Infamous 82
Governance in the Cosmos Hub has gotten spicy, to say the least. Despite gaining the support of some of the most influential names in the space, Prop #82 was rejected after more than 1/3 of voters chose "NoWithVeto".
\n
Take a look at governance behavior surrounding Proposal #82 - specifically first time voters and vote switching. Is it possible to identify any key "swing voters" (ie ATOM whales or influential validators) that really turned the tide of the vote? Were any of them first-time voters?
\n
What is the average wallet size (in ATOM) of the people voting? Of the people who changed their vote? Further, is Prop #82 significantly different than other proposals from an engagement perspective? Analyze voting for Cosmos #82 vs. other recent governance proposals in the Hub. Has overall governance participation increased or decrease since Prop #82?
\n
Finally, have ATOM holders re-delegated their staked ATOM as a result of the vote? Highlight any interesting patterns in re-delegation activity.
Most of Yes votes were in the first days and highest vote was on November 1 with 14K votes
After November 9, number of votes labeled “No With Veto” has started to increase
In general, total number of Yes votes is 57.9K votes by 49.6K voters
total number of No votes is 4K and number of voters for this type of vote is 2.8K users
“No With Veto” has 10.9K votes and 10.2K users
total Abstain votes is 1.8K votes cast by 1.7K users
The ratio of Yes votes to other votes is about 77%
New and Regular Vovers
Number of Votes and Voters
93% of voters were regular voters and only 7% were new voters
total number of new voters is 4K users
78% of regular voters voted Yes to proposal #82
And 72.6% of new voters voted Yes
Method
Tables:
cosmos.core.fact_msg_attributes
cosmos_fact_governance_votes