Proposal: Governance Contribution Recognition (Cycle 2: May - December 2025)

[kevinknielsen]

@danielo

One adjustment I suggest is about increasing the lower weight given to forum participation, and this relates to the foundational question about what we are incentivising.

Thanks @danielo. Posting your voting rationale and forum score are both weighted moderately; when they’re combined, those two factors are already weighted more than voting alone. We’re of the opinion that those two aspects of forum participation combined are slightly more valuable than voting alone, but voting is the most important single action that a delegate can take.

@PinkBrains

Agree with @jengajojo_daoplomats, while we understand it may signal broader trust from token holders, it could also be a barrier for delegates who have over 2.5K SCR delegated but fewer delegators.

@coffee-crusher

I have a couple of questions about the CGR’s eligibility criteria, specifically, regarding the >5 delegations rule.

How will this impact graduates of the Delegate Accelerator program who could receive up to 5,000 SCR from a single delegation (i.e. the program multi-sig wallet)? They could meet the 2,500 SCR minimum but not the delegation count.

Thank you both for your thoughts, I hope we can add some color to our decision here. With regards to the new delegates entering the DAO from the Delegate Accelerator, a 5000 SCR delegation is already quite a substantial reward. It’s relatively unprecedented for a DAO to pay brand new delegates, but our proposal currently gives them a shot at being compensated in the 2nd payout. They can also support each other in delegating to one another to meet that minimum criteria before the 2nd snapshot.

@coffee-crusher

I support @danielo comments regarding the Negation Game as a more defined forum participation that reflects a delegates thought process, and hope to see the next potential cycle of the GCR consider how to incorporate (and possibly give more weight to) forum comments before a vote, in addition to rationales use for commentary.

This aligns with our thoughts as well. Use this Cycle 2 to acknowledge and lightly reward the use of NG, leave it open for future working groups to potentially weight it more heavily.

@coffee-crusher

Regarding the edibility criteria, when is this “snapshot” taken for participation? Is it at the start (and must be maintained during the entire cycle timeframe) that the delegate must meet all eligibility criteria or is this “snapshot” determined at the close of the cycle timeframe? For example, if a delegate reaches the 60%, 2,500 SCR and >5 delegators half way through the cycle active timeframe, is the delegate eligible for the GCR rewards from that cycle?

The first snapshot will be taken on September 1st; that’s when the final scoring data will be provided. We wanted to account for all forum activity in August. The 2nd Snapshot will be taken just prior to the 2nd payout, accounting for September-December. This gives delegates time to reach all of those requirements halfway through the cycle, but they won’t be rewarded until the 2nd payout.

@coffee-crusher

If the Cycle 2 is extended and the CGR’s mandate extends to support this cycle, will the GCR working group require additional budget approval from the DAO beyond their 30K SCR approved for the team members compensation payment?

@coffee-crusher

Also in regards to the budget, if the consensus is to extend the second iteration to December, will this budget need to be adjusted to reflect the increased two months of 140,000 SCR for the Tier reward allocations?

The total budget will need to be increased by 140,000 SCR (covering the two extension months) for the delegate rewards portion; the new total budget for 8 months of GCR will be 580,000 SCR. For the additional WG compensation, we won’t include an increased budget request for the WG in this proposal, but we will need to work out a way for one member of the WG to work with gov council or re-elect the WG in time for the payout in early Jan. Most of the heavy work has been done for this cycle, we’d just need someone to collect data and post final scores.

@connormcmk

if users have published their rationales using the Negation Game, will that count toward their rationale rate?

@Seiryuu May be the best person to connect with here; we’ve tried to gather everyone’s rationale from NG, so it should already be counted under the Rationale score. Please message us if anyone thinks that we missed them.