Ratify Governance-Official Meanings for Yes, No, Abstain and NoWithVeto

Summary

This proposal aims to put forward a clear definition for the voting options “Yes”, “No”, “Abstain”, and “NoWithVeto” in Evmos governance that are simple for voters to understand and do not undermine the will of the community. These definitions are taken directly from the Evmos docs, and will be further formalized if this proposal passes.

• Yes: indicates approval of the proposal in its current form.
• No: indicates disapproval of the proposal in its current form.
• Abstain: indicates that the voter is impartial to the outcome of the proposal.
• NoWithVeto: indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting No. If the number of NoWithVeto votes is greater than a third of total votes excluding Abstain votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are burned.

Abstract

Recently, there have been proposals that have attempted to redefine the meanings of the voting options in a governance process. This is a dangerous precedent to set because it can lead to confusion and misunderstanding among voters, which can in turn undermine the will of the voters. To ensure that voters can make informed decisions and that the results of the vote accurately reflect the views of the community, it is crucial to clearly define the meanings of the voting options and design the governance process in a way that promotes fairness and effectiveness.

Motivation

In Evmos governance a “No” vote is generally understood to mean that the voter is opposed to the proposal and does not want it to be implemented. An “Abstain” vote means that the voter is neutral on the proposal and does not wish to express a position either for or against it. A “No With Veto” vote means the voter is strongly opposed and in most cases will lead to the proposal deposit being burned.

It can be dangerous to add or change meanings to the voting options in a governance process because it can lead to confusion and misunderstanding among voters. Additionally, changing meanings to the voting options can undermine the transparency and fairness of the governance process. If voters do not understand the full implications of their votes, they may make decisions that are not in line with their true views or the best interests of the community. This can undermine the legitimacy of the governance process and lead to mistrust and dissatisfaction among the community.

Overall, it is important to clearly define the meanings of the various voting options in a governance process to ensure that voters can make informed decisions and that the results of the vote accurately reflect the will of the community.

The passage of this proposal will ratify following definitions directly from the Evmos docs that are simple for voters to understand and do not undermine the will of the community:

• Yes: indicates approval of the proposal in its current form.
• No: indicates disapproval of the proposal in its current form.
• Abstain: indicates that the voter is impartial to the outcome of the proposal.
• NoWithVeto: indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting No. If the number of NoWithVeto votes is greater than a third of total votes excluding Abstain votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are burned.

Voting

• By voting YES, indicates approval of the proposal in its current form to ratify the governance-official meanings of “Yes”,“No”, “Abstain” and “No With Veto” for governance voting options.

• By voting NO, indicates disapproval of the proposal in its current form.

• By voting ABSTAIN, you formally decline to vote either for or against the proposal.

• By voting NOWITHVETO, indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting No. If the number of NoWithVeto votes is greater than a third of total votes excluding Abstain votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are burned.