What is the Question?🚨

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".

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?

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?

Finally, have ATOM holders re-delegated their staked ATOM as a result of the vote? Highlight any interesting patterns in re-delegation activity.

Analyzed Topics:

1. Overall & Daily Analysis of Proposal #82
2. Voters Distribution
3. Comparison of Proposal #82 with Other recent Proposals
4. Vote Changing Activity
5. $ATOM Re-Delegation
6. Voters $ATOM Balance

Introduction🚩

What is Cosmos?

Cosmos (ATOM) is a cryptocurrency that powers an ecosystem of blockchains designed to scale and interoperate with each other. The team aims to "create an Internet of Blockchains, a network of blockchains able to communicate with each other in a decentralized way." Cosmos is a proof-of-stake chain.

More Info

What was Proposal #82?

It describes two pieces of app-specific functionality, the Interchain Scheduler and Interchain Allocator, which together form a flywheel for accelerating interchain growth.

More Info

Method⚡

In this dashboard i analyzed proposal #82 on cosmos that its voting period recently launched on Oct 31th until November 14th. At first i will take a look at its daily and overall stats like number of votes and voters with their vote types, then i will go more deep in the analysis and compare it to other cosmos recent proposals and especially voters vote changing activity.

I mainly extracted the data from ==Cosmos.core== schema that newly launched on Flipsidecrypto database and used ==“cosmos.core.fact_msg_attributes”== & ==“cosmos.core.fact_transfers”== and ==“cosmos_fact_governance_votes”== tables.

I filtered proposal #82 data from these tables with proposal_id=’82’ and only considered successful transactions with tx_succeeded=’TRUE’

The data analyzed between ==2022-10-30== and ==2022-11-14== (Proposal #82 voting period)

Dashboard made on ==2022-12-11==

Findings👀

• Totally over 58K voters recorded a total of 70.5K votes in 14 days between Oct 31 2022 until November 14th and most of the votes happened on November 1st, the second day that voting got started while most of the voters recorded YES votes.
• In a general view, over 76% of voters were agreed to that proposal and voted YES. But this proposal got rejected at the end because a huge number of voters changed their mind and changed their YES votes to NO and we will get to this later in this dashboard.
• The first 2 days of voting for proposal #82 were the hottest day between 14 days of voting and those days recorded the most number of votes by the most number of voters.

Findings👀

• As we see, mostly they were Non first time voters that voted for this proposal and most of the both non first-time and first time voters voted YES to this proposal.

1. Overall & Daily Analysis of Proposal #82

3. Comparison of Proposal #82 with Other recent Proposals

2. Voters Distribution

Findings👀

• 156 validators also voted for this proposal and they accounted 0.2% of all proposal #82 voters.

Findings👀

• We can see the comparison of Proposal #82 to other recent proposals on cosmos, it seems that this proposal has recorded more votes and voters than its previous 10 proposals and in past 20 proposals before #82, it will place in the third in terms of number of votes over 70K votes in total.
• Proposal #69 is in the lead in terms of number of votes with over 105K votes by 85.8K voters followed by proposal #65 with 93K votes recorded by 87.7K voters.
• In Terms of number of voters, proposal #65 is in the lead among past 20 proposals before #82.
• It is interesting that although proposal #65 had more voters than proposal #69, but it recorded less votes than it over time!
• If we compare proposal #82 to other recent proposals in terms of average votes and voters, we can see that proposal #82 is in the lead among recent proposals and has more average stats.

4. Vote Changing Activity

Findings👀

• Most of the changing votes happened on the first day of voting, Oct 31th with over 2.5K number of vote changes. We can see most voters changed their vote from YES to No or YES to No with VETO.
• In overall, over 42% of voters changed their vote to No with VETO from YES over time in that 14 days followed by YES to NO with accounting 16% of voters vote changing share.

