Try Quests to earn cryptoNouns Governance Participation
What is Nouns?
Nouns is a generative non-fungible token (NFT) project on the Ethereum blockchain. Nouns are 32x32 pixel characters based on people, places, and things. One noun is generated every day.
How do they create?
One noun is auctioned every 24 hours, forever. One interface for participating in noun auctions is nouns.wtf. Because of the way Ethereum works, Noun auctions must be settled after they are completed. The auction settlement transaction does three things: 1. it sends the current NOUN ERC-721 token to the winner of the auction, 2. generates the next Noun, and 3. begins the next 24-hour Noun auction.
Market?
You can see all the Noun ERC-721 tokens here:
Nouns DAO
The Nouns DAO treasury receives 100% of ETH proceeds from daily noun auctions. As of this writing, the Nouns DAO treasury contains 22,938.38 ETH, the equivalent of $ 26,126,127 USD on 2022-07-06.
This is the contract of Nouns DAO: Treasury → 0x0BC3807Ec262cB779b38D65b38158acC3bfedE10
As the main governing body of the Nouns ecosystem, the Nouns DAO is based on Compound Governance. There is one vote per noun in all governance matters within Nouns DAO, and every noun is an irrevocable member.
Nouns use their voting abilities (1 Noun = 1 vote) to direct the treasury. Nouns can create and vote on governance proposals, which execute transactions on the Ethereum blockchain when they are approved.
Purpose of dashboard
As we found out in the explanation above, each Nouns NFT has 1 voting power in the proposals. So, for example, if you have 6 NFTs, you have 6 voting rights in each proposal. Now the purpose of this dashboard is to see which proposals have the most participation and most engagement. This case can be looked at from two perspectives. First, engagement based on the number of votes, and second, participation based on the number of voters.
Methodology
When we dive into the voting data on the blockchain, we see that some of these proposals have been voted on even after their deadline, which is strange. For this reason, before we get the number of votes for a proposal, we need to find the start and end date of that proposal, to only count the votes between the same period and before the deadline. To achieve this goal, first I find the start block and end block of each proposal by querying contract_address = '0x6f3e6272a167e8accb32072d08e0957f9c79223d' and event_name = 'ProposalCreated' on ethereum.core.fact_event_logs table. And after that going to find votes by doing EVENT_NAME = 'VoteCast' on ethereum.core.fact_event_logs another time, and limit vote dates of each proposal, to find the right answer. I’ll attach contracts that contain votes at the end of this dashboard.
In the first section of this dashboard, on a bar chart, I have arranged the proposals in order left to right by proposal id. For each proposal, the number of votes is displayed as a bar and the number of voters as a line. (To remind: each voter may have more than 1 NFT and therefore, several voting power).
Proposal Engagements
In the top-left chart, all proposals are sorted from left to right, based on their id on the X-Axis line. The Y-Axis line represents the number of votes (number of NFTs) as a bar and the number of unique voters as a line.
Two things are clear in the chart. First, the number of votes (bars) is increasing over time. (Reason: a new NFT is minted every day). Second, the number of voters has not increased much over time. What does this mean? It means that new NFTs are settled (purchased) by old NFT holders (voters). They are trying to increase their voting power so that they can keep the project valuable.
The interesting thing is that after Proposal No. 95, the number of votes decreased, but the number of voters has not decreased. This means that large holders are not very willing to participate in the voting.
You may wonder why the votes of some proposals are not displayed in the chart. For example, proposals 79 or 80. If you go to Nouns DAO, you will see that these proposals have been canceled, so no votes have been recorded for them.
→ Top 5 most engaged proposals based on the “number of NFTs voted”
The top-middle chart shows the 5 most engaged proposals based on the number of NFTs voted. As we see, Proposal No. 95 is in the 1st rank with a total of 139 votes. Proposals number 81 and 82 followed that with a total of 138 votes for each in the 2nd rank and proposals number 87 and 90 are in 3rd place together with 134 votes for each.
→ Top 5 most engaged proposals based on the “number of voters”
The top-right chart shows the 5 most engaged proposals based on the number of voters. It’s interesting that the rankings it not the same as in the previous chart. Here, Proposal No. 90 is in the 1st rank with a total of 33 unique addresses voting for it.
The other 4 proposals are in the 2nd rank with a total of 29 unique addresses voted for each.
Votes (For/Against/Abstain)
The left chart is different proposals based on number of votes. The initial proposals had fewer votes, but almost all the votes were in favor. As the number of votes increases, the votes against a proposal increase. In some proposals we have more abstain votes. In proposal No. 95, all the 139 votes were in favor and there were no dissenting or abstaining votes.
The right chart is based on voter counts and as more people participate in voting process, the votes against one proposal increase.
Check charts data with site values
In the two images below, I will show a sample proposal (No. 81) in two-mode. On the left, based on “votes count” and on right, based on “voters count”. When we check the image data with the charts above, we can see that the values displayed on the charts are accurate. For Proposal No. 81, there are 54 NFTs voted “For”, 83 NFTs voted “Against“ and 1 NFT voted “Abstain“.
Conclusion
- The number of votes (bars) is increasing over time.
- The number of voters has not increased much over time.
- New NFTs are settled (purchased) by old NFT holders (voters). They are trying to increase their voting power so that they can keep the project valuable.
- After Proposal No. 95, the number of votes decreased, but the number of voters has not decreased. This means that large holders are not very willing to participate in the voting.
- Some proposals were canceled over time.
- The initial proposals had fewer votes, but almost all the votes were in favor.
Engagement based on “number of NFTs voted”
- Proposal No. 95 is in the 1st rank with a total of 139 votes. Proposals number 81 and 82 followed that with a total of 138 votes for each in the 2nd rank and proposals number 87 and 90 are in 3rd place together with 134 votes for each.
Engagement based on “number of voters”
- Proposal No. 90 is in the 1st rank with a total of 33 unique addresses voting for it. The other 4 proposals are in the 2nd rank with a total of 29 unique addresses voted for each.