Disadvantages of On-Chain Governance?

There is a low voter turnout in this election. Low voter turnout, like in real-world elections, might be a challenge for on-chain governance. The DAO Carbonvote, which had 4.5 percent participation rates at one point, is confirmation of the issue. Low voter turnout is also undemocratic since it may allow a single node with substantial holdings to influence the protocol’s general future direction.
Votes may be manipulated by users with more stakes, and nodes with more money receive more votes. This means that users with greater vested interests can take control of the voting process and influence future growth in their favor. It also shifts the balance of power away from miners and developers and toward consumers and investors, Someone may be more concerned with maximizing future revenues than with improving the protocol for novel applications.

Based on initial experiments conducted with on-chain protocols, the disadvantages of this type of governance are as follows:

  • It has a low-voter turnout

As with real-world elections, low voter turnout may become a problem for on-chain governance. The DAO Carbonvote, which at one time had recorded

  • Users with greater stakes can manipulate votes

Nodes with more coins get more votes. Again, this means that users with more stakes can take control of the voting process and steer future development in their desired direction.