Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives #6506

jhweintraub · 2023-02-15T17:18:52Z

When opening a pull request to submit a new EIP, please use the suggested template: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/eip-template.md

We have a GitHub bot that automatically merges some PRs. It will merge yours immediately if certain criteria are met:

The PR edits only existing draft PRs.
The build passes.
Your GitHub username or email address is listed in the 'author' header of all affected PRs, inside .
If matching on email address, the email address is the one publicly listed on your GitHub profile.

eth-bot · 2023-02-15T17:19:27Z

All reviewers have approved. Auto merging...

abcoathup · 2023-02-16T00:33:13Z

EIP editors, is this numbered 6504 due to closed PR #6504?

jhweintraub · 2023-02-16T03:00:44Z

That was me. I closed that PR in order to make more local edits and clean up the change history. Sorry if that screwed up the process.

abcoathup · 2023-02-16T03:57:59Z

That was me. I closed that PR in order to make more local edits and clean up the change history. Sorry if that screwed up the process.

Generally EIPs/ERCs are numbered after the first PR #, but will need to wait and see what the EIP editors assign.

lightclient

6506 is fine

SamWilsn · 2023-02-21T15:33:33Z

EIPS/eip-6506.md

+
+2. The lack of an existing standard means that parties are relying entirely on trust in one-another to obey. Bob has to trust Alice to pay out and Alice has to trust Bob to vote. Even if the two of them were to use an escrow contract, it may have flaws like relying on a trusted third-party, or simply that it is outside the technical reach of both parties.
+
+


Suggested change

SamWilsn · 2023-02-21T15:34:18Z

EIPS/eip-6506.md

+
+The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 and RFC 8174.
+
+The key words "BRIBE" and "INCENTIVE" are to be interpreted as the transfer of a digital-asset(s) from user A to user B in exchange for an assurance that user B will vote in a specific-direction, on a specific proposal, for a specified-DAO. If user B does not honor the arrange, the digital-asset(s) will be returned to user A. 


Suggested change

The key words "BRIBE" and "INCENTIVE" are to be interpreted as the transfer of a digital-asset(s) from user A to user B in exchange for an assurance that user B will vote in a specific-direction, on a specific proposal, for a specified-DAO. If user B does not honor the arrange, the digital-asset(s) will be returned to user A.

The key words "BRIBE" and "INCENTIVE" are to be interpreted as the transfer of a digital-asset(s) from user A to user B in exchange for an assurance that user B will vote in a specific-direction, on a specific proposal, for a specified-DAO. If user B does not honor the arrangement, the digital-asset(s) will be returned to user A.

EIPS/eip-6506.md

SamWilsn · 2023-02-21T15:37:39Z

EIPS/eip-6506.md

+      type: bytes calldata
+```
+
+#### claimIncentive


You should use backticks for any code in headings, for example:

#### `claimIncentive`

SamWilsn · 2023-02-21T15:38:01Z

EIPS/eip-6506.md

+
+## Security Considerations
+
+EIP-TODO is a standard intended to work with existing governance systems. Any potential issue with existing governance may represent a potential attack on this as well. This includes voting-weight manipulation, vote forgery, verification discrepancies etc. All systems in which this EIP is integrated with should be properly audited for maximum security, as any issues may result in improper distribution of these governance incentives.


Suggested change

EIP-TODO is a standard intended to work with existing governance systems. Any potential issue with existing governance may represent a potential attack on this as well. This includes voting-weight manipulation, vote forgery, verification discrepancies etc. All systems in which this EIP is integrated with should be properly audited for maximum security, as any issues may result in improper distribution of these governance incentives.

