Programs such as Unexplored Projects, where applicants propose projects and the PM selects the selected projects and accompanies them for about 6 months, are not compatible with Quadratic Voting.

  • This is due to the fact that the nature of “accompanying” is different from that of money
  • Quadratic Voting is a consensus-building mechanism that may or may not be suitable for some situations, such as the nature of the goods to be distributed. It should be noted that it is not a magic wand that makes everything better.

Specific examples

  • There are four PMs.
  • Suppose Project A receives votes 1,1,1,1 and Project B receives votes 15,0,0,0
  • At this time, Quadratic Voting selects project A
  • From PM1’s point of view, it appears that “Project B, which I pushed for, was rejected because the other PMs did not understand it.
  • Even if we were to accompany Project A (+1), it would be difficult to have the same enthusiasm as for Project B (+15)

This is due to the fact that the resource of “enthusiasm” tightly coupled with the individual cannot be separated and is difficult to control externally

  • Programs that offer “enthusiasm” as a value must think carefully about how to produce more of this valuable resource.

What I wrote here is that QV is not suited to provide “companionship.”

  • Conversely, the “funding” part, which removes the accompaniment, does not.
  • For example, I think Quadratic Funding is a possible solution to the problem that both software and hardware projects of the unexplored juniors are not good with a budget of 500,000.

relevance


This page is auto-translated from /nishio/伴走型プログラムの採択にQVは向いていない using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.