Q3 2025 Delegate Incentive Program Report

#1

Author: @jarisjames (Founder of daospace)

Reviewer: @Anria, Rari Foundation

Abstract

This report details the Q3 2025 rewards under the amended RRC-40 Delegate Incentive Program. Following the execution of RRC-51, the Treasury Management Empowerment Program, delegate rewards are now disbursed directly by the RARI Foundation rather than executed via the DAO treasury. The fixed-per-activity model introduced in Q2 remains in place, rewarding delegates for onchain voting, rationale posting, and proposal authorship. Each activity is capped at 500 RARI, with a maximum of 1,500 RARI per delegate. This report summarizes qualifying delegates, payout calculations, and compliance with the eligibility requirements across both Ethereum and RARI Chain governance. As disbursements are now managed through the Foundation multisig, this report does not require a separate onchain vote.

Motivation

The Delegate Incentive Program continues to strengthen governance participation within RARI DAO by rewarding active and transparent engagement. The fixed-per-activity model introduced in Q2 provides a predictable and sustainable framework that balances inclusivity with accountability. For Q3, the focus remains on maintaining consistent participation across both Ethereum and RARI Chain governance while ensuring delegates provide a clear rationale for each vote and continue contributing through thoughtful proposal authorship.

Rationale

The fixed-per-activity model reinforces fiscal responsibility by ensuring rewards are distributed predictably and proportionally to measurable participation. Transparency is upheld through the expectation that delegates provide a rationale for each vote, setting higher standards of contribution and integrity within the delegate ecosystem.

Specifications

Eligibility Criteria

The eligibility rules for this report follow the amended framework introduced by @Jose_StableLab in Q2 2025. To qualify for rewards, delegates were required to meet the following conditions:

  • Minimum Voting Participation: At least 60% voting participation, as set in RRC-40.

  • Voting Power Requirement: A minimum of 2,000 veRARI delegated on Ethereum Mainnet, or at least 2,000 RARI voting power on RARI Chain under the dual-governance model.

  • Active Delegate Thread: Delegates must maintain an active Delegate Thread on the RARI DAO governance forum, posting rationale for each vote during the quarter. (1:1 rationale-to-vote ratio). All rationales for Q3 were required to be posted by the close of the final proposal of the quarter: October 3, 2025 at 8:15 PM EST, which already served as a brief grace period beyond the official quarter-end date of September 30, 2025.

  • Updated Delegate Profile: Tally profile must include delegate name, description, expertise, and past achievements.

  • Not already paid for delegate services by the Foundation.

Reward Structure

Rewards are fixed per activity and determined individually rather than by a pooled point system. Each eligible delegate’s payout is based on:

  • Percentage of votes/rationales participated in

  • Number of proposals authored (capped at one 500 RARI reward per proposal, even with multiple authors)

This fixed model ensures predictable compensation aligned with consistent governance activity.

  1. Onchain Voting Activity - 500 RARI
    Voting on 100% of onchain proposals earns 500 RARI. Rewards are prorated by participation (e.g., voting on 80% of proposals yields 400 RARI).

  2. Voting Rationales - 500 RARI
    Posting a rationale for each vote earns up to 500 RARI.

Rationale posting carries equal weight to onchain voting, reinforcing the expectation that every vote must be accompanied by an explanation.

Rewards are prorated by the percentage of rationales/votes posted (e.g., 60% completion yields 300 RARI for rationales + 300 RARI for voting). Rationales must reflect genuine reasoning, clarity, and independent thought.

  1. Proposal Authorship - 500 RARI
    500 RARI is awarded for authoring proposals that pass onchain. Rewards are split evenly between co-authors. Proposals that already include author compensation are not eligible.

Accountability Note

@Sixty submitted rationales for all eight proposals this quarter but actually voted on seven.
A rationale was posted for RRC-46 even though no vote was cast on it. This is why timely rationales matter; when they’re all posted at the end of the quarter, it’s easy to misrepresent participation. That can unintentionally mislead delegators who assess engagement through forum activity.

KPIs

Average number of active voters: Mainnet = 9 | RARI Chain = 17

Average vote participation rate for active voters: Mainnet = 58% | RARI Chain = 93%

Average $RARI voting on proposals: Mainnet = 2,859 RARI | RARI Chain = 9,743 RARI

Number of proposals passed: Mainnet = 4 | RARI Chain = 3

Key Terms

  • veRARI: Voting-escrowed RARI
  • RRC-40: The passed proposal establishing the Delegate Incentive Program
  • Rationale: Delegate explanation of vote posted on the forum

Steps to Implement

  1. Publish the Q3 Delegate Incentive Program Report on the RARI DAO forum for transparency and recordkeeping.

  2. The RARI Foundation will review the list of qualifying delegates.

  3. Once reviewed, payments will be processed directly from the Foundation multisig.

Overall Cost

  • Q3 Delegate Rewards Pool: 8,010 RARI
  • Admin Fee (daospace): $1,500 USD equivalent - 1,773 RARI at the time of writing