This proposal is a standard intended to work with existing governance systems. Any potential issue with existing governance may represent a potential attack on this as well. This includes voting-weight manipulation, vote forgery, verification discrepancies etc. All systems in which this EIP is integrated with should be properly audited for maximum security, as any issues may result in improper distribution of these governance incentives.

jhweintraub · 2023-03-13T17:51:40Z

I have made the requested revisions alongside various syntatic changes made during development. An official reference implementation can be found at the following repo

https://github.com/jhweintraub/ERC6506

github-actions · 2023-03-13T18:10:01Z

The commit 256fbd8 (as a parent of b848eb0) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

EIPS/eip-6506.md

* Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives * renamed file for appropriate number * updated with requested changes and full implementation spec * attempted fix of walidator errors * markdown linter fix * Apply suggestions from code review --------- Co-authored-by: Sam Wilson <[email protected]>

Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives

f2bb3a7

jhweintraub requested a review from eth-bot as a code owner February 15, 2023 17:18

github-actions bot added c-new Creates a brand new proposal e-number Waiting on EIP Number assignment s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-erc labels Feb 15, 2023

github-actions bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Feb 15, 2023

renamed file for appropriate number

bb1a043

github-actions bot removed e-number Waiting on EIP Number assignment w-ci Waiting on CI to pass labels Feb 15, 2023

lightclient reviewed Feb 16, 2023

View reviewed changes

poojaranjan mentioned this pull request Feb 21, 2023

EIP Editing Office Hour Meeting 12 ethcatherders/EIPIP#212

Closed

21 tasks

SamWilsn reviewed Feb 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

abcoathup mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2023

EIPIP Meeting 76 ethcatherders/EIPIP#217

Closed

9 tasks

updated with requested changes and full implementation spec

cbe6986

eth-bot added e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus e-review Waiting on editor to review labels Mar 13, 2023

github-actions bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Mar 13, 2023

attempted fix of walidator errors

256fbd8

markdown linter fix

acad615

github-actions bot removed the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Mar 13, 2023

poojaranjan mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2023

EIP Editing Office Hour Meeting 13 ethcatherders/EIPIP#216

Closed

25 tasks

SamWilsn reviewed Mar 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

Apply suggestions from code review

f415dcf

SamWilsn approved these changes Mar 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

eth-bot enabled auto-merge (squash) March 21, 2023 15:13

eth-bot approved these changes Mar 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

eth-bot merged commit 3d1252c into ethereum:master Mar 21, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives #6506

Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives #6506

jhweintraub commented Feb 15, 2023

eth-bot commented Feb 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

abcoathup commented Feb 16, 2023

jhweintraub commented Feb 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading

abcoathup commented Feb 16, 2023

lightclient left a comment

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

jhweintraub commented Mar 13, 2023 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Mar 13, 2023


		2. The lack of an existing standard means that parties are relying entirely on trust in one-another to obey. Bob has to trust Alice to pay out and Alice has to trust Bob to vote. Even if the two of them were to use an escrow contract, it may have flaws like relying on a trusted third-party, or simply that it is outside the technical reach of both parties.


		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 and RFC 8174.

		The key words "BRIBE" and "INCENTIVE" are to be interpreted as the transfer of a digital-asset(s) from user A to user B in exchange for an assurance that user B will vote in a specific-direction, on a specific proposal, for a specified-DAO. If user B does not honor the arrange, the digital-asset(s) will be returned to user A.


		## Security Considerations

		EIP-TODO is a standard intended to work with existing governance systems. Any potential issue with existing governance may represent a potential attack on this as well. This includes voting-weight manipulation, vote forgery, verification discrepancies etc. All systems in which this EIP is integrated with should be properly audited for maximum security, as any issues may result in improper distribution of these governance incentives.

Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives #6506

Add EIP: P2P Escrowed Governance Incentives #6506

Conversation

jhweintraub commented Feb 15, 2023

eth-bot commented Feb 15, 2023 • edited Loading

abcoathup commented Feb 16, 2023

jhweintraub commented Feb 16, 2023 • edited Loading

abcoathup commented Feb 16, 2023

lightclient left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SamWilsn Feb 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jhweintraub commented Mar 13, 2023 • edited Loading

github-actions bot commented Mar 13, 2023

eth-bot commented Feb 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

jhweintraub commented Feb 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading

jhweintraub commented Mar 13, 2023 •

edited

Loading