Die dritte Abstimmungsrunde von Jupiter LFG steht kurz bevor. 3 Minuten, um die Änderungen der Plattformregeln schnell durchzugehen

Original｜Odaily Planet Daily

Autor: Wenser

On May 22, the third round of voting for Jupiter Launchpad LFG is about to begin . The candidate projects for this round are the cross-chain interoperability protocol deBridge , the betting platform Divvy.Bet , and the NFT market Exchange Art . Compared with the 5-6 candidate projects in the first two rounds, the number of candidate projects in this round is nearly half of that in the previous two rounds. It is worth noting that based on past voting activities and community feedback, the LFG platform officials have also made some changes to the voting rules to better play the role of the platform. Odaily Planet Daily will introduce the changes in the LFG platform rules in this article and give a brief interpretation.

Profits from one source: Fewer projects, only one winner

1 Vote, 1 Winner (One vote, one winner). —— Changes to LFG’s voting rules for the third round

According to the Jupiter LFGfirst Undsecond voting pages, a total of 201 million JUP participated in the voting in the first phase, and Zeus Network eventually received more than 58% (about 117 million votes), and the proportion of votes for other projects ranged from 2% to 20%; a total of 230 million JUP participated in the voting in the second phase, and Sanctum eventually received more than 64% (about 146 million votes), and the proportion of votes for other projects also ranged from 2% to 20%.

Therefore, from the voting results of the first two rounds, we can see that LFG Launchpad voting is a winner takes all platform activity. This is because communities with more members and more votes can often gain a huge amount of attention in the early stage, and then gain the first-mover advantage of the voting interface, thereby ensuring that the corresponding project can get the first place in the final vote.

Therefore, to some extent, other projects are just accompanying projects to study. Although they can get a certain amount of attention, they still cannot get the opportunity to be listed on LFG Launchpad. Moreover, they also waste other votes of varying numbers in disguise.

This point has been mentioned in previous community discussions and proposed changes to the resolution . LFG official Slorg also said, Ensuring a single winner will help the LFG platform pay closer attention to them after the project goes online to provide them with the best online experience. In addition, when the vote is very close, the platform is willing to accept exceptions. For example, in the case where the first and second place votes have 45% and 44% respectively.

Of course, it can also be seen here that the main issue involved is the vote-following operation during the voting process, so the next change is obvious.

LFG first round voting results

Avoid following the crowd: process blind selection mechanism to ensure the authenticity of the results

Blind Voting (blind voting is very necessary). —— Changes in LFGs voting rules for the third phase

In the description of the changes in the voting rules for the third phase of LFG, the official explanation is:

“In the 2 votes before LFG, the voting process was publicly visible in the voting interface. What we observed was that projects with a lead would see their lead build over time, which in turn prompted more people to vote for them. We have tried to display the voting results several times and think it is worth trying to hide the voting results in this vote. Blind voting will (to some extent) eliminate the bias of voters to vote for the current leading project in the hope of getting more rewards.”

It has to be said that in the past, the voting results were visible in real time. Although it ensured the openness and transparency of the voting results to a certain extent, it did easily lead voters to follow the crowd and choose the advantaged projects with the leading votes. On the one hand, this design may lead to the phenomenon of vote manipulation. Whether it is the project party, the giant whales holding a large number of chips, or the ordinary voters, they will choose the projects with higher votes that are more likely to be listed on Launchpad; on the other hand, in the field of voting, which may produce the tragedy of the commons, there are indeed many people who blindly vote without understanding the voting rules and the specific information of the voted projects. Therefore, introducing a blind selection mechanism in the voting process can indeed ensure the authenticity and effectiveness of the voting results to a certain extent.

In other words, the third phase of LFG voting, which introduces a blind selection mechanism, will keep the suspense of the final winning project until the moment the voting ends. During the voting stage, voters will participate in a subtle psychological game – not only need to consider the impact of their own votes, but also need to consider the voting tendencies of the majority.

Of course, the community’s opinions on the addition of the blind selection mechanism are not completely consistent.

In previous community discussions and proposed changes, it was mentioned that for the blind selection mechanism:

On the one hand, arguments in favor include:

• It reduces herd behavior;

• It may reduce the number of people who “vote strategically” (i.e., make vote-following choices based on voting conditions);

• Boost voter confidence and encourage more thoughtful voting.

On the other hand, the opposing arguments include:

• Reduced transparency;

• May reduce participation (people merely vote instead of discussing the project);

• May produce unexpected results;

• In reality, the voting results on the chain are not hidden;

• People cannot give feedback on real-time usage.

In any case, the addition of the blind selection mechanism in the third round of voting can be seen as an active attempt by the LFG platform. Further adjustments and regulations will be made based on the voting results and community feedback.

LFG Second Round Voting Results

Flexible voting: Partial staking, watch before voting

In addition to the above two rule-level changes, LFGs third round of voting also made two more flexible detail changes based on community feedback :

Partial unstaking function is now available

Some voters wanted to unstake a portion of their JUP tokens, rather than all of them, and this functionality is now available.

Note: When partially unstaking, users can only vote with JUP tokens that are still staked. Tokens that are partially unstaked will have no voting power at all, unlike the linear decay function of voting power with maximum unstaking.

Voter Informed Timer

A good voter should understand the content of the vote before voting. In order to help users understand the relevant information before voting, LFG officials set a new timer on the voting page. Any voter needs to wait a few minutes after opening the voting interface before voting. During this period, voters will be reminded to study the voting content in depth. Regardless of which project they vote for, all voters will receive active staking rewards.

It can be seen that the LFG platform officials want to encourage voters to make their own judgments and exercise their voting rights prudently after having a certain understanding of the project, rather than simply to obtain staking rewards or other potential token incentives.

Summary: The third round of voting may

In addition to these relatively large rule changes, Jupiter has also made a number of optimizations to the workflow and information disclosure of LFG Launchpad, including:

• Launch JupiterDAO as a channel for announcements of subsequent DAO information and voting-related information;

• The UI of Active Staking Rewards (ASR) will be explained and optimized later (note: all those who participate in the vote can get this reward);

• The AMA of previous online projects was changed from Discord to Twitter Space;

• Give unique role identification to candidate projects and their related personnel in Discord;

• Create a calendar of related events to more accurately show the timeline of LFG platform workflows.

Jupiter official event calendar

Not only that, considering the form and channel of external publicity content for voting candidate projects, the LFG platform officials are also considering whether to add voting video commentary (such as a 30-second introduction to the candidate project, in-depth explanation, interview dialogue video or clips of candidate project interviews, etc.) to facilitate voters to quickly understand the candidate projects and make voting decisions.

In terms of the launch of Launchpad projects, the LFG platform has also updated and iterated the anti-bot function, which will be implemented with the help of the dynamic liquidity DeFi protocol Meteora , and is expected to be utilized when the subsequent UpRock project is launched.

Finally, according to the latest news released by JupiterDAO , the third phase of LFG voting will start at 1:00 on May 23 and will last for three days. Users who have previously participated in JUP staking can participate on time.

According to the social media platform data of previous AMA tweets, compared with the betting platform Divvy.Bet Und the NFT market Exchange Art , the cross-chain interoperability protocol deBridge is expected to become the winner of this round of voting. After the introduction of the blind selection mechanism and flexible voting function design, whether LFG’s third round of voting can once again attract market attention, active user participation and lay a good foundation for the subsequent project launch, let us wait and see.

This article is sourced from the internet: Jupiter LFG third round of voting is coming soon, 3 minutes to quickly review the platform rule changes