts of the votes by user with high amounts staked $LUNA in final results is reduced. In other words, the dominance of high level stakers is lowered, which makes the lower level users votes more valuable)
• 66% of the users have voted in just 1 proposal, which can be the ERIS protocol’s, as this proposal have the highest amount of participations.
• 29.5% of the voters (164 from 555 voters) in the last 5 Terra proposals are new users with no voting history before. \n

Overall info

Voting status

Proposals performance

Voters status

Extra part: Comparing the last 2 proposals of Terra governance

Findings

Both these proposals are the Community pool type proposals which requesting funds for developing their projects.

The first difference between these two protocols is their type of product! Eris is a Defi protocol while Terra Poker is a Gamefi project, and almost in all chains users interact with Defi projects more than Gamefi ones. Therefore, personally, I think it’s easier for Eris to gain the attention of the community comparing with Terra Poker.

As a result of looking at the full reports (available on agora.terra.money) of the two protocols about their proposals, we can see that the Eris protocol's report has much more transparency and details about why they are requesting the funds, how the funds will be used, and also more infographics about the project's working methods than Terra Poker's report, giving members a better understanding of Eris' plans.

Another point can be these two projects activity on agora.terra.money , Eris related account is much more active on agora than Terra poker’s account.

(6 Threads & 10 Comments vs. 1 Thread & 4 Comments), I think the level of activity can have some impact on members' opinions.

Also if you look at Terra poker’s proposals history, you can see they published their second proposal immediately after the failure of their previous proposal (3794), however their ‘Yes’ votes increased from 14% to 33% but maybe if they could have a better review of their failed proposal they got a better result on the second one.

Me in social platforms:

Discord: Hessish#9153

Twitter: @h355i

Conclusion

• 3 of the last 5 Terra proposals were community pool spending ones, which shows the creator of these proposals have counted on the community to use its special fund for their projects, by publishing the proposals in this type.
• The activity of the Terra community in voting has increased recently, as the average number of votes and also voters in recent 5 proposals have increased comparing with the past ones.
• ERIS Protocol’s proposal (3796) has gotten the most attention from the Terra community among the last 5 ones with 304 unique voters.
• Terra Poker (the first Texas Hold’em style Poker based Play-to-Earn protocol on the Terra Blockchain) with 2 rejected proposals have the worst performance among last 5 Terra proposals, and the Phoenix Software upgrade proposal has the highest agreement level with 98% positive votes.
• Votes in recent 5 proposals are more decentralized than before, as in these proposals the average power of votes are decreased comparing with the past ones. (Lower voting power means the impacts of the votes by user with high amounts staked $LUNA in final results is reduced. In other words, the dominance of high level stakers is lowered, which makes the lower level users votes more valuable)
• 29.5% of the voters (164 from 555 voters) in the last 5 Terra proposals are new users with no voting history before.

Thanks for your attention, have a nice day! 👋