I do support how points can be gained by passing a proposal vs. just submitting a proposal on Discourse. This will incentivize the author(s) to submit proposals that align with the DAOs and Foundations goals, and not trying to gain the system of just submitting proposal for the purpose of points farming.
I genuinely appreciate how this proposal keeps it simple on earning points, while at the same time, starting the monitoring of rewards from Q1, is a good starting point.
With it starting retroactively, you’ll get a good baseline of delegates who have been active during this period without any incentives, and also meets your KPI of mapping your number of active voters, governance discussions and proposals, which should increase in Q2, and going forward.
Thanks, @bitblondy, that makes total sense. I really like the simplicity of this proposal, and also, I didn’t catch it when I first read it (and you mentioned it in your comments below) that this is a quarterly renewal-able proposal.
I think this is great way do it, since it allows the team to adjust the proposal if something is not working as intended, and at the same time, it reduces the risk to the treasury with a quarterly approach.
Thanks @coffee-crusher for your positive feedback. The downside is the shorter continuity for delegates, but for the first quarters we should have the option to reiterate on the process if necessary.
@CRYPTOCHILD Thanks for your comment. Yes, for the first (retroactive) quarter, the draft favours delegates that have already been active without incentives. While this does not have an effect on previous engagement, as @coffee-crusher mentiones, it provides a baseline to measure the effects in the coming quarters. Open to hearing more thoughts on this.
GM everyone, thank you for all the positive feedback on the proposal. I think we have had sufficient time to discuss and digest this proposal, and we will be working on getting it published on the RARI DAO Tally this week.
Just a couple of reminders:
The first version of this proposal will have no cost, and will simply act as a signaling mechanism and ratification for the first year of Delegate Incentives (distributed quarterly).
Any interested delegates should create their voting rationale threads by the end of this quarter (March 31st, 2025), to be eligible for Q1 incentives. Examples of Delegate Threads → (DAOplomats Delegate Thread, StableLab Delegate Thread)
This looks great, @Sixty and I’m looking forward to it going up on Tally. Thanks also for the reminder with the deadline for creating a delegate thread.
I’ve been watching RARI from the outside for a while and have been interested in becoming more active in the governance and community (and I’m finally doing so yay). I support this proposal since it creates a strong incentive for people like me to start participating actively.
That said, as others have mentioned in previous comments, this should be open to any applicant rather than being retroactive. Opening it up would encourage new people to engage with RARI Governance. I understand that this may seem unfair to those who have already contributed in previous months, but perhaps they could receive an extra incentive (like X amount of points for being active before the program started). That way, we can reward past contributors while also encouraging new participation.
Hey San, thank you so much for the comment and contributing to RARI! Would love to have a call with you to get to know you better and see how we can help plug you into the community DM’d you to find a time to connect
Hey @san, this will be open to any applicant since you can start participating in the next quarter and be eligible for incentives. The program is intended to run through to the end of 2025, and incentives will be distributed for participation in each quarter.
@bitblondy , as I was posting my delegate thread on the Forum, I realized that should have asked you to clarify regarding what is being measured as the qualification dates for the first quarter of the incentive program, and therefore, all future quarters.
Specifically, is the proposal date measured by using the “voting period start date” or the “end voting period date” for voting participation? And that delegate activities for Q1 would measure for the following proposals: RRC-37 - RRC-40.
I am in support of this proposal but I will be highlighting a few things as voting is already live on Tally.
Please, this link takes us to Tally and not the eligible delegates.
Also, if we are using the 2k veRARI as an eligibility criterion, even the 15 recognized delegates from the current cohort won’t qualify for the initial set of rewards. This is because of the decay factor. All 15 delegates currently have <2k veRARI.
So, upon passing, would this then start with the next cohort of delegates?
@coffee-crusher that’s a good question, we didn’t clarify that in the proposal. We could measure, when an individual delegate voted. It probably does make more sense operationally, though, when one proposal gets assigned a certain quarter. @Sixty What do you think from an operational perspective?
Thanks, @WinVerse, for your comment. We indeed didn’t account for the decay in veRARI voting power. Tally is not displaying the current voting power correctly, as it seems.
As far as I see, the decay for the participants of the current delegate launchpad cohort started in February, so only this (most recent) proposal would be affected.
It would be an option, to make an amendment in the upcoming rewards proposal for Q1. However, I’m not sure about future proposals.
It depends on the launch date of the next delegate cohort, and more importantly, the governance migration. @addie Do you might have an update from foundation on these two aspects?
Thanks, @bitblondy and @Sixty for your help. The reason why I’m asking, is when I looked at RRC-36, the voting period started for that proposal on Dec 26th and ended on Jan 3rd. I wondered if there were a future proposal that had similar start and end voting dates (i.e. that started and ended in different quarters) what quarter would that proposal be considered for delegate incentives?
Fixed the link ser, should take you to the delegates page now. Initially, we based the criteria on the veRARI on the delegate page linked, so we will discuss and figure out the best way forward.
@bitblondy@coffee-crusher operationally it would make the most sense to look at when a proposal was published, rather than the end of the voting period. So Q1 would start with RRC-37 in this case.
@Sixty , @bitblondy and @cr1st0f , are we still on target to post the Q1 rewards report this week, or do you have an updated timeline of when this will be posted for comments?
Hey @coffee-crusher, we will share an update on the community call next week. We want to make sure we are all aligned since this will be the first iteration of the incentives program.
Revision 3: Modified the Active Delegate Thread points criteria
Section Changed: Active delegate thread - 100 Points
Change:
Removed: “Points for maintaining an active delegate thread will be distributed only for voting rationale on onchain votes (Tally). Therefore, these points will be calculated as a percentage of total onchain votes for that quarter.”
Added: "Points for the active delegate thread will be awarded for:
Voting rationale posts for onchain votes (Tally), calculated as a percentage of total onchain votes for that quarter
Substantive participation in governance forum discussions about active proposals
The calculation method and weighting for these components will be determined by the DAO."
Justification:
Primary supporting feedback: Priority #1 from @coffee-crusher (SimScore 57%): “I do have a clarification question about the 100 points for the Active delegate thread. The second to last sentence states that points for active delegate thread will only be distributed for Tally votes. Does that mean that points are only awarded for ADT if the delegate both voted for that proposal and added their voting rationale /comment thread to their ADT for that vote?”
Additional supporting feedback: Priority #3 from ratjarisjames (SimScore 50%): “I’m fully in support of this proposal. It presents a thoughtful and well-designed approach to one of the core challenges in DAO governance by establishing a clear incentive system that promotes consistent participation while prioritizing the quality of contributions over volume. I especially appreciate the emphasis on rewarding thoughtful engagement through rationale”
Additional supporting feedback: Priority #6 from sohobilt (SimScore 44%): “Why were these three criteria (onchain voting, active delegate thread, and proposal creation) chosen instead of other factors like participation in discussions or community education?”
The change both clarifies how ADT points are earned (addressing Priority #1) and expands the criteria to include forum discussions (addressing Priority #6), while maintaining the emphasis on thoughtful engagement that Priority #3 supports.
DM’d you to find a time to connect