Anyone should be able to activate an account's vote

[nambrot]

Expected Behavior

Any account should be able to activate a vote.

Current Behavior

The account needs to activate it's own votes to receive rewards

[nambrot]

This feels like an easy one that could prevent a bunch of voting but non-active CELO which applies to about 3M CELO right now @aslawson

[aslawson]

to clarify this means any account can activate another account's 'pending' votes?
what is the use-case for "anyone"? cLabs or other vote platforms activate pending votes on behalf of accounts (to avoid users forgetting to activate a day later)?

[aslawson]

i guess this would only prevent a bunch on non-active voting CELO is if the "activator" could regularly identify the non-active votes, but I'm not sure there is a way to access all accounts with non-active votes with the current storage structure.

[nambrot]

cLabs or other vote platforms activate pending votes on behalf of accounts (to avoid users forgetting to activate a day later)?

That is correct.

There probably isn't an easy way of doing so with pure contract storage, but with any on-chain indexer it should be pretty easy. I.e. we track this metric with eksportisto

[deepakhb2]

@nambrot I am working on this issue.

[deepakhb2]

Hi all, Please give me a direction on which contract is handling this. I am finding it difficult to understand current logic that is handling the current votes. Thank you in advance.
Is this the right doc to start with https://docs.celo.org/celo-owner-guide/quick-start#the-next-day-activate-your-vote?

[jmrossy]

@nambrot @aslawson Could we take this a step further and remove the need for a manual activation tx entirely?
Could the distributeEpochRewards method in Election (or something similar) search for unactive votes and activate them?

Having some kind of service monitoring + activating would definitely be an improvement but it's still another service to pay for and manage.

@deepakhb2 here is the solidity code that controls this: https://github.com/celo-org/celo-monorepo/blob/master/packages/protocol/contracts/governance/Election.sol#L271

[deepakhb2]

Thank you @jmrossy. Current implementation is the current pending vote will selected from group by sender address to activate the vote. This needs to be changed like activate function should accept anther account address parameter to get the pending vote of a account. So the sender can pass other account to activate the pending vote. Is my understanding correct?
Or the other option is to activate all the pending votes in the group.

[nambrot]

@jmrossy The search unfortunately would require brute-force, so without substantially expanding the storage requirements or processing time in the epoch block (which is very sensitive), I would imagine it's gonna be a while until we get automated vote activation.

@deepakhb2 Your understanding is correct, another activate function that allows someone to activate in any account's behalf should be good. I do not believe it is easily possible to activate all pending votes in the group as you need to know the voters addresses.

[gitcoinbot]

Issue Status: 1. Open 2. Started 3. Submitted 4. Done

---

This issue now has a funding of 49.0 CELO (199.92 USD @ $4.08/CELO) attached to it as part of the celo-org fund.

• If you would like to work on this issue you can 'start work' on the Gitcoin Issue Details page.
• Want to chip in? Add your own contribution here.
• Questions? Checkout Gitcoin Help or the Gitcoin's Discord
• $1,634,728.24 more funded OSS Work available on the Gitcoin Issue Explorer

[gitcoinbot]

Issue Status: 1. Open 2. Started 3. Submitted 4. Done

---

Work has been started.

These users each claimed they can complete the work by 265 years, 8 months from now.
Please review their action plans below:

1) deepakhb2 has been approved to start work.

I have experience working on celo project and I have already looking into this issue. My initial research is complete.

Learn more on the Gitcoin Issue Details page.

[deepakhb2]

@nambrot Thank you. I will work on this change and raise the PR for review.

[deepakhb2]

@nambrot I have made the changes and I haven't raised PR yet I need to add unit tests to cover the change. I checking the tests to find best way to add the test coverage.
In mean time please review the change I have made https://github.com/deepakhb2/celo-monorepo/blob/issue/6467-activate-account/packages/protocol/contracts/governance/Election.sol#L290. Let me know if I am missing anything?
There is a dependency like account address depends on group address like passed account should belong to group.

[nambrot]

Looking good, one thing I might suggest is to rename the function. Even though it does clearly the same thing, I'd personally prefer to semantically distinguish the functions. Curious to get @yorhodes @m-chrzan's take on it. I would also consider extracting the common functionality into a _activate function.

[gitcoinbot]

@deepakhb2 Hello from Gitcoin Core - are you still working on this issue? Please submit a WIP PR or comment back within the next 3 days or you will be removed from this ticket and it will be returned to an ‘Open’ status. Please let us know if you have questions!

• reminder (3 days)
• escalation to mods (6 days)

Funders only: Snooze warnings for 1 day | 3 days | 5 days | 10 days | 100 days

[deepakhb2]

@nambrot This issue is complete. Please review the PR when you get a chance. Thank you.

[gitcoinbot]

Issue Status: 1. Open 2. Started 3. Submitted 4. Done

---

Work for 49.0 CELO (221.97 USD @ $4.53/CELO) has been submitted by:

---

• Learn more on the Gitcoin Issue Details page
• Want to chip in? Add your own contribution here.
• Questions? Checkout Gitcoin Help or the Gitcoin's Discord
• $1,946,458.45 more funded OSS Work available on the Gitcoin Issue Explorer

[gitcoinbot]

Issue Status: 1. Open 2. Started 3. Submitted 4. Done

---

The funding of 49.0 CELO (220.99 USD @ $4.51/CELO) attached to this issue has been approved & issued to @deepakhb2.

• Learn more on the Gitcoin Issue Details page
• Questions? Checkout Gitcoin Help or the Gitcoin's Discord
• $1,956,712.59 more funded OSS Work available on the Gitcoin Issue Explorer