Proposal reputation and trust

[Redsandro]

Unless one has specific knowledge of the people behind a proposal, it's difficult to assess whether a proposal is genuine and its team is competent. It's important to be able to verify from a proposal document who's behind it, what their reputation is, what former accomplishments are, and then be able to verify these claims so that someone asking for funds cannot claim to be someone else with a much higher reputation in the hopes of getting more votes.

Using the proposal of the Syscoin Foundation as an example, it could add this information in a footnote. For example:

• Syscoin Foundation is a legal entity established in Netherlands. (link)
• It has an established relationship w/ a traditional bank (link).
• It’s a registered non-profit (where and link)
• People involved (list)
• Previous accomplishments (list) (<- people always ask about this)

It's important to have a link back to the document on the team/organisation website/github, proving it was really them that made the proposal.

This will prevent proposal fraud.

Similarly, people should be discouraged from "commenting" the vote address in the comment section of a proposal, as this is sensitive to vote fraud. I could comment my vote address under your proposal, pretending to be helpful.

[Keyare]

This is outside the scope of the voting portal.
Proposal submitters are responsible for proving ability to complete the proposals.
Each proposal can be linked to a document, and many are.
"commenting" has no impact on votes. Putting your address there would not affect votes in any way, nor could funds be redirected in any way regardless of anything put in the comment section.

[Redsandro]

I was asked to report this here on Discord. Feel free to close this issue.

Every proposal however, even the Syscoin Foundation ones, are lacking and can learn from other chains that allowed voting for longer, like NEM. You might want to consider using the voting portal as a means of nudging/enforcing/streamlining the proposal process, using some of the points I mentioned.

For example, there is no vote command on the website. People just comment the vote commands. You have to know and trust their usernames. Some documents don't have a vote command either, and can only be voted on by other means.

"commenting" has no impact on votes. Putting your address there would not affect votes in any way, nor could funds be redirected in any way regardless of anything put in the comment section.

It already happened before in other chains. Imagine you have a very trustworthy proposal. Now in the comment section, I write: gobject vote-many my-sucky-proposal funding yes. Others might assume I'm a member of your team, and copy my vote command.

Humans will be humans. All people commit sins and make mistakes.

[Keyare]

Voting string will be added to 1.1.1 but the additional functionality we will look at for 1.1.2