Cosmos Hub - The Battle For Prop 82 - Day 10

· 5 min read
Cosmos Hub - The Battle For Prop 82 - Day 10

Things continue to ramp up as we approach the Sunday deadline for voting on prop #82. At the time of writing, the votes stand at 65.02% Yes and 29.40% NoWithVeto.

The NoWithVeto percentage has been steadily trending upwards, up almost 4% in the past three days. If at least 33.4% of voters vote NoWithVeto, the proposal cannot pass.

Check out the live voting percentages here:

Interchain Explorer by Cosmostation
Interchain block explorer and data analytics for sovereign blockchain networks.

A New Concern for Jae Kwon

Jae once again called on Cosmonauts to vote NoWithVeto on prop #82 today. For the first time however, he referred to his concerns about the risks of liquid staking, asking:

“Has anyone at all considered this simple risk in analysis about the dangers of liquid staking? I've never considered it until now.”
Source: @jaekwon Twitter

The proposal #82 document outlines the requirement for liquid staking as follows:

A practical consequence of the current competition between staking and external uses of capital is that most staking assets are confined to their originating chain, which hinders cross-chain composability. Therefore, full economic integration of the interchain requires liquid staking.

Read more about the proposed liquid staking in Section 2.2 of the prop #82 proposal document.

Validator Updates

StakeLab Tweeted that they will be voting NoWithVeto as "words are important" and they do not agree fully with every element that is being proposed.

Imperator, having previously voted Yes on prop #82, are now taking Jae Kwon’s insights on board as they rethink their decision. Will they change their vote?

Posthuman validators changed their vote today from No to NoWithVeto. In a Tweet thread, they explained their reasoning as follows:

"If we have so many votes NoWithVeto - it means that something wrong with Proposal #82. Also, it means that we need to change our voting from YES to NO, to show to our community that we care about their opinion, and ready to reach the Consensus"

Other Notable NoWithVeto Votes

Ban Hammers

It all went down in the AtomGov Telegram chat as discussions turned to the topic of banning users that personally insult others, and reinstating previously banished users.

Jacob forwarded a screenshot showing Jae calling others "bastards".

Jacob also recorded a small audio clip in which he called out sock puppet accounts within the different social media platforms. 😂

Image not related, just a screenshot from an unrelated video for comedic effect!

Two Sides of the Same Coin

Another hectic day of  prop #82 debates comes to a close with a plethora of yet more questions and issues to be resolved, as the Yes and NoWithVeto camps fight for the vision of the best solution for the future of the CosmosHub.

If you've been enjoying our series on prop #82, please consider following our Twitter page.

We put a lot of effort into synthesizing the many discussions and updates that happen in the Cosmosverse everyday. If you think we provide value, please help us be seen!

Thanks, Syed 😊