Hey everyone,
I’ve been thinking about how governance could evolve beyond simple token-weighted voting. Right now, voting power is usually based solely on the number of tokens someone holds, but is that the best way to reflect the interests of the ecosystem? What if we also factored in a user’s activity within the network?
By activity, I mean things like staking, participation in governance discussions, building or contributing to projects, or even providing liquidity. These are all meaningful contributions that show commitment beyond just holding tokens. It seems reasonable to argue that such users should have more influence in decision-making. Otherwise, there’s a risk that passive holders or whales with minimal engagement could dominate governance outcomes.
This could also help reduce the problem of voter apathy. If people knew that consistent participation increased their voting power, we might see more sustained involvement. Of course, it raises questions—how do we measure activity fairly? And how do we prevent abuse or gaming the system?
Curious if anyone here has seen good models for this approach, or if there are drawbacks I’m not seeing. Could something like this work in Unit0’s governance model, or would it complicate things too much?