Open discussion about the selection process for Celo Sage proposals.
Hi, I really have questions regarding the voting system
Which community members is going to vote for the approval of tutorials, is it we the celo sage members or celo foundation community
How can we verify each vote is from a validated user
There’s no way to know the previous voting ranking so that we can adjust for next time
If 4 of my tutorials has the highest vote does it mean all will get approved?
Is 15 topics not small considering the number of sages we have?
I have been brainstorming over this voting system, i have a few suggestions to make:
Let’s make the voting restricted to a select group of creators/writers/users:
These could be;
Reviewers: Since they have been on the platform for quite a longer period of time and they understand the direction of the academy.
RegularUsers: This could be restricted to maybe the first 10 or 15 to attain this milestone.
Only users who have successfully completed the KYC procedure be allowed to vote.
In addition to any of the above, everyone with voting rights be given a maximum number of votes weekly.
Also, voting for self should be prohibited.
This will go a long way in sanitizing the whole process because a
sybil attack is possible if just everyone is gonna be voting.
My proposal is more of a DAO where governance is performed by governance token holders and not just every member of the community.
Also, looking at the backlog of proposals in new request, a lot may not be seen or vetted over time…
Non-qualifying proposals be deleted at the end of the week. These could be re-proposed by in the next week by the prospective writers.
The weekly quota can be increased to 20.
Maximum of 2 approvals/projects/tutorial per writer.
are you saying that any tutorial that did not get selected for the week should be deleted?
Some initial concerns in response to the new proposal system.
In as much as i quite like the idea of approving tutorials based on voting, I believe some details might need looking into a bit more, to make the process fair and reward well meaning sage authors. In this regard, some certain questions arises with this pattern in place:
- If anyone is allowed to vote, how do we guarantee their credibility?
- There could be potential Sybil issues, how do we curb that?
My initial proposal to address these concerns is that there could be something like a trust committee which would comprise members with experience and who are active in the CELO community to first review the tutorial proposals, and the community(would comprise of people with a reputation score) can then vote on the ones they deem the most useful.
Therefore, we would need a way to come up with a reputation score for community members, this would be a tempoary solution to address sybil/vote collusion.
@4undRaiser yes…the backlog currently is over 200.
I think that is due to the fact that only 15 tutorials can be accepted per week, and not the inability for the owner to create the tutorial.
A better idea would be to prevent members with existing multiple proposals from creating new ones.
Or something like 1 tutorial person among those selected.
I am just hoping we can avoid situations where the same set of people are getting the highest number of votes consistently.
Please everyone should try to follow the official Celo Academy twitter page @CeloAcademy
The deletion is to ensure that it can be it can be reposted and then stand an equal chance of being selected the next week…
Before now, @joenyzio used to delete request that do not meet community standards weekly.
This serves to sanitize the workspace so that voters can focus on the real stuff.
Deleting stuff also gives writers the opportunity to better present their idea.
Yesterday one of the articles picked is more like a close copy of my proposal. Just that i made the request 3weeks ago.
There’s a difference between deleting tutorials that does not meet the standard for the academy and deleting tutorials that do meet those standard. So which one are you referring to @EmiriDbest because the later would only just add more workload to @joenyzio
@4undRaiser I am suggesting we start every week on a clean slate so that older articles are not disadvantage or even at advantage due to vote stacking over time.
How do you come about the assumption?
Tutorials will not be deleted everyweek
So writers will have their chance to get more votes over their unapproved time and eventually get to write their piece
And apparently from what @0xviral mentioned on the last meetup not all high voted articles will be approved
I’d the proposed article takes. Long while to be accepted then may be considered irrelevant and we’ll ask the writer to make changes or pitch something else
It won’t be much of a set back…
In a way the backlog system still hold cuz
If we were to start no articles every week, it’s not like there’s a fixed say for pitching proposal
So it can’t work like that
So @4undRaiser is right deleting tutorials that don’t meet at standard rather that deleting tutorials with vote
I don think so
There’s no algorithm in charge of that
Well…laslas WAGMI…we move
At this point, in the best interest of everyone, i believethe best thing to do is @joenyzio should go back to the old pattern of making proposal selections .
This can be continued until the user base grows large enough to credibly run a voting system that is not easily threatened by voter bias.