EOSREAL: No Manipulation in Voting

No Manipulation in Voting

No interference with the process of the voting, whether by increasing the vote share of the BP candidate, depressing the vote shares of the rival BP candidates, or both.

No buying/selling votes in any forms.

Discussion:

In real-world political election system, there are many ways to manipulate the voting process. Although EOSIO prevents a lot of manipulations through technical solutions, one critical problem is vote buying.

Vote buying can be in many forms such as monetary/token exchange, goods, services. Sometimes, it can be in more subtle forms such as a business partnership, job offering, certain benefits in kind…

It is harmful to the whole system for any kind of vote buying because those who buy the votes spend more costs resulting to:

1. Less financial resource to run the system as BP
2. Take more out from the system to compensate the costs.

Unlike in real world, In EOSIO, no one can be imprisoned. As a self-operated organization, the maximum penalty shall be deprived BP position in EOS community.

First, we suggest to establish a EOS Election Commission (EEC) to monitor, analyze and investigate potential voting manipulations. Rather than kicking into the Arbitration process, voting commission can react to voting related disputes more cost-efficiently.

We suggest the following fules:

1. Anyone cannot ask for, receive or obtain, give or confer, any property or benefit with the intention of influencing the vote before, during and after election.
2. The organized meetup, party, dining are not considered voting bribery in the circumstance of the cost per participant is below 200 USD.
3. Small souvenir is allowed as the cost to each guest is below 20 USD.
4. The penalty for a contravention of rule 1,2,3 is imposing a fine or deprivation of BP position for certain period of time, or both.
5. EOS Election Commission (EEC) will be the organization monitoring the election procedure.
6. The member of EEC can be replaced anytime if any member drops out due to personal reason or expelled by EOS Arbitrator.
7. Anyone can file a petition to EOS Arbitrator if he/she finds that EEC member takes bribery. The petition charge is USD 300, which will be refunded by defendant if the defendant is found guilty.
8. If any EEC member is found committing bribery behavior by EOS Arbitrator, EOS Arbitrator is empowered to expel the member out of EEC. A new member will replace.
9. Anyone who is aware of a breach of rule 1,2,3 is encouraged to notify the EEC. The EEC will then determine whether it is appropriate to refer to the EOS Arbitrator for further investigation. The complainant should provide as much information as possible to enable assessment of the alleged breach. Evidence from which the EEC can make a formal assessment of its compliance with the rule should accompany complaints.
10. If EOS Arbitrator accepts the case referred from EEC, the complainant shall pay the petition charge, USD 300 first, which will be refunded by defendant if the defendant is found guilty.
11. EOS Arbitrator is empowered to, amongst other things, declare the BP who was elected not duly elected, the penalty fine amount, deprive the BP position, and to dismiss or uphold the petition in whole or in part.
12. The penalty fine amount shall be used to compensate arbitrator work, and BLOCK.ONE shall set up an arbitration fund for arbitrator compensation and other cost related to arbitration.
13. The decision from EOS Arbitrator is final.

Regarding the Exchange Voting:

1. Exchanges may vote for the tokens they own with a standalone account (not mixing with its users’ assets). 2. For its users’ token, exchange should design none manipulative interface for its users to choose among BP Candidates. Exchanges shall not create new manipulation of demography, disenfranchisement or misrecording, misuse of proxy.
2. It is not allowed to use a preset framework contract/disclosure term to mislead users to delegate their voting rights to exchanges.

(No anonymous voting is accepted.) -- further discuss

If we can know exactly who is the voter, we can better fight the crimes. It is also in the financial world that the shareholder voting is open. In order to do this, a risk based KYC program could be implemented to make the crime cost higher and make the penalty easier. Privacy needs to be protected though.

It is also in our view that the candidate should be more verified than the users, including KYC, source of funds, own EOS token holding, related party EOS holding.