• On this article we will take a look at the Proposal #362.
• As it is said in the boxes bellow there are 24.2k votes on the Proposal #362 and 24.1k votes were from validators and the number of voter validators are 125.
• Deposited volume on Proposal #362 is 1600 OSMO by a single depositor.
• In the column forms bellow we can see the number of depositors on #362 is less than recent proposals but the volume deposited is more by 270 than recent.

Stats

Comparison of Proposal

Vote-Changing

• Based on the percentage wheels shown bellow we can say that 1.28% changed their votes after voting.
• Among the voters who changed their votes 94.4% voted for different options 2 times, in the second place 5.21% voted for different choices 3 times and lastly in the final position 0.347% voted 4 different options.
• 93% of vote changers changed vote 1 time, 6.64% changed 2 times and the final section changed their option more than 2 times.

• On the first image we can see a column form that tells us the number of voters count and their vote choice, and we can see that 18.976k voters, voted for YES with 20.575k votes.
• From the distribution wheels on the first row we can understand that over 84% of votes were YES and over 84% of voters, voted YES.
• Only over half a percent( 0.52% to be precise) of all voters are voter validators.
• By the column form on the left in the second row we can understand that 28.5% voter validators voted NO which by comparison is much bigger portion to the regular voters NO section.

• Here we have the average number of votes per regular voter of validator which in order is 1.08 votes and 1.3 votes.
• The number of different choices per voter is also like the number of votes wheel and here we can see in the second wheel the voter validators overcome by 56.2% and 1.29 different option per voter.
• On the second row we can see the different number of votes and their choices from Nov 14th to Nov 19th, we had the most number of votes on Nov 15th which 13.114k of them were YES and 109 of them were NO.

• The top 20 voters with most number of votes on the Proposal #362, tell us that the most number of votes the first voter has in 17 and on the other hand the most number of different votes for the first voter( on the right side column graph) is 4.
• Same as the normal voters info we have the top 20 number of votes and different votes for validators too.
• In the second row left hand graph we can see the first top voter has voted 4 times and the top voter with different options has 3 different votes on their behalf.

• On the comparison of votes and voters of Proposal #362 with recent Proposals, we can see that both the number of votes and voters were increased in the Proposal #362.
• The proposal #362 has 4.3813k more votes and 3.95672k more voters.
• The total deposit volume of proposal #362 is pretty much like its recent proposals and in last ones we also had proposals with more deposit volume such as #317 and #320
• By the vote count comparison of #362 with its previous proposals we can see that the vote counts are pretty standard and in the higher middle of the charts, this goes for both vote count and voter count comparison bellow.

• The same information in the last text box can be said about the average number of votes per voters and average number of voters per day and the numbers are in a higher middle compared to other proposals.
• What is noticeable here is that the number of votes and voter count and the average amounts for proposal #353 is higher than any other proposals in the columns.
• In he daily number of votes and voters on different proposals we can see that on Nov 15th the majority of voters and votes conclude the activity for proposal #362.

• The average balance of vote changer who changed their votes more than once is much higher than the other 2 averages and only 14 of the vote changers in this section have less than 10 $OSMO.

• We can see here that 16.44 k of the voters have OSMO balance of less than 10$OSMO and the average OSMO balance of voters is 307 $OSMO.

• The average OSMO balance of vote changers in the studied proposal is 2960 $OSMO and 215 of the vote changers have less than 10 $OSMO.

• The behavior of vote changers is distributed into different segments based on type of their change in the chart bellow.
• As you can see in the first place 78 of changers, changed their vote from YES to NO, now this is for normal voters but for validators we have 8 of the changers, changing their vote form YES to NO.
• And the least changes have been in the following cases:
  • Changed Vote From NO WITH VETO To ABSTAIN
  • Changed Vote From NO To ABSTAIN
  • Changed Vote From ABSTAIN To NO WITH VETO
  • Changed Vote From YES To NO WITH VETO
  • Changed Vote From ABSTAIN To NO
  • Changed Vote From NO To NO WITH VETO
  • Changed Vote From ABSTAIN To YES
  • Changed Vote From ABSTAIN To NO WITH VETO

Conclusion

• The osmosis governance proposals are important events that make a lot of impact on the Osmosis platform management and here we have the proposal #362 and compares of it with the recent proposals.
• As we saw the amount of volume deposited into #362 is 1600 OSMO and all by one depositer and the volume amount is pretty standard compared to the other proposals, because most of previous ones also had 1600 OSMO volume deposited into them.
• The wheels in the beginning and the middle suggest that the validators average number of votes are more thane regular voters and a big portion of vote changers which are only 1.28% of the total voters count, are validators and they changed their votes (judged by the percentage wheels) more thane the regular voters.
• The average balance of vote changers who changed their votes once or more than once, are way more than the average balance of voters who didn’t change their votes and this probably means that the voters who have more balance were probably more preceptive than the lower balance voters and the reason of changing their votes multiple times was either to change the course of vote process or to make the better decision in the end.

Appendix

• Author: Hojjat
• Discord: hojjat7878#8809
• Twitter: @hojjat8d
• Email: hojjat78delshad@gmail.com

Thank you dear ==alik110 for codes==

Source codes link :

THANK YOU FOR READING!

Osmosis Review

The Decentralized Finance (DeFi) industry seeks a massive change in cryptocurrency trading as it challenges the functions of existing centralized exchanges. Since 2020, the decentralized exchange has continued to grow in popularity and usage. Centralized exchanges have remained a majority with high trading volume and this is because it has provided high convenience in trading crypto and fiat currency. However, these centralized exchanges have limitations in areas like security, anonymity, and control. In this case, decentralized exchanges are providing all-encompassing solutions. This Osmosis Exchange Review has all you need to know about decentralized exchange.

Decentralized exchanges offer new integrated features that distinguish them from centralized exchanges. They offer Automated Market Maker which changed the entire ecosystem entirely. One of its amazing features is user anonymity. Privacy is one of the limitations of centralized exchanges and while Bitcoin and Ethereum claim to be pseudonymous in nature there is no complete anonymity. Transactions done on the blockchain are accessible to everyone. Hence, users are vulnerable to risks since their public addresses are shared. The decentralized exchange aims at ensuring transparency while ensuring that users trade without having to worry about their privacy.

Automated Market Maker is a major part of the Decentralized Exchange (DEX). The AMM has changed the style of trading by introducing the Peer-to-contract method. AMM ensures increased decentralization as traders can trade without prior permission and prices are determined by algorithms and not order books. The DeFi industry is still a growing innovation and progressive changes are made to ensure that users trade without any difficulties. Also, Automated Market Maker has made a space for itself in the crypto market through the introduction of new technologies and altering the existing regulatory frameworks.

Method

The following tables were used to create this dashboard:

osmosis.core.fact_governance_votes --- osmosis.core.dim_vote_options

osmosis.core.fact_governance_proposal_deposits --- osmosis.core.dim_labels

Filtering this number in the proposal_id column is used to find Proposal 362.

In this dashboard, Proposal 362 is compared with Proposal greater than 350.

In the dashboard below, only successful transactions have been checked using the following command.

tx_status = 'SUCCEEDED'