Cost of Control (Metrics discussion)

[AngelaKTE]

Description

• Goal: We measure how many voters have to be added or removed at minimum to achieve a certain funding increase
• Why here?:
  • Optimism knows how many voters and what voters are eligible to vote in Retro Funding
  • in every round, badgeholders can decide whether they participate in a voting or not
  • a malicious actor could convince voters to abstain from voting in order to increase the funding results
  • also, since Optimism is trying to increase the number of voters, malicious voters could convince new voters to take part just to manipulate the result
• How we model it:
  • in every round:
  • we define the desired funding increase (as a constant, e.g. 20%)
  • we randomly assign votes to projects
  • we iterate over all projects to find out which one needs the minimum of voters to be added/removed to reach the target funding increase
  • we add/remove voters accordingly
  • we measure the average minimum per round (across all projects?)
  • many rounds: we run many rounds and measure the average minimum number of voters required
  • all voting rules: we compare the results over all voting rules
• Chart:
  • average of all rounds, plotting a line chart
  • x-axis: min. decrease/increase of voters (average minimum)
  • y-axis: funding increase
• Scenarios:
  • Model for $10K / $50K / $100K / $500K funding increase
  • we can translate these values to a % based on the scenario design, it's just important to give readers a picture of the absolute value in OP tokens

Open questions:

• Token allocation only integers for voters? @a.kreitenweis to check with Optimism

[linear[bot]]

GOV-33 Cost of Control (Metrics discussion)

#### Description * **Goal:** We measure how many voters have to be added or removed at minimum to achieve a certain funding increase * **Why here?:** * Optimism knows how many voters and what voters are eligible to vote in Retro Funding * in every round, badgeholders can decide whether they participate in a voting or not * a malicious actor could convince voters to abstain from voting in order to increase the funding results * also, since Optimism is trying to increase the number of voters, malicious voters could convince new voters to take part just to manipulate the result * **How we model it:** * in every round: * we randomly assign votes to projects * we iterate over all projects to find out which one needs the minimum of votes increase to reach to reach the target funding increase * we add voters accordingly * many rounds: we run many rounds and measure the average minimum number of voters required * all voting rules: we compare the results over all voting rules * **Chart:** * average of all round, plotting a line chart * x-axis: min. decrease/increase of voters (average minimum) * y-axis: funding increase * Scenarios: * Model for $10K / $50K / $100K / $500K funding increase * we can translate these values to a % based on the scenario design, it's just important to give readers a picture of the absolute value in OP tokens **Open questions:** * Token allocation only integers for voters? @a.kreitenweis to check with Optimism