You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There are two issues/areas for improvement with this approach:
This burn transfer happens on every deposit, adding an additional transaction to the network for each vote
The additional gas cost is incurred by the voter (roughly doubled since we are executing an extra transaction)
What should happen:
For efficiency, batch burn transactions together (e.g. when VoteOption contract balance surpasses a certain threshold)
Abstract the additional gas cost so it's not paid by the voter (e.g. Have the issuer of the proposal fund both the yes/no options with some funds to execute these transactions, these funds could be returned to the issuer after the deadline when the contract selfdestructs)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently the burnSignal contract burns funds as follows:
Whenever funds are received on one of the
VoteOptions
contracts via thereceive()
function, two things happen:BurnedDeposit
event when successful (see https://github.com/Tomasvrba/burnSignalContracts/blob/burn-address/burnSignal.sol#L25)There are two issues/areas for improvement with this approach:
What should happen:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: