Seeking Clarification on Delegate Incentive Program Eligibility & Price Calculations

,
#1

gm everyone,

As the administrator of the Delegate Incentive Program through daospace (as outlined in the proposal), I’ve been reviewing the Q1 implementation and wanted to raise a few points for clarification before finalizing the quarterly report and submitting the payout proposal to Tally.

Eligibility Criteria Clarification

The proposal (authored by @sixty, @bitblondy, and @cr1st0f) outlines four eligibility requirements under the “Eligibility Criteria” section:

  • At least 2,000 veRARI delegated

  • 60% 90-day voting participation rate

  • An active Delegate Thread

  • Not already receiving compensation from the Foundation for delegate services

While recent discussion has largely focused on voting participation, the Delegate Thread is also listed as a requirement.

There are a few delegates who were active and met all the other requirements but did not maintain a delegate thread, such as @Firefly808 and @andreitr. Based on a strict reading of the proposal, they would be ineligible, but it’s worth surfacing this publicly to ensure everyone is aligned on interpretation. Personally, I would recommend allowing a short grace period for these contributors to create their delegate threads. Delegate threads were never strictly enforced prior to this program, and the requirement may not have been clearly emphasized during the quarter, making it easy to overlook.

We also have cases like @coffee-crusher, who embodies the exact kind of thoughtful participation this program was designed to recognize. Due to technical issues with Tally earlier in the quarter, some of her votes didn’t register onchain, which might technically disqualify her. But she still took the time to share detailed rationale, engage in forum discussions, and uphold a high standard of delegate conduct.

Her commitment to transparency, accountability, and good-faith participation really stands out, and I think it’s important that we build space in this program to ensure delegates like her aren’t overlooked due to technical issues outside their control.

Quarterly RARI Price Clarification

One last clarification relates to how the $30,000 equivalent in RARI is calculated. The proposal specifies that the average price of $RARI over the quarter should be used to determine the token distribution.

For Q1, the average price of $RARI was $1.71, while the current spot price is approximately $1.02. This means that using the quarterly average results in significantly fewer RARI tokens being distributed across the program.

Raising this here to align publicly before finalizing the quarterly report

7 Likes
RARI DAO Highlights - April 7-13, 2025
#2

Thank you so much for bringing up this issue regarding the eligibility of delegates of the DIP, as the program administrator, @jarisjames. This is a new program, and I’m sure that we may need to adjust it as it progresses each quarter that it runs, to refine with more clarification and efficiency.

I greatly appreciate your consideration for my eligibility, and I will concede to the consensus of the delegate community to weight in on what would be fair and equal for all delegates participants in the DIP, in addition for outlying circumstances that have affected delegates such as myself, @Firefly808 and @andreitr.

I also don’t want to sway the community with my personal position for my own self-benefit, and I do recommend that whatever the consensus from the community regarding the issue that @jarisjames has brought forth, is fair and equal treatment for all delegates who may have been affected.

Regarding the RARI price determined for this DIP Q1 distribution, would it make sense to take the RARI price on Jan 1st and then March 31st and determine the medium/mean price from these two price periods?

3 Likes
#3

Hey all—
Just dropping a quick note since I’ve now posted my delegate thread (a few days late—thanks Jaris for the reminder!). I understand the importance of having clear criteria, but I think a short grace period for the Delegate Thread makes sense—especially this early in the program rollout.

Also want to say I fully support including coffee-crusher. From what I saw, they met the intent of the program but ran into issues with Tally vote registration—something clearly out of their control. Would be a shame to exclude someone who’s actively participating just because of a technical glitch.

Appreciate everyone working through this thoughtfully.

3 Likes
#4

Thanks @jarisjames for summarizing and for the reminder about the delegate thread. And in general, thanks to everyone who provided feedback and pointed out things we hadn’t considered—there are already a few areas we can improve on in the next quarter.

I agree with allowing a short grace period for the delegate threads—no more than about two weeks, though. For future proposals, we’d also suggest counting them toward the quarter in which the voting period ends (in response to @coffee-crusher’s remark). As @cr1st0f mentioned, we can only determine who voted after a proposal ends, which would mean RRC-36 (the Rumble Exchange proposal) counts toward Q1.Kindly ask all delegates, to add this one in their delegate thread.

Regarding @coffee-crusher’s voting issue—I remember you’ve flagged this a few times. If it was a technical issue on Tally’s side, making an exception seems reasonable.

On the topic of quarterly price averaging: I’m fine with changing it for Q2, so delegates face less volatility risk at the time of payment. That said, for Q1 the averaging approach was part of the initial proposal.

Looking forward to having the results for Q1 presented in the call, do we already have selected a time for that?

2 Likes
#5

I’m in favour of changing payment to $RARI cost at time of payment rather than average price. This makes more sense and in my opinion can be voted on in the same proposal as the payment disbursal to reduce governance load on delegates.

3 Likes
#6

To some of these prior points, we are fully supportive of a grace period to be inclusive of members such as @coffee-crusher, @Firefly808, and @andreitr, and seems quite customary in situations like this.

@jarisjames, maybe it would be helpful to create or communicate a table/list of the delegates who are qualified and ready to receive points?

Also agree with @cr1st0f’s points that spot price adjusted at each month makes the most sense for payments.

3 Likes
#7

Appreciate your input @PGov, fully aligned with everything you shared.

Below is the current list of delegates who met the voting requirement and have submitted delegate threads:

bitblondy
Firefly808
forexus
lionmsee
PGov
DAOplomats
Jaf
cr1st0f
jarisjames
Sixty
coffee-crusher

@andreitr is the only delegate who hasn’t yet submitted a delegate thread but met the minimum voting requirement of 60% participation. I suggest setting April 30, 2025 as the grace period deadline to complete that requirement and ensure full eligibility for the Q1 rewards cycle.

Additionally, several delegates forgot to include RRC-36 in their rationale posts. The grace period will also serve as a final opportunity for delegates to update their threads and increase their point totals as well.

1 Like
#8

thanks for the shoutout @jarisjames :pray:

1 Like