Osmosis Governance

Osmosis users who have Staked their OSMO are eligible to vote on governance proposals. Osmosis has an on-chain governance mechanism for passing text proposals, changing consensus parameters, spending funds from the community pool, and for updating Osmosis pool incentives. Osmosis governance is driven by the Osmosis community, which has large overlap with the Cosmos community. Much of the documentation this repo is based off was funded by the community fund itself in Cosmos Hub Proposal 23. Governance discussions happens in a number of places moderated by diverse community members such as Discord, Telegram and anywhere else user might interact with members of the Osmosis community.

What is OSMOSIS?

Osmosis is Layer-1, Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchain built using the Cosmos SDK that has optimized its design to be a sandbox for automated market makers (AMMs). The chain enables developers to design and deploy customized AMMs by using its various modules and leveraging Osmosis' on-chain governance system. Osmosis' native token, OSMO, grants holders the right to vote on proposed network changes and earn rewards for helping secure the network. Its first application, also called Osmosis, is an AMM that features ATOM and OSMO as its initial base trading pairs.

General Stats of Proposal 362

FINDINGS

According to the data we obtained, the most voted option of the proposal 362 was 'YES' and it has a total of 20,575 votes. In addition, there are a total of 19,081 people who voted 'YES'. The ratio is not 1:1 because the votes of the validator and regular voters are counted differently.

When we examine them according to the days, we see that the most votes were cast on 15 November. There were a total of 13,114k 'YES' votes on this date. The number of people who voted for 'YES' was 12,643 on this date.

When we examine it by hours, we see that most games are used between 04-06 hours. And as a day, we can see that Tuesday is quite busy.

When we categorize the balances of the voters, we see that most of the voters have a balance of less than 10 $OSMO, exactly 21.3k people.

Proposal Comparison

FINDINGS

When we compare the recent proposals in the time period of proposal 362, the proposal that received the most votes and voters with slight differences was proposal 362.

Apart from that, if we look at the recent proposals in general, it has roughly the same number of voters as the 357-358-359-360-361-364-365 proposals. Average votes per voter value is 1.08, which is also close to the average.

We also see in the vote comparison that most of them have a value close to the proposal.

Vote Changing

FINDINGS

When we examine the users who changed their votes, 98 percent of those who changed their votes changed their vote only once, and the number of these people is 297.

The maximum number of votes users re-voted by changing their votes was 'NO'. These are 132 people in total.

In addition, when we combine the number of vote changes and the decisions they took, the majority of those who voted 'NO' gave the first decision change.

When we analyze the vote changers according to their balances, the whales cover a very small part of the vote changers.

And the whales don't have a specific choice of choice, roughly the same number of choices they choose.

The most decision changes occurred on balances less than 10$OSMO.

CONCLUSION

The highest number of votes was given on the second day of voting, that is, on November 15.

The time period in which the majority of the votes are cast is between 04-06 on Tuesday.

The majority of users who voted are low-balance accounts, with 80 percent of them under $10OSMO.

When we compare Proposal 362 with other proposals, it has average values. It has the same number of votes and voters as most proposals. But the proposal rightly had the most value during the time that 362 was active.

Nearly half of the voters changed the vote to 'NO'. And 98 percent of the vote changers changed the game only once. And again, the game changers were mostly accounts under $10OSMO.

Proposal #362: Osmosis Grants Program (OGP) Renewal

By voting YES, OSMO stakers signal their support for a 12 month renewal of the Osmosis Grants Program with Reverie continuing as Grants Lead.

By voting NO, OSMO stakers voice their dissent for a 12 month renewal of the Osmosis Grants Program.

The Osmosis Grants Program (OGP) has been active for 6 months, and is now looking to renew for an additional 12 months with some changes to the program. The details are outlined below.

Details

The OGP will continue its core objective of issuing grants to contributors that can deliver long-term value to Osmosis.
The OGP will add to this objective the incubation of new subDAOs and Strategic Initiatives to tackle protocol functions.
Reverie will continue to serve as Grants Lead and is requesting 55,000 USDC and 25,000 OSMO per month in renewed compensation.
Reverie will add more transparency through monthly reporting, calls, and other frequent reports.
Jeremy Parish and Monetsupply will be added as two new signers on the OGP multi-sig.

As part of this proposal, the community will have an option to terminate Reverie’s involvement with the OGP after 6 months.

Methodology

The tables I used while preparing this dashboard are as follows:

FACT_GOVERNANCE_VOTES I used this table to get the main vote and voter information.

FACT_DAILY_BALANCES I used this table to calculate the OSMO balance of the users.

FACT_GOVERNANCE_PROPOSAL_DEPOSITS I used this table to find the OSMO volume deposited in the proposals.

flipside

flipside

Osmosis Governance: 362 and Beyond

Osmosis Governance

What is OSMOSIS?

FINDINGS

According to the data we obtained, the most voted option of the proposal 362 was 'YES' and it has a total of 20,575 votes. In addition, there are a total of 19,081 people who voted 'YES'. The ratio is not 1:1 because the votes of the validator and regular voters are counted differently.

When we examine them according to the days, we see that the most votes were cast on 15 November. There were a total of 13,114k 'YES' votes on this date. The number of people who voted for 'YES' was 12,643 on this date.

When we examine it by hours, we see that most games are used between 04-06 hours. And as a day, we can see that Tuesday is quite busy.

When we categorize the balances of the voters, we see that most of the voters have a balance of less than 10 $OSMO, exactly 21.3k people.

FINDINGS

When we compare the recent proposals in the time period of proposal 362, the proposal that received the most votes and voters with slight differences was proposal 362.

Apart from that, if we look at the recent proposals in general, it has roughly the same number of voters as the 357-358-359-360-361-364-365 proposals. Average votes per voter value is 1.08, which is also close to the average.

We also see in the vote comparison that most of them have a value close to the proposal.

Vote Changing

FINDINGS

When we examine the users who changed their votes, 98 percent of those who changed their votes changed their vote only once, and the number of these people is 297.

The maximum number of votes users re-voted by changing their votes was 'NO'. These are 132 people in total.

In addition, when we combine the number of vote changes and the decisions they took, the majority of those who voted 'NO' gave the first decision change.

When we analyze the vote changers according to their balances, the whales cover a very small part of the vote changers.

And the whales don't have a specific choice of choice, roughly the same number of choices they choose.

The most decision changes occurred on balances less than 10$OSMO.

CONCLUSION

The highest number of votes was given on the second day of voting, that is, on November 15.

The time period in which the majority of the votes are cast is between 04-06 on Tuesday.

The majority of users who voted are low-balance accounts, with 80 percent of them under $10OSMO.

When we compare Proposal 362 with other proposals, it has average values. It has the same number of votes and voters as most proposals. But the proposal rightly had the most value during the time that 362 was active.

Nearly half of the voters changed the vote to 'NO'. And 98 percent of the vote changers changed the game only once. And again, the game changers were mostly accounts under $10OSMO.

Methodology