Governance Grind

    Terra - 9

    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    db_img

    On 8 May 2022, UST, the Terra native stablecoin, lost its peg with the dollar. The loss of the peg caused the Terra ecosystem value to its complete collapse on 10 May. Two options were available for Terra developers, either continue the terra or abandon it and establish a new project. A group of Terra developers take the latter option and started a new project called Terra 2.0.

    Terra 2.0 as a decentralized blockchain is governed by community members. Decentralized governance allows users and validators to make changes to the Terra protocol. Community members submit, vote, and implement proposals using the Cosmos Governance platform.

    The governance system to be effective and as decentralized as possible requires high turnout in voting. Hence, the question of how to increase participation in governance among the community is an important question to be answered.

    This dashboard investigating the past governance proposals with a focus on the 5 recent ones, attempts to shed some light on the factors that contribute to the participation of the Terra communities in the governance.


    Overview



    Analysis



    Governance votings among the terra community started in June 2022. The graph below shows how the daily number of votes has changed over time.

    We can see some busy weeks in July, September, October, and December 2022.

    We can also see that most of the voting periods overlapped and there are days that there is no voting.

    Average number of votes and voters per proposal is 251 and 229 respectively.

    The two proposals with the highest turnout are proposals 349 and 986.

    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...

    Results vs turnouts

    Data shows that there is a relationship between turnout and results. As the graphs below indicates the number of votes for rejected proposals is significantly lower than for passed proposals.

    The average turnout of passed proposals is about 350 while the average turnout of rejected proposals is near 200.

    Recent Proposals

    The graphs below show the number of votes per recent 5 proposals as well as their vote options.

    We can see that proposal number 3619 and 3769 experienced a turnout higher than the average. Also we can see that the number of ‘No’ vote is high in proposals #3794 and #3795.

    The barchart below also shows how the number of votes has changed over time. In the next section, we delve into the dynamics of votes per proposals.

    Proposal Contents

    Table below listed the selected recent proposals.

    Proposal IDResults
    3619Phoenix Software Upgrade 2.2.0 *Passed
    3665Control Protocol Grant Proposal **Passed
    3794Terra Poker | Grant Proposal **Rejected
    3795Terra Poker Grant Proposal (Updated) **Rejected
    3796ERIS Protocol Revised Grant Proposal **Passed
    *Short description with a github link
    ** Short description with a link to the agura for full proposal and discussion

    We do not see a significant difference between the low turnout proposals and the high turnout. We can see that in except one the Agura forum link for further discussions are provided. Discussions before and during voting can increase the number of participants.

    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...

    In this section, we want to focus on the dynamics of votes over time.

    Specifically, we want to examine whether early votes influence the late votes and final results.

    The hourly number of votes per proposal is shown in the graphs in this section. We cannot see any effects of early votes on the final turnout.

    Votes for proposal #3796 is a case that the percentage of options has not changed radically in the course of the voting period.

    However, we can see that the early vote for proposal #3619 dominated all votes. Both these proposals received a high turnout.


    We can see from the chart next to this box that in overall the number of votes per proposal is decreasing over time.

    From #1382 to #2460, all proposal was rejected by the force of more than 34% ‘No with Veto’.

    The most unanimous votes were for proposal # 986 (Terra Phoenix Airdrop).


    Summary


    In May 2022, the Terra stablecoin lost its peg with the dollar, causing the ecosystem to collapse. A group of Terra developers decided to start a new project called Terra 2.0, which is a decentralized blockchain governed by community members. The new governance system requires high voter turnout, and the question of how to increase participation among the community is an important one. The dashboard provided examines past governance proposals, with a focus on the five most recent ones, in an attempt to shed light on the factors that contribute to participation in the Terra community.

    The data shows that there is a relationship between turnout and results and the average turnout of passed proposals is around 350 while the average turnout of rejected proposals is around 200.

    The data also shows that discussions before and during voting can increase the number of participants.

    The results does not support the effect of early votes on the late votes and final results. it concludes that early votes do not have any significant effects on the final turnout.

    \n