TOTAL COST: 9,783 RARI

============================================================

Full Report & Payout Breakdown

1). Delegate: @forexus

Wallet: 0xd8936e602e38dfee5d6466865068b94b1943debf

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Rationales: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Proposal Author: 1 (Co-Authorship), 1 (Full-Authorship) = 500 RARI, since rewards max out at 1,500

Payout: 1,500 RARI

============================================================

2). Delegate: @coffee-crusher

Wallet: 0x6a39677F216D8Ea21BE5F95798Cd23d0c454E818

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Rationales: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Proposal Author: 1 (Full-Authorship) = 500 RARI

Payout: 1,500 RARI

============================================================

3). Delegate: @jarisjames

Wallet: 0xb04e6891e584f2884ad2ee90b6545ba44f843c4a

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Rationales: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Proposal Author: 1 (Co-Authorship) = 250 RARI

Payout: 1,250 RARI

============================================================

4). Delegate: @PGov

Wallet: 0x3fb19771947072629c8eee7995a2ef23b72d4c8a

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Rationales: 8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Proposal Author: 0

Payout: 1,000 RARI

============================================================

5). Delegate: @Money

Wallet: 0x34c2871C3D539C473E40a09158BDff522202E2d5

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 8/8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Rationales: 8/8 (100%) = 500 RARI

Proposal Author: 0

Payout: 1,000 RARI

============================================================

6). Delegate: @lionmsee

Wallet: 0x326301483Aaa7366960877fa18b019e9C2d53E5d

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 7/8 (88%) = 440 RARI

Rationales: 7/8 (88%) = 440 RARI

Proposal Author: 0

Payout: 880 RARI

============================================================

7). Delegate: @Sixty

Wallet: 0xc2971fe806ce4438da09e21fc7be7fb121cf7e13

Proposals Voted - V1 + V2: 7/8 (88%) = 440 RARI

Rationales: 7/8 (88%) = 440 RARI

Proposal Author: 0

Payout: 880 RARI

============================================================

Admin Fee: 1,500 USD equivalent (500 USD/Month) = 1,773 RARI at the time of writing

Daospace wallet: 0xd3EDA7aB6Ed6a1836EAB644D86E7f76ABAd75172

7 Likes
#2

Looks great, thanks for the report, @jarisjames , I also like the addition of the KPIs in the report, interesting to see how this will map to each quarterly report. Thk u!

4 Likes
#3

Thanks for putting this report together. Appreciate the detail!

4 Likes
#4

Looks amazing, thank you for putting in all the work @jarisjames :fire:

3 Likes
#5

Thanks for putting this together, it’s honestly really helpful for someone like me who’s still getting familiar with how delegate incentives work here. I really like how the fixed-per-activity model rewards genuine participation and transparency rather than just holding voting power.

I do have a small question though, for new delegates who haven’t yet reached the minimum delegated tokens, is there any pathway to start contributing meaningfully while building up to eligibility?

1 Like
#6

I still fulfilled the requirements for Q3, I believe?

#7

@bitblondy, you didn’t qualify for Q3 because your final two rationales were submitted on October 4th, after the close of the final proposal of the quarter. That proposal closed on October 3rd at 8:15 PM EST, which already served as a brief grace period beyond the official quarter-end of September 30th.

The eligibility rule is the same as the amended framework from Q2:
“Delegates must maintain an active Delegate Thread on the RARI DAO governance forum, posting rationale for each vote during the quarter.”

This rule ensures a timely 1:1 vote-to-rationale ratio for all delegates. Extending the cutoff any further would have meant changing the rules just to accommodate one participant.

2 Likes
#8

Thanks for the clarification @jarisjames.
The last two proposals could equally be Q4, not sure if this is specified, but doesn’t really matter.

More importantly, #RRC-47 (co-authored by you?) further states the following:
"Writing rationales for 100% of onchain votes in a quarter earns 500 RARI. Partial completion will be rewarded proportionally, e.g., rationales for 60% of votes will yield 300 RARI. "

Sounds to me like counting rationals is the way to go.

#9

And @jarisjames I’m sorry to be extra annoying, but since you made me double-check. You seem to miss the last rationale as well.

#10

@bitblondy, The final proposal you’re referring to, the “Treasury Management Empowerment Program” proposal, was published onchain on October 1st, which falls under Q4 voting activity, not Q3.

The Q3 review covers a total of 8 proposals whose voting periods occurred between July 1st and September 30th. Since that one opened in Q4, it will be reflected in the next report instead.

Every Q3 proposal I voted on within that timeframe has a corresponding rationale.

2 Likes
#11

@bitblondy, that’s correct, but the proportional rewards in RRC-47 apply only to delegates who meet the baseline eligibility criteria, which includes maintaining an active Delegate Thread and posting a rationale for each vote during the quarter.

