RFC Jupiter Governance Dashboard

Thanks again, @0xSoju , for your interest in our dashboard. As suggested by @0xSoju, we have created this forum thread to outline details for JUPDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard.

First, let me briefly introduce myself. Hi, Meow! My name is England, a JUP contributor who has recently joined JUP DAO and is also a part of Curia, a team dedicated to enhancing the DAO ecosystem. Our goal is to make meaningful contributions to various DAOs. For instance, we’ve built a governance dashboard for Optimism and SafeDAO

We’re keen on contributing to JUP DAO and are currently exploring ways to help improve JUPDAO, especially in terms of governance accessibility and transparency. One of our ideas is to help build a governance dashboard for JUP DAO. Our aim is to simplify complex governance data into clear insights, encouraging informed decision-making and active participation. The dashboard will feature analytics on voting patterns, participation rates, voting power distribution, unstake overtime, and proposal dynamics.

Metric Details

1. Holder Metrics

  • Total number of holder wallets.
  • Total token supply.
  • Votable supply (tokens in circulation that are eligible to vote).
  • Unstake JUP Overtime
  • Share of votable supply

2. Concentration of Voting Power Metrics

  • Nakamoto coefficient

  • Big Meow Holders Metrics:

    • Total Voting power from nonminority holders.
    • Number of tokens held by nonminority holders.
  • Small Meow Holder

    • Total Voting power from minority holders.
    • Number of tokens held by minority holders.
  • Voter Dominance:

    • Voting Power Distribution: Share of total voting power held within the top 5, top 10, top 25, top 50, top 75, and top 100 voters.

3. Proposal Metrics

  • Total number of proposals
  • Unique Proposers: Ratio of unique proposers to total proposals.
  • Proposal Outcome: Number of passed vs failed proposals.
  • Proposal Type: Distribution of proposals by type.
  • Voting Results of the Proposal: Classification of results as contentious, generally accepted, or normal.

4. Participation Metrics

  • Voter Turnout: Tracking each individual voter participation activeness, refers to their recent proposals participation, voting stats & history.
  • Voter Behavior: Voting behavior by voting time, Voting Momentum - Tendency to vote early or wait until the end.
  • Participation per Proposal: Number of voters and voting power cast per proposal.
  • Minority voters’ Participation: Percentage of minority voter tokens participating in governance, breakdowns of minority voters by participation
  • Non-Minority voters’ Participation: Percentage of minority voter tokens participating in governance, breakdowns of minority voters by participation


5. Voter’s Profile

  • Dedicated page for each voter, displaying all proposals they have voted or not voted on.
  • Rationale Vote: Tracking each voter whether they only vote or also provides a rationale & discussion for their vote, both on-chain and in forums.
  • Non-Conformity Ratio: Display the ratio of times a voter votes against the majority.
  • Voting Power Tracking: Tracking changes in the amount of voting power each voter.
  • Stake/Unstake history for each individual


We’re reaching out to gather the community’s thoughts on this initiative. Specifically, we’re interested in hearing:

  • What details or features do you want on the dashboard?
  • How can we make everything clearer and easier with this dashboard?
  • Any other thoughts or ideas to improve this for our community?

Your thoughts mean a lot to us as we start working on making Jup DAO’s governance better. Looking forward to your thoughts and suggestions!

16 Likes

This is great work – would love to have something like this for JUP.

Many of these metrics are interesting to know, but I think a ‘less is more’ approach would be ideal. Ill categorize below my input for what metrics would be preferred, what would be good to add, and what is perhaps less relevant.

