OrbitLens
Thanks for the feedback, that's very helpful :)
Poll creation wizard - Members section is not clear. Does it mean "answer options" or "poll participant addresses"?
This is "answer options" The next release will be more specific about that.
I can't customize answer options. Also it seems like there is no way to create a single-choice questions. For example, "Your nationality". And there is not way to customize answer options.
Maybe there's some confusion around the term "poll". This system is for voting (e.g.: elections), not to build custom forms. In a future release, I'll add an option to have custom grades, though.
Btw, the set of grades Cosmic.vote is using has been researched & designed after the principles of majority judgment creators. That is, distinct & meaningful enough so you won't hesitate between two - but as restricted as possible. Except for specific cases, you'd be better with those defaults.
There are "Open since NaN days" and "Never expire" labels in the voting interface. It looks like your engine supports time bounds settings, but there is no way to set them in the interface.
The time bounds feature is being worked on, I'll release it within the next couple of weeks. If you get the NaN error again, could you please share the page link with me?
What is the overall length limit for the title and options? Looks like it is determined by the maximum manage_data op you can pack into the transaction (100-2=98 data entries). Am I right?
Yes, and I should probably set a sane limit here. ;)
Something like voting by creating a trustline to a specific predefined asset, or sending specially minted voting tokens to one of the accounts that represent voting options. A pre-signed smart contract transaction might use this to execute conditional actions allowing elaborate chained smart contracts schemes.
What do you think? Is there a way to use your voting contracts for this case?
The system you're proposing is worth digging, although this is not what I'm trying to do here.
What you're proposing is using "conventional" Stellar smart-contract capabilities to implement voting & maybe money distribution. This is possible to some extent, but to really shine this solution would need a special type of transaction that doesn't increment the sequence number on failure. This way, we could any operation as conditions similar to minTime/maxTime/sequence. Then, it'll be possible to set conditions on the amount of asset, trustlines & so on.
What I'm doing instead is saying "Ok, there's a ton of things we can't build within this paradigm. Let's see what can be taken to layer 2 without losing the properties of the underlying consensus (trustlessness)". That's how I came with passive & operated contracts, which are layer 2 contracts - btw those mechanisms are not new, but the way I'm working with them is.
This is a different path with different trade-offs, but long story short, I'm indeed working on chaining those things as I mentioned earlier.
If someone could come up with an idea that allows usage of voting results in the smart contracts, it would be a giant step towards the oracles and DAOs on Stellar.
Well then... ;)
