Enjoyed reading all this other than the formulas.
My friend would say “Urbit fixes this”, but I would say “Diversification fixes this”:
Could the holy grail be achieved with diversification?
Example… all in one round together:
20% traditional CLR matching (whales can’t run the show)
20% pairwise-bounded quadratic matching (teams can’t team up)
20% CLR matching with Negative votes (shorts allow a free market)
10% single matching (good ol’days)
10% 3x matching (encourages donations larger than 1 Dai)
10% Randomized matching (Introduces lottery element - play lotto for your cause!)
10% Sample-vote matching (David Chaum knows what he’s talking about)
Benefits:
- Hard to game; a gamer might go in circles
- With the right optimization may not need identity???
- Diversification often makes things better - the game-able characteristics of certain strategies would be highly reduced by the other strategies.
DeDivGiv = Decentralized Diversified Giving
Cheers