SEEDGov Initial Thoughts
November has come to an end. Paradoxically, it officially did so on December 12. Today, we are ready to share with the DAO the results of the first month of the Delegate Incentive Program 1.5. This first month has been crucial for testing the new framework and has provided valuable lessons.
The analysis of the reports revealed a significant insight: the level of activity in the DAO remains intense and demands constant attention. Aware of this, we decided not to pause the DIP while transitioning to the new version. For this reason, over the past 30 days, we faced the challenge of executing tasks related to version 1.0, managing the transition, and operating under the demands of version 1.5 simultaneously.
During this period, we resolved disputes, coordinated payments with the MSS, designed and iterated work frameworks, worked alongside Karma on the new changes, improved the dashboard, attended calls, and tracked delegate attendance. Additionally, we reviewed all communication rationales and processed over 600 forum comments. These comments were observed, subjected to an initial validity filter, and evaluated using a rubric based on five qualitative parameters. All of this was achieved while navigating the busiest month in the program’s history regarding inquiries.
We look forward to implementing improvements as the program progresses and continue refining its structure to maximize its impact. Also, we are relieved that the transition has come to an end, and we found solutions to a lot of things that we won’t need to worry about in the future.
In this regard, we want to thank @mmurthy and the Karma team for their exceptional dedication to developing the new dashboard and their constant support and availability.
Karma Initial Thoughts
Over the past two months, we have been heads down, working closely with the SeedOrg team to rebuild the Delegate Compensation Dashboard from the ground up. This effort was informed by six months of learnings from DIP 1.0 and focused on addressing two primary goals:
- Enhance transparency for delegates regarding their monthly activity:
- Introduced a dedicated page for delegates to view their monthly activity.
- Clearly show which proposals they voted or did not vote on and their last 90-day voting activity.
- Integrated communication rationales from various sources to eliminate previous pain points.
- Indexed the forum to display all posts made by delegates during the month and many more.
- Provide admins with robust tools to manage the program more efficiently:
- Revamped the admin portal to adapt to their ideal workflow
- The system now allows admins to include or exclude proposals without our team’s involvement.
- Simplified the auditing and updating of delegate statistics.
- Added a delegate feedback rubric for admins to input evaluation data.
- Launched version 1 of LLM integration to automate delegate feedback scoring.
We remain committed to iterating on the product to better serve both delegates and admins. If you have any questions or feedback, please contact me on Telegram (mmurthy) or via email at mahesh@karmahq.xyz.
November Participants
For the November iteration of the program, 71 participants enrolled, 59 of whom met the requirements to qualify.
You can see the full list here.
Parameters Breakdown
Snapshot Voting
During the month, there were a total of 4 Snapshot Votes, which were considered for the assignment of scores by SV. It is important to note that only those proposals that ended in November were counted. These are the proposals that were considered:
- Restitution For Extensively Delayed ArbitrumDAO Minigrant Winners
- [Non-Constitutional] Treasury Management v1.2
- Adopt a Delegate Code of Conduct & Formalize Operations
- Hackathon Continuation Program
Tally Voting
For this month, a total of 2 Tally Votes were considered for TV scoring. It is important to note that only those proposals that ended in November counted. It’s important to clarify that proposals with the tag [CANCELED] are not counted for DIP. These are the proposals that were considered:
Communication Rationale
For the CR, the published rationals of all the votes of the month were considered, taking into account Snapshot and Tally. To obtain the maximum qualification in this aspect, a delegate had to express his rationale for all the month’s votes, in other words, 6 (4 Snapshot + 2 Tally).
Delegate Feedback
Starting this month, the ‘Commenting in Proposal’ section is deprecated and replaced by ‘Delegate Feedback’ (DF).
In this section, delegate comments are manually reviewed, subjected to an initial validity filter, and then qualitatively scored with ratings from 1 to 4, as approved in the proposal.
In addition to scored comments like the one above, there are also cases where comments are deemed invalid. This can happen, for example, if the comment is a Communication Rationale or if the author of the comment is also the author of a proposal and therefore treated as a proposer rather than a delegate.
You may also encounter comments like this one, which we find do not add value to the discussion.
The reasons can vary: it might be repetitive compared to other delegates’ inputs or lack