Preferred

  • All holder Metrics
  • Voter Dominance
  • Voter Turnout
  • Participation per Proposal
  • Non-Minority Voters Participation
  • Minority Voters Participation
  • Non-Conformity Ratio
  • Voting Power Tracking
  • Proposal Outcome
  • Total # of proposals

Contentious / Not Preferred

  • Dedicated page for each voter
  • Rationale Vote
  • Stake/Unstake history
  • Voter Behavior/momentum
  • Unique Proposers
  • Proposal Type
  • Small & Big Meow holders metric (covered sufficiently in ‘Voter Dominance’)
  • Nakamoto Coefficient

New Features Preferred

  • With the “Unstake JUP overtime” - this would be ideal if we can also see the date/time in advance of pending unstaked JUP. So not solely how much JUP has been unlocked at present day, but the total unstaked JUP that is pending in advance with the 30d duration.
  • JUP transfers to other wallets that also participate in voting, perhaps something like Coordinape’s model so we can identify potential sybil attacks.

Rationale

Personally I don’t have issue with displaying voter profiles that show stake/unstake behavior, or what people have voted for in the past – however many would probably like to keep this information undisclosed. Perhaps a better option here would be to make it an “opt-in” feature by the voter. The norm being with political voting is that its a private decision, so there is a bit of a cultural difference here with what people would prefer. The same rationale here can be applied to unstaking being associated with anyones identity – as it can encourage a kind of collective shaming or ill-judgement that pressures explanation of financial situations and/or decision making.

On another note – since the JUP DAO is not yet engaging in technical proposals that directly execute on-chain for things like functionality, I think this can be more streamlined for the LFG launchpad voting. If governance is to expand jurisdiction beyond the launchpad, then adding the ‘Dedicated page for each voter’ to further facilitate the possibility of Delegation and tracking more metrics for Delegates would be ideal.

So that’s my two-cents – love the UI too btw, very clean and well designed. Apologies for the lengthy feedback… am working on being a simpler cat :smiley:

11 Likes

It would be cool to see the tokenomics breakdown for all projects were voting on, it would also be great to have more understanding of how the rewards work for us newbies

3 Likes

I love this idea of JUPDAO Governance Analytics Dashboard. It will definitely improve transparency and encourage involvement of new participants. J4J!

4 Likes

@WEareSatoshi @Joy888 @Rainman77 Thank you, guys! We are looking forward to helping JUPDAO become even better!

1 Like

Hey! @worza Thank you for your thoughtful feedback! We’re thrilled to hear you’re excited about the project. We’ll adjust our approach to focus on the metrics you’ve highlighted as preferred, and explore the possibility of incorporating your suggested new features.

This is an interesting idea. We also agree with it and plan to implement it into our dashboard!

However, in my opinion, this data is publicly disclosed and can be found on-chain, which will enhance the transparency of JUPDAO. For example, we could identify unusual behavior from stakers and develop initiatives to help solve these problems.

2 Likes

I second this!

Overall, the UI looks great - I hope to see this coming in to fruition!

3 Likes

@c2yptic Thank you so much for your support and kind words! We’re thrilled to hear you like the UI design. Our team is working hard to bring this project to fruition, your feedback is always welcome!

2 Likes

@englandzz This is fantastic! We also need transparency on assets held by the DAO earned from launch fees and TGEs. The vote page is opaque by simply stating “75% Launchpad fees from WEN & more”. I would like to know how much was earned in both WEN and USDC, where those assets currently reside, etc. All of that information needs to be readily available to everyone.

With this information in hand, you could calculate estimates for the Active Staking Rewards owed to each individual holder, based on their staking and voting activity. Of course there would be huge disclaimer noting it is only an estimation based on votes during the current rewards period, and that the allocation will change as more proposals are put up to vote during the current rewards period.

3 Likes

Thanks to @GeekLad for the valuable feedback! You’re right about needing transparency on the DAO’s assets from launch fees and TGEs. This is important and it’s something we should cover in our treasury details. Right now, our main focus is on governance, but as we grow and have the resources, we plan to look into this area too. Appreciate your input!

1 Like

I agree with the safety aspect more so now than ever because of the unprecedented amount of malicious actors in the crypto market as a whole!