XIP#52 Voting Strategies for NFTX owned Floor

Proposals
1

Summary

Recommend that NFTX creates a Snapshot vote to decide the collection allocation for proxy voting on Floor War allocations.

These will be set for a 12 week period before re-snapshotting and updating the allocation as required.

History

In a previous proposal NFTX exercised a claim on ~30k Floor tokens which, once staked, could be used for voting in Floor goverance.

Over the past few months the gFloor tokens have been used to allow NFTX token holders to proxy vote on the Floor Wars and decide which collection would be swept. Example snapshot

Floor has now upgraded to floor V2 and NFTX have migrated and staked the tokensfor 12 weeks to allow for maximum voting power.

Floor V2

FloorV2 is now fully on chain for sweeps allowing tokens holders the chance to vote YES for their preferred collection to be swept, and vote NO for their least favourite collection to be sold.

The top three collections then have the 2 week yield spent on sweeping them in the propotion of the votes, while the bottom collection is sold off based on the proporition of the votes.

Token holders are able to stake their Floor to get voting power, with 12 week staking providing the most staking power. After the stake period expires the tokens maintain their voting power without requiring a restake, and any votes will automatically lock them for 4 weeks.

Once you have voted you do not need to vote again for subsequent Wars, the previous vote distribution will remain for all subsequent votes until updated.

Recommendation on how the new Proxy voting will work

Each collection will be listed on the snapshot as per the existing previous snapshots. NFTX Token holders will be able to vote for which collection they would like to allocate the NFTX holdings for, which will then be applied to the current Floor War.

This initial allocation will then be applied to the current Floor War and left until a new snapshot is cast in 3 months time.

For example, if the votes are

  • CryptoPunks: 60%
  • Milday: 20%
  • Remio: 10%
  • BGAN: 5%
  • Squiggles: 5%

then NFTX will apply that weighting using the voting power for Floor war #1, and it will remain the same until Floor War #7 at which point changes can be made.

While previously there has been no quorum on Floor Wars, this will now require the quorum to be met for the initial setting and each setting afterwards. Failure to reach quorum for succesive votes will mean the last successful vote allocation remains.

If for whatever reason an early update to the voting strategy is requested, a snapshot must be run to bring and reach quorum requirements.

New collection additions

New collection additions will follow the same quorum requirements, and the successful collection in the NFTX Snapshot will be awarded the full NFTX voting allocation (shared voting not possible for new collections).

For example, if three new collections are up for addition NFTX will run a snapshot for those plus the abstain/none option.

  • LIL Pudgys (20%)
  • Mooncats (10%)
  • Pudgy Milady (10%)
  • None (5%)
  • Abstain (55%)

This will result in LIL Pudgy recieving the NFTX vote for new collections.

For a vote that ends with these numbers (and reaches Quorum)

  • LIL Pudgys (20%)
  • Mooncats (10%)
  • Pudgy Milady (10%)
  • None (25%)
  • Abstain (35%)

No new collection will receive votes (i.e. NFTX are opting out of voting).

Quorum and Governance Notes

  • Minimum Quorum: At least 5 votes
  • Passing Threshold: More than 10% circulating supply must vote the XIP to Pass. For changes to the NFTX contract, more than 70% must vote in agreement for the XIP to pass towards on-chain voting.

(edit: updated Quorum to new values)

  • Yes, proceed with this proposal
  • Adjust the proposal (leave comment)
0 voters
2

For “New Collection” votes, the method of voting it appears FloorDAO has used in the past is a weighted vote, where each individual voter can split their voting power across the different options. Therefore, I’d be more in favor of whatever percentage does vote, that same weight gets applied to the Floor options.

Taking the example NFTX vote results of:

  • LIL Pudgys (20%)
  • MoonCats (10%)
  • Pudgy Milady (10%)
  • None (5%)
  • Abstain (didn’t cast a vote at all; 55%)

45% of NFTX voted. This would then be translated into NFTX voting its FLOOR weight as:

  • LIL Pudgys (20/45 = 44.425%)
  • MoonCats (10/45 = 22.225%)
  • Pudgy Milady (10/45 = 22.225%)
  • None (5/45 = 11.125%)

That makes the sum of those four options be 100% of NFTX’s voting power, and makes choosing to abstain in the NFTX vote means “I delegate the choice of how to split the vote weight to everyone else who voted”. This is different than the proposed of “whichever option gets plurality gets 100% of the FLOOR vote weight” (For this example, that logic would result in LIL Pudgy receiving 100% of the NFTX vote for new collections), to more accurately reflect the NFTX holders’ collective desires. This would still be subject to quorum rules, so if not enough NFTX-holders vote, no FLOOR vote will be given.

3

Thanks for following up.

This is true for past votes on snapshot, however for V2 Floor you can only vote for one collection per wallet for new collection addition votes which is why the strategy and approach is different in the new collection vote.

4

Ah, that makes sense if “New Collection” votes are handled differently. For the “Floor War” vote I see that is proposed to be proportional to the NFTX vote, which I think is good. From the proposal here, it seems that NFTX would not use the “Sell” (NO) option (voting to remove/sell off a collection), and only gathering feedback from NFTX-holders on which ones to have a positive effect on (vote “Sweep” (YES))?

5

To begin with I wanted the proposal to be simple and avoid complicating the process with sweep AND sell votes.

In the future if someone wants to incorporate negative voting then the DAO can weigh up the proposal and vote as they see fit.