JUP’s governance is designed to empower community-driven decision-making, but the Abstain button does the opposite. It allows voters to show up without taking a stand, diluting the quality of decisions and creating misleading participation numbers.
This proposal argues that Abstain should either be:
a) Removed completely, or
b) Disqualified from ASR (Active Staker Rewards).
Real-World Example:
In a recent governance vote, the numbers were clear:
Total votes: 135,727,969
Votes For: 98,915,910 (73%)
Votes Against: 19,739,147 (15%)
Abstain: 17,072,911 (12%)
That’s over 17 million votes cast by users who took no actual position, yet their votes influenced the quorum and most likely earned ASR rewards — simply for clicking “Abstain.”
False Participation = Flawed Governance
Abstain lets voters appear active without making any contribution to the actual decision, misleading the community and inflating turnout statistics.
ASR Farming Without Participation
Most people who select Abstain are only doing so to qualify for ASR rewards — not to exercise governance. This is an exploit of the system and goes against the spirit of active, responsible staking.
Reduces Accountability
Governance depends on commitment. Abstain gives voters an easy way out, while still benefiting from rewards designed for actual participants.
Enables Strategic Manipulation
Abstain can be used tactically to push proposals over quorum without supporting or rejecting them — an unfair loophole.
Proposed Solutions
Remove Abstain Completely
Let voters either:
Vote FOR
Vote AGAINST
Or don’t vote at all (true abstention).
This creates a clean, binary result that reflects real community decisions.
No ASR Rewards for Abstain
If Abstain must stay, voters who select it should not qualify for Active Staker Rewards, since they did not contribute meaningfully to governance.
Redefine Abstain or Replace It
If removing Abstain isn’t an option, replace it with feedback-focused alternatives like:
“Proposal unclear”
“I need more information”
“I disagree with both options”
This encourages genuine participation and helps proposers improve.
i feel abstain allows someone who does not understand so they will leave it to better minds.However you would think being invest they would want to have input
I think if a few can decide the outcome of a vote as currently the case there should be a 80% in favour or against to decide the outcome. Abstaining just complicates things. Or make the voting structure decentralised. Then it’s okay.
Most time abstain simply means "No’ to the proposal when I’m not satisfied with the proposal but I want ASR reward. Abstain and No percentage should be counted as No from the community.
This was actually a great point and a topic that I wanted to make days ago, and you nailed it! IMO, the Abstain option should never again be re-introduced into voting options.
I would agree to remove neutrality, but are we sure that we don’t risk complicating our lives and turning everything into a black or white dynamic? Then haven’t the bosses already responded from above That it is untouchable? Perhaps before eliminating the possibility of voting neutral, it would be better to go deeper and explain the discussion more clearly. Furthermore, I think it is time to focus on something more constructive for those who are tired of continually debating the same issues. Is it important? Perhaps, but there are other paths and ideas that deserve attention. (Ruminating in order not to act) and so we continue to bang our heads against the wall sooner or later some new idea arrives tum tum tum. You are a laugh))
I hope you realize what is happening. It is time to focus on something useful and truly innovative, something that gives oxygen to the brains and stimulates creativity. We cannot continue to go round in circles in the same discussions, like a snake biting its tail. We need a change of pace, to create a project that truly makes a difference. And be careful with jokes: avoid saying things that can be interpreted badly, because some people might take them too seriously and jump off the top floor of the first building they find. Dr. Evil even if you continue to ignore me from the top of your skyscraper I will not give up, if you do not want to argue with me, I can have you contact one of the most polite group beautiful and hairy than me with his head on his shoulders.
Every vote has a hidden option: to sell your JUP.
If we don’t embrace people who didn’t have the time to research for a good reason or don’t feel equipped to make a decision, they might just sell their JUP.
I know being active is part of the philosophy here, but maybe we shouldn’t be so harsh?
if the abstain votes are not counted regardless. then yes it’s basically useless. since if they want to protest they would vote against simply. maybe we have have high priority votes where we can’t abstain.
This proposal brings up an important point: whether the Abstain option should be:
a) Removed entirely, or
b) Disqualified from earning ASR (Active Staker Rewards).
Honestly, this deserves to be put to a vote.
(Just kidding, kind of.)
I’m torn between two perspectives.
On one hand, Abstain can feel like a shortcut for users to collect ASR without engaging meaningfully, not reading through forum posts, not watching proposal videos. The last vote for the devrel and designlabs made it pretty clear that many voters don’t actually read the materials provided. You can prepare all the fancy materials formatted and laid out for them to read, but the user must be willing to spend the time to read in the end.
In that sense, the Abstain option enables passive participation, which contradicts the very idea of Active Staker Rewards.
My personal take is, if someone isn’t willing to at least review the proposal, maybe they shouldn’t be voting at all. period…
That being said, my fear of removing Abstain is that it might push some users to randomly pick a side just to claim rewards, which could lead to poor or inaccurate DAO decisions.
Which leads me to think of another question, which i personally feel is even more vital than the Abstain button. Is there a better way to reward engaged stakers without relying solely on the act of voting?
Ideally, only those who genuinely want to shape the future of the Jupiverse should be casting votes , not just clicking through to farm rewards.
We are looking at it in the wrong way, imo. I think having an abstain option is important and is not necessarily a free lunch. People like me vote to abstain when we are unhappy with the choices presented, so it’s kind of like a silent protest in a way.
I think a better way to promote active participation would be to introduce mini-quizzes that accompany each vote. Don’t penalize users who get the question(s) wrong, but we can reward a small amount of JUP to users who answer the question(s) correctly. Maybe use a portion of the “carrots” for this initiative. Positive reinforcement is the way to go when it comes to things like this, imo.
Abstain is a choice, it’s “i’m choosing not to choose”. You should not force a person to choose yes/no. If you value freedom of choice, this option should be retained.
False Participation = Flawed Governance
Remove Abstain Completely
Redefine Abstain or Replace It