Should smart-contracts be allowed to vote?

[lock9]

I want to propose a discussion: should smart-contracts with Neo be allowed to vote? (and claim gas)
What is your opinion? Why?

My opinion:

Pros: Neo will be moved around, good for dapps and the general market.
Cons: Smart-contracts(admins) becoming too 'powerful'; dapps voting for their own candidates, without user permission.

If we create a NEP for voting delegation, then ok, I'm in favor. This is because I believe that the more assets moving around, the better. I'm not really sure. I would like to know your opinions.

[roman-khimov]

They can do that already (and we use that in NeoFS internal chain contracts), see #1924.

[dahongfei]

I am leaning towards not to change current design - allow SC to vote and collect GAS. Deactivate NEO's voting capacity in SC limits the flexibility of SC, i.e a voting strategy SC.

[ioannistsil]

I am leaning towards not to change current design - allow SC to vote and collect GAS. Deactivate NEO's voting capacity in SC limits the flexibility of SC, i.e a voting strategy SC.

i think this will have negative impact for gas value

[lock9]

@roman-khimov how do you split votes? Isn't the smart-contract considered only one account? Are these contracts open-source?
@dahongfei Agreed. We don't happen to have a voting strategy SC example, do we? I would like to learn more about this.
@ioannistsil why do you say that?

[roman-khimov]

how do you split votes?

That's a very good question, one account only votes for one candidate now, so to make it all work we deploy several (depending on number of CNs needed) contracts (technically, it's even the same NEF now, #2044 allowed us to deploy it using different senders) that hold NEO, vote with it and receive GAS.

Are these contracts open-source?

Sure, https://github.com/nspcc-dev/neofs-contract, the one you're interested in is alphabet.

[lock9]

I will leave this open for another day, but the results were great. I know where to go. Suggestions on #2233 are welcome! Thanks.