Vote allocation structures are a pretty complicated topic, so this is going to be a multi-part article. Until very recently I had just assumed that the structure used by FCFL would be a simply “one token, one vote” structure. However, in a recent post on their Telegram channel, someone associated with FCFL (I can’t remember who) indicated that this would not be the case. They indicated that the model might look more like the payouts in a poker tournament and implied that that would prevent any one voter from completely monopolizing control of a team.
Before I get into the pro and cons of how various structures might work, I’ll address what I think the goals of the voting structure should be:
*Provide incentive to all fans to buy FAN tokens, regardless of how many (or few) they already hold
*Remove the possibility that any one fan or small group of coordinating fans can gain complete control of a team (which would remove incentive for anyone else whose tokens are locked to that team)
*Be reasonably easy to understand
*
Some of these goals are similar for the structures of poker tournaments and of daily fantasy sports tournaments (an industry that has a lot in common with poker and in which I have a lot of experience), while others are different. As I discuss specific structural options for FCFL voting, I’ll get into some of the lessons learned from those industries and how they apply here.
It’s also worth noting that the FCFL may or may not allow different teams to eventually adopt different vote allocation structures. While this would certainly be in keeping with the idea of giving fans as much control and choice as possible, it also might allow fans of some teams to make decisions that go against their own best interests. FCFL’s decision on whether to allow this may ultimately come down to how strongly they believe in the wisdom of the crowd.
