Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

Comparing DAO Voting: On-Chain vs. Off-Chain

One of the main advantages of DAOs is in allowing their community to make decisions for the DAO via direct voting, which some DAOs do on-chain and some off-chain. What’s the difference and why does it even matter?

On-chain voting

On-chain voting means that each vote is recorded on the blockchain so anyone can see how each DAO member voted (and that record is preserved forever). If a proposal is passed with enough votes, it will become official at the predetermined snapshot of the blockchain. Since on-chain votes need to be added to the blockchain the same way other data is added to the blockchain (by miners in PoW, stakers in PoS, etc.), each vote may require a gas fee, which may make regular voting expensive for some DAO members.

Off-chain voting

Off-chain voting can be as simple as a vote on any website or app. The implementation of a passed proposal can also use the snapshot method or be done manually. There is generally no cost involved for the voter. It is also much easier and faster to implement as opposed to the slower on-chain voting (where the DAO must wait for the votes to be added to the blockchain). However, off-chain voting lacks the historical permanence of on-chain voting — if the website the vote is on decides to delete voting info, it’s gone.

Does it matter which type of voting to use?

In both cases, each voter is usually authenticated with their Web3 wallet like MetaMask to prevent double voting and other fraud.

Which of the two options is implemented should not directly affect the vote as long as fraud and technical malfunctions are prevented. However, the choice has many implications for the nature of the DAO, including transparency and trust, voting dynamics, development costs, and more.

Transparency and Trust

This one is obvious: on-chain voting is visible immediately and forever, so you know who voted for what. Transparency in voting helps to hold people accountable for their governance actions. On the other hand, open voting allows malicious actors to target those whose vote they don’t agree with or to discriminate against them. The recent controversy of the a16z hedge fund single-handedly trying to sway the Uniswap DAO vote in favor of their preferred token bridge to BNB is a case in point. If a16z was able to do so anonymously, there would not be a controversy. Whether that would be a good thing is debatable, of course.

To be clear, off-chain voting can also be transparent. But it would require a higher level of trust since a website (usually running on Web2 tech at this point) is generally much easier to hack than a blockchain.

Voting dynamics

If you see that your friends are voting one way on a proposal, would you be swayed to vote with them? What if it’s a whale or the founder of the DAO? The permanence of a voting record can also have a self-policing effect of making one think twice about their vote.

Another voting dynamic is the ease of casting a vote. On-chain voting requires you to sign your vote, which at the very least requires your Web3 wallet and the blockchain to be functioning at the time you’re voting. In this way, at least, off-chain voting is generally easier.

Development costs

Any on-chain system is generally more costly to implement than an off-chain one based on both blockchain fees and the actual development costs. That being said, there are third-party platforms that can be used for voting, with Snapshot being perhaps the most known off-chain one. Aragon offers a hybrid of off-chain voting with on-chain execution. Plus, the ability to fork the code of many blockchain projects lowers the development costs vis-a-vis Web2 development.

Wen which?

When it comes down to it, the choice of on-chain vs. off-chain is not one of absolutes but based on each DAO’s specific situation and the kind of voting going on. For example, a small DAO may not afford the costs of on-chain voting while also not needing to worry so much about centralization (since there are so few members.

Meanwhile, a large DAO may absorb such costs much more easily and have greater concerns of keeping voting records transparent and voting itself decentralized — with the historical evidence of the votes being inscribed into the blockchain.

The DeXe way

DeXe’s DAO builder is all about flexibility, so we offer both on-chain and off-chain voting options. Better yet, DAO creators can implement variable voting rules for different types of votes. So more routine ones can be done off-line with a lower quorum while a proposal that may fundamentally change the DAO or make significant use of the treasury’s funds can be put to an on-chain vote with a big quorum to make sure it’s truly the will of the people. Members can even delegate their votes to trusted delegators to make sure their voice is heard without being there for every single vote.

As a DAO member, the choice is always yours. At DeXe, our choice was to give you the options for all your choices. That’s the DAO way!

Stay tuned!

Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • CZ launches testnet course on Giggle Academy

    CZ, the former CEO of Binance, announced the test network course of the recently launched education project Giggle Academy. CZ shared a video clip on his X account, which involved a course in an installable Android software package (Apk).

  • After the Bitcoin halving, new mining output will be reduced from 900 to 450 per day

    According to HODL15Capital's monitoring, after the halving of Bitcoin, its newly mined output will be reduced from 900 coins per day to 450 coins per day. Based on the current price, purchasing all of these new outputs would cost approximately $28 million.

  • BTC breaks through $62,000, and the intraday decline narrows to 2.96%

    According to market data, BTC has broken through $62,000 and is currently trading at $62,008.36. The intraday decline has narrowed to 2.96%, and the market is experiencing large fluctuations, so please be prepared for risk control.

  • Tether issued USDT worth $437 million yesterday

    Tether issued $437 million worth of USDT on April 17 and redeemed $142 million worth of USDT (a net increase of 295 million USDT in circulation). Approximately $100 million worth of USDT was issued to an address starting with 0x5c (suspected to be a Bitfinex forwarding address), and approximately $81 million worth of USDT was issued to an address starting with 0x77 (suspected to be Bitfinex wallet address 1).

  • Ordinals founder confirms that the Runes protocol only hard-codes rune number 0

    On April 18th, Casey Rodarmor, the founder of Ordinals, stated during a Discord community meeting that the Runes protocol only hardcodes the 0th rune, which is "UNCOMMON•GOODS". The other nine token names are not hardcoded into the Runes protocol due to a lack of good ideas. According to Casey's previous plan, the Runes protocol will hardcode the first 10 runes, which are numbered 0-9.

  • The number of Ordinals inscriptions exceeds 70 million

    The Bitcoin Ordinals browser Ord.io posted on X platform, stating that the number of Ordinals inscriptions has exceeded 70 million.

  • Grayscale GBTC assets under management fell to $18.82 billion

    On April 18th, according to official data from Grayscale, as of April 17th local time, GBTC held 308,593.8819 BTC, a decrease of 1277.5014 compared to the previous trading day. In addition, GBTC's assets under management (non-GAAP) were $18,823,819,454.54, with circulating shares of 346,460,100.

  • There are only about 2 days left until the Bitcoin block reward is halved

    Data shows there are still 298 blocks left until the Bitcoin block reward is halved, which is approximately 1 day, 23 hours and 10 minutes.

  • BTC falls below $60,000

    According to market data, BTC has fallen below $60,000 and is currently trading at $59,951.1, with a daily decline of 3.16%. The market is volatile, so please take precautions to manage your risks.

  • BTC falls below $61,000

    Market data shows BTC has fallen below $61,000 and is currently trading at $60,900, with a daily decline of 2.24%. The market is experiencing significant fluctuations, so please be prepared for risk management.