Findings👀

• Over 73% of voters changed their mind once followed by 17.6% of them that changed their mind twice and changed their votes for 2 times.
• 51,500 of voters recorded only 1 vote with accounting over 88% of the whole voters share.
• ==“cosmos14wc97l8zn5mkl825pgshqcy8749qaetdmp0vtq”== and ==“cosmos1tugm892unf8w2hm0u0pc04xzrmplktgw3gr5jh”== wallet addresses both made 8 vote changes and they are in the lead among all voters with the most cote changes over time.

5. $ATOM Re-Delegation

Findings👀

• November 6th until 8th has recorded the most number of redelegates and redelegate users over time and it was during the voting time of proposal #82. It was also around the FTX collapse too.
• $ATOM Redelgate volume experienced a huge spike on November 7th with over 8M delegated $ATOM.
• In a general view, before Proposal #82 more number of redelegates has been recorded but in terms of volume, the #82 voting time is in the lead with over 10M delegated $ATOM and an average volume of 16.93K.

6. Voters $ATOM Balance

Findings👀

• In this section, i showed voters $ATOM balance during the proposal #82 voting time.
• We can see that over 10K of voters had between 10-100 $ATOM followed by over 8K of them with 100-1000 $ATOM balance in the second place during those 14 days of voting.
• As i mentioned earlier, most of the users voted YES , between these voters, most of them had less than 10 $ATOM tokens followed by 10-100 $ATOM holders in the second place.
• Voters with more than 10K $ATOM were the least in all voting options.

Conclusion💡

• Although proposal #82 has recorded so many YES votes in its first few days of voting, but got rejected because most of the YES voters has changed their votes to NO or NO with VETO for some reason.
• Proposal #82 has recorded more number of votes and voters than its past 10 proposals and we can say it was more popular than cosmos recent proposals.
• The highest number of redelegates and redelegate volume has recorded on November 7th, but in overall, before proposal #82 had the highest number of redelegates and redelegators over time.
• November 7th has recorded a massive volume of over 8M delegated $ATOM.
• Proposal #82 voters were mostly had between 10-100 $ATOM, nearly 10K of them.

Author: Sbhn_NP

Discord : Sbhn_NP#8717

Twitter : Sbhn_np

Instagram : Sbhn_NP

Thanks for your time!

Cosmos Governance Overview

The Cosmos Hub ("Gaia") has an on-chain governance mechanism for passing text proposals, changing consensus parameters, and spending funds from the community pool.

This repository provides background information on these different kinds of proposals and best-practices for drafting them and proposing them on-chain. It also provides a place for collaborating on draft proposals in plain text on Github.

If you'd like to draft a proposal, start here. See the contents below for more background on the governance system, the different types of proposals, and how to submit one.

ATOM stakers can find active on-chain proposals to vote on here (opens new window).

== \n The Proposal Process: Two Periods==

1. Deposit Period

The deposit period lasts either 14 days or until the proposal deposit totals 64 ATOMs, whichever happens first.

Deposits

Deposit amounts are at risk of being burned. Prior to a governance proposal entering the voting period (ie. for the proposal to be voted upon), there must be at least a minimum number of ATOMs deposited (64). Anyone may contribute to this deposit. Deposits of passed and failed proposals are returned to the contributors.

In the past, different people have considered contributions amounts differently. There is some consensus that this should be a personal choice. There is also some consensus that this can be an opportunity for supporters to signal their support by adding to the deposit amount, so a proposer may choose to leave contribution room (ie. a deposit below 64 ATOMs) so that others may participate. It is important to remember that any contributed ATOMs are at risk of being burned.

Burned deposits

Deposits are burned only when proposals are vetoed i.e. 33.4% of voting power backing the 'NoWithVeto' option as documented in the Cosmos SDK gov module spec (opens new window).

2. Voting Period

The voting period is currently a fixed 14-day period. During the voting period, participants may select a vote of either 'Yes', 'No', 'Abstain', or 'NoWithVeto'. Voters may change their vote at any time before the voting period ends.

More Info