This proposal makes the edge case scenario it is trying to address worse, please vote AGAINST this proposal
(Revised with AI to make it clearer)
TL;DR
Vote AGAINST removing Abstain votes from quorum.
This change increases the risk that bad proposals pass by discouraging “No” voters from showing up early.
Why the Proposal Backfires
| Current Logic | Proposed Logic | What Really Happens |
|---|---|---|
| Yes + No + Abstain count toward quorum | Yes + No count only (Abstain is ignored) | If quorum is almost reached, extra No votes can push the proposal over quorum — helping it pass. Rational No voters will therefore wait until the last minute (or never vote), making proposals look better than they actually are. |
Perverse Incentive for “No” Votes
Quorum not reached yet?
- A “No” vote helps the proposal hit quorum.
- The rational move is to stay silent until the end.
Late-Voting Spiral
When early “No” votes disappear:
- Later voters see mostly “Yes.”
- Humans herd.
- More “Yes” votes follow.
- A proposal that should fail squeaks through.
Signal Distortion
Governance loses a neutral signal.
Right now, Abstain means:
“I showed up, but I’m not for or against.”
Removing Abstain from quorum makes it equivalent to not voting at all — which is not the same thing.
Better Design Patterns (Ranked)
| Design | Quorum Calculation | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Best | Yes + Abstain | Encourages participation without punishing “No” votes |
| Okay | Yes only | Simple; treats quorum as pure turnout for support |
| Acceptable | Yes + No + Abstain (with low quorum threshold) | Works if quorum is rarely a deciding factor |
| Worst (this proposal!) | Yes + No | Creates the “hide your No vote” dynamic |
Bottom Line
Keeping the status quo is safer than this change.
If we want to fix the edge case, a better solution would be to remove “No” votes from quorum — not Abstain.
Until then, vote AGAINST this Governor update to preserve balanced incentives and clearer signaling.
NOTE:
In other contexts, removing Abstain from counting towards quorum would make perfect sense, but in a DAO context with public voting & real time results, it is a bad idea.