April 2022 - This month in Cosmos Hub governance

Welcome to our first ever monthly update! We will be posting a summary of the latest governance discussions, as well as highlight proposals that have been up to consideration on the Cosmos Hub.

We are doing this as part of our forum activation work, which we scoped in Proposal #63 (view in block explorer, see forum discussion). As mentioned in our proposal, which passed on 2022-03-29, Hypha Worker Co-operative has been helping out with the Hub’s testnet program and improving the Hub’s documentation. We’re a co-op based in Toronto, Canada that specializes in tech design and development, as well as organizational strategy and development.

Since this is our first digest, let us know if there’s anything else you’d like to see in these updates.


On-Chain and Closed Proposals

Recover EVMOS channel by upgrading to new client

View in block explorer.

Proposal #70 will restore connection between the Hub and EVMOS.

Include CosmWasm in Rho Upgrade

View in block explorer, see forum discussion.

The CosmWasm module would allow governance-gated smart contracts to be hosted on the Hub. This would lower the barrier to entry for new features but raises important questions about the vision of the Hub and the responsibility of governance participants in deciding how features should be added to it. Conversation about the security risks and purpose of the Hub has been lively - feel free to join in on the forum! Note that this is a signaling proposal to gauge the community’s thoughts!

Make Cosmos Hub the Lead Sponsor of Cosmoverse 2022

View in block explorer, see forum discussion.

Proposal #68 passed. Cosmoverse 2022 is scheduled for September 27 & 28 in Medellín, Columbia and the organizers have been funded for 2600 ATOM from the Community Pool to finance costs such as venue, food and beverages, marketing, A/V, afterparty, and legal costs. This makes the Cosmos Hub a main sponsor of the event.

Staking Param Change: MaxValidators 175

View in block explorer, see forum discussion.

Proposal #66 passed, increasing the active validator set from 150 to 175. This is the third such proposal in the Hub’s history with the last increase being in August of 2021. This proposal had rich discussion on many platforms including the forum, Twitter, Youtube, and Reddit. Prior to passing, a validator needed to have approximately 65k ATOM staked on their node to be included in the active set. One month after the proposal’s passage, validators now need approximately 23k ATOM staked on their node to be in the active set.


View in block explorer.

Proposal #65 passed, upgrading the Cosmos Hub from v6-Vega to v7-Theta after a successful upgrade on the Theta public testnet. The proposal inspired conversation on how to publicize test results and utilize the forum to improve transparency around the upgrade process.

Signal Proposal: Migration of Gravity DEX to a Separate Cosmos Chain

View in block explorer, see forum discussion.

Proposal #62 passed, indicating wide community approval for the Gravity DEX being re-homed to the newly created Crescent Network. Crescent is now up and running and a follow-up Proposal #67 recently passed to officially sunset the Gravity DEX on the Cosmos Hub (view in block explorer). From a governance perspective, it’s great to see a signaling proposal transition so smoothly to make the changes that were suggested.

Update expired client between Cosmoshub and Bostrom

View in block explorer.

Proposal #64 passed, unfreezing the expired IBC channel-240 connecting the Cosmos Hub and Bostrom chain. This update lets affected accounts recover stuck funds from the channel and will re-activate the connection between the two blockchains.

Activate governance discussions on the Discourse forum using community pool funds

View in block explorer, see forum discussion.

Proposal #63 grew out of a draft for a signaling proposal in late 2021 and passed, with the community signing on to fund the improvement and stewardship of the Discourse forum as a space for Cosmos Hub governance conversations.

Governance meta

NoWithVeto concerns

There has been some confusion about the term NoWithVeto. The Hub documents define what each voting option means. The docs state the definition as:

NoWithVeto indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting ‘No’. If the number of ‘NoWithVeto’ votes is greater than a third of total votes excluding ‘Abstain’ votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are burned.

As accepted by the community in Proposal 6, voters are expected to vote ‘NoWithVeto’ if a proposal leads to undesirable outcomes for the community. It states “if a proposal seems to be spam or is deemed to have caused a negative externality to Cosmos community, voters should vote NoWithVeto.”

Voting ‘NoWithVeto’ provides a mechanism for a minority group representing a third of the participating voting power to reject a proposal that would otherwise pass. This makes explicit an aspect of the consensus protocol: it works as long as only up to a third of nodes fail. In other words, greater than a third of validators are always in a position to cause a proposal to fail outside the formalized governance process and the network’s norms, such as by censoring transactions. The purpose of internalizing this aspect of the consensus protocol into the governance process is to discourage validators from relying on collusion and censorship tactics to influence voting outcomes.

It may still be worthwhile to work with the community to further clarify what NoWithVeto means for Cosmos Hub.

Forum updates

The Cosmos Hub Discourse Forum has been renovated to include some new category architecture and post templates for proposal drafts to guide discussions and make it easier to get started. We have put together a great Start Here post to help people find their way and have posted a moderation policy so that you know how the moderators will be interacting with the space. Also – the forum looks different! Enjoy the dark theme. :slight_smile:

@CosmosGov Twitter

The Hypha team is now managing the @CosmosGov Twitter account! We are using this platform to raise awareness of governance proposals on the forum. In addition to being a way for people to monitor on-chain proposal progress, we want to highlight proposals before they hit the chain and help them gain awareness and feedback from the community.

Governance Vote Tallying issue

Validators are experiencing issues with their nodes during the block in which governance votes are tallied. This is due to the large amount of computation required during tallying and the increase in votes cast. Improvements to the IAVL (Cosmos’s data structure that stores persistent data) should fix the issue in an upcoming Gaia release.


That’s the recap for April 2022. We encourage you to explore the discussion categories and chime in if you have thoughts, questions, and of course, any proposal ideas.

Thanks for reading!