The 1:1 rationale-to-vote rule establishes eligibility first, and proportional rewards are calculated only after that requirement is met. This example is clear with @lionmsee & @Sixty, who voted on 7 out of 8 proposals, and also provided rationales to justify each of their 7 votes withn the voting period that occured within Q3, with the final proposal of the quarter “RRC-52: RARI DAO Security Council Election Proposal”, ending on October 3rd, at 8:15pm EST.

Btw, the last two proposals of the quarter were RRC-51: Establishment of the Rarible Creator Fund Working Group & RRC-52: RARI DAO Security Council Election Proposal, and you posted rationales for each proposal on October 4th, well after the close of Q3, which would be September 30th.

2 Likes
#12

Not sure, if you’re interpreting RRC-47 correctly. Partial rewards make sense, but I hardly believe it was the intention of the program to remove delegates entirely, because they missed posting a rationale.

Is this why you removed other delegates like @DAOplomats @Jaf, or @sohobiit as well?

1 Like
#13

@bitblondy the program didn’t remove anyone arbitrarily, it followed the same eligibility framework from RRC-47 and the Q2 amendment. Every delegate is required to post a rationale for each of their votes during the quarter to remain eligible.

All qualifying delegates last quarter met that 1:1 vote-to-rationale standard. This quarter, several delegates didn’t, including the ones you mentioned. @Jaf reached out directly and acknowledged the rule once it was clarified.

Posting a rationale for each vote is the bare minimum participation requirement under RRC-47.

3 Likes
#14

I agree with @bitblondy on this.

It feels unfair to remove delegates who have shown consistent interest, participation, and overall good performance from the incentives program.

The rule states:

If this rule is what made me ineligible, I want to clarify that I did maintain an active delegate thread. While I didn’t post my rationale for the last vote on time for different reasons, I don’t think it’s fair to remove me after being active and engaged throughout the entire quarter.

I interpret the program rules somewhat differently, but since the program’s main goal is to motivate delegates to perform well, it feels discouraging in my case.

1 Like
#15

@Jaf, you didn’t post a rationale for the last 2 votes you made for the quarter, so your statement above is inaccurate.

You didn’t post a rationale for the two following proposals:

RRC-51: Establishment of the Rarible Creator Fund Working Group & RRC-52: RARI DAO Security Council Election Proposal

As mentioned earlier, the eligibility framework from RRC-47 and the Q2 amendment requires a rationale for each vote during the quarter to qualify. You acknowledged this in our earlier telegram exchange as well.

image
image989Ă—484 66 KB

4 Likes
#16

As far as I can see the rules as stated in the proposal are being followed.

I can understand there is disappointment, I would also be disappointed. Best thing to do is to make sure this doesn’t happen in Q4.

Right now it is like it is. Looking forward to see everyone, and new faces, back on the list after Q4!

3 Likes
#17

This infighting and governance theater has got to stop. This is ridiculous. Both of you - @bitblondy and @Jaf participated in passing RRC-47 back in July, and as delegates, it’s your responsibility as a delegate to have the FULL context, knowledge and understanding of all successfully passed votes. And @Jaf you voted in favor of RRC-47 and @bitblondy , your abstain vote still counted for quorum to pass this proposal. If you were both against it then, you would have more than likely voted against it.

image
image1029Ă—347 23.8 KB

So unless any delegates wants to participate in building this DAO and working together, outbursts like these are unproductive and unbecoming traits of delegates who token holders have invested their VP in.

3 Likes
#18

Couldn’t agree more… :grinning:

n my opinion, the program shouldn’t exclude good delegates who have shown solid performance.
Perhaps this can serve as a good lesson to improve the program.

no need to start more drama…

#19

Just a suggestion, everything you do is public to all token holders, including those who have chosen to delegate to you. How you respond and act in governance is always transparent.

2 Likes
#20

@Jaf, the program can be improved serveral ways to bring more attnetion to the RARI ecosystem in general. As delegates we can be more active on X as well as forum, to naturally attract potential delegators and new delegates in the first place.

But the current form of the Delegate Incentive Program is very simple. When you vote, post a rationale to justify your vote. The program isn’t asking for much in its current form, this should be the bare minimum for governance participation.

Now, since you and @bitblondy are framing the program as unfair, delegates like @DAOplomats are now posting last minute rationales for Q3 to try and justify being included as well. Without a cutoff date, more and more delegates will try and qualify after the end of the quarter, which diminishes the integrity of the program as if the rules for eligibility doesn’t matter at all.

Besides, a grace period was given in Q1, but now we’re in Q3, with the very same delegates, and in Q2 every delegate posted a rationale for their vote on time, so why is it a problem now?

It’s very imprtant that delegates start reading and comprehending what they vote for onchain as well. If they had done that, rationales would have been posted for each vote on time. And you know that’s not asking for much.

4 Likes