Just wanted to start a discussion about how we can mitigate sybil attacks on our governance as we grow. As you may know, we currently use Quadratic Voting on our snapshot governance votes. This means that each wallet’s voting power is determined by the square root of their sLOBI balance instead of their sLOBI balance itself. This is meant to combat large holders calling all the shots while normal participants feel their vote doesn’t matter. In this mechanism, if most people agree on a certain option that option may win the vote even if they don’t control most of the sLOBI used to vote.
This is great. However, this can be gamed quite easily. For example, consider a hostile actor who holds x sLOBI. If they hold it in one wallet, they have voting power x0.5. If they hold it in four wallets, they have voting power 4*(x/4)0.5 = 2*x0.5. With sixteen wallets they have 4*x0.5 and so on. Since we’re on a blockchain, it can be hard to distinguish between sixteen legitimate holders and sixteen wallets controlled by a hostile actor.
In view of this I would like to discuss some potential mitigation strategies. Some that come to mind are:
- Ditch quadratic voting for normal voting but this brings back those old problems.
- If x% of the sLOBI is in favour of an option, it wins. (For example, take x = 90. Then if 90% of the sLOBI vote for Option 1 but many small accounts make Option 2 win in the Quadratic Voting, Option 1 will still be considered to have won.)
- If the difference between normal voting and quadratic voting is too big, go back to normal voting.
What do you think?