How Does Quadratic Voting Fundamentally Differ from One-Token-One-Vote?
Quadratic voting (QV) ensures that the cost of an additional vote increases quadratically with the number of votes already cast. In contrast, one-token-one-vote (OTV) assigns voting power linearly to token holdings.
For example, under OTV, 100 tokens yield 100 votes. Under QV, to get 10 votes, a holder might need 100 tokens (102), but to get 20 votes, they would need 400 tokens (202).
This structure makes it prohibitively expensive for large holders to buy a majority of votes, giving smaller holders a louder collective voice.
Glossar
Voting Power
Measure ⎊ Voting Power is the quantifiable metric representing the degree of influence a specific participant holds over the outcome of a decentralized governance vote, usually derived from the quantity of staked or delegated tokens they control.
Voting
Governance ⎊ Voting within cryptocurrency, options trading, and financial derivatives represents a mechanism for stakeholders to exert influence over protocol parameters, listing decisions, or the direction of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs).
Quadratic Voting
Formula ⎊ The core principle employs a cost function where the expense to cast additional votes increases quadratically, typically requiring $n^2$ tokens for $n$ votes.
Vote
Decision ⎊ Vote in a blockchain governance context refers to the signed expression of preference by a stakeholder regarding a proposed protocol change or parameter adjustment, such as modifying options trading fees or collateral ratios.
Decentralized Governance
Autonomy ⎊ This governance structure dictates that modifications to the protocol's core logic, such as adjusting option expiry rules or collateralization ratios, are determined by the community rather than a centralized body.