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

  • A British court has postponed the final sentencing of Wen Jian, a British-Chinese national involved in the country's largest Bitcoin money laundering case, until May 24.

    On May 11th, it was reported that Jian Wen, a 42-year-old British Chinese citizen, was found guilty of "participating in arranging money laundering" in the UK's largest Bitcoin money laundering case. He could be sentenced to up to 14 years in prison. Jian Wen's defense lawyer, Mark Harries, stated that due to the judge's busy schedule, the UK court has postponed Jian Wen's final sentencing, which was originally scheduled for May 10th, to May 24th.

  • Web3 startup Star Nest completes $6 million in Pre-A round of financing

    Hong Kong Web3 music startup Star Nest announced that it has completed a $6 million Pre-A round of financing, led by Chuangqi International Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hong Kong Stock Exchange-listed company Guofu Innovation. Star Nest will collaborate with Armonia Meta Chain to develop the Star Nest SpaceStar metaverse game, which includes music, role-playing, and social features.In addition, Star Nest plans to launch its NEST project in the third quarter of 2024. Nest will receive 2.1 billion NEST tokens tailored for the project, and Star Nest will use the NEST token to build a more complete music industry token economic system. The NEST token will be widely used for purchasing performance tickets, chain game cooperation, metaverse consumption, governance voting, and other activities.

  • Over $594 million worth of PYTH is staked

    According to Dune data,  there are currently 1,201,167,362 PYTH tokens in the staked state, with a total staked value exceeding $594 million. The number of PYTH stakers has reached 151,211.

  • US Department of Justice: Tornado Cash indictment has nothing to do with "free speech"

    On May 11th, the US Department of Justice explained why the motion to dismiss the criminal case against Tornado Cash founder Roman Storm was invalid. The Department of Justice reiterated that their indictment was not related to whether the Tornado Cash computer code had freedom of speech or was protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. The defendant was not charged for publishing computer code, but for using it to facilitate profitable illegal activities.

  • USDC circulation decreased by $100 million in the past week, with a total circulation of $33 billion

    According to official data,as of May 9th, Circle has issued approximately $2 billion USDC and redeemed approximately $2 billion USDC in the past 7 days, with a decrease in circulation of approximately $100 million. The total circulation of USDC is $33 billion, with a reserve of $33.1 billion, including approximately $3.3 billion in cash and Circle Reserve Fund holding approximately $29.8 billion.

  • SEC rejects Coinbase's request for appeals court ruling on cryptocurrency rules

    The US SEC has rejected Coinbase's request to appeal to the court to review whether traditional securities rules are applicable to cryptocurrencies. In its application, Coinbase stated that it hoped the appeals court would consider whether the Howey test, which has long been used for securities evaluation, should be applied to digital assets. However, the SEC pointed out that Coinbase has not successfully demonstrated the need for such an evaluation. The SEC stated that Coinbase is attempting to create a "new legal test," but this attempt was rejected by the court. The court found that Coinbase's arguments lacked consistency and did not successfully demonstrate the existence of decisive issues. Currently, the judge responsible for hearing the SEC's case against Coinbase will make a ruling on Coinbase's intermediate appeal motion.

  • Colombian President Suspected of Accepting $500,000 in Illegal Crypto Donations

    Colombian President Gustavo Petro is suspected of accepting over $500,000 in digital token donations from a fraudulent cryptocurrency project during his 2022 election campaign. A former contractor revealed that the illegal donation occurred during a meeting in February 2022 that discussed the advantages of cryptocurrency and the possibility of working with the government. This allegation is one of the latest charges faced by President Petro during his election campaign, with the Colombian Prosecutor's Office investigating his campaign last year.

  • Fed's Kashkari: The bar for another rate hike is high, but it cannot be ruled out

    The Federal Reserve's Kashkari expressed a cautious attitude towards restrictive monetary policy; he is adopting a wait-and-see attitude towards future monetary policy; he is in a wait-and-see state to see if inflation is stagnating; the threshold for raising interest rates again is high, but this possibility cannot be ruled out; if inflation data supports it, the Fed will maintain interest rates.

  • The address that defrauded 1,155 wBTC has returned more than 96% of the funds to the victims

    Blockchain data shows that the address poisoning attacker lured users to send 1,155 Wrapped Bitcoins (wBTC) (valued at $68 million at the time) to them. The attacker has returned almost all of the stolen funds. These funds were exchanged for Ethereum (ETH) during the attacker's holding period, and the price of ETH has since fallen. However, the attacker returned about 22,960.07 ETH, worth about $65.7 million, which accounts for over 96% of the initial stolen funds in terms of US dollar value.

  • TrumpAI tokens on Ethereum have been RUG

    PeckShield has monitored that the TrumpAI token on the Ethereum blockchain has fallen by 100%. An address starting with 0x935A sold 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 TrumpAI tokens, which is about 26.57 WETH (approximately $80,000). Note: rugpull tokens have the same name as legitimate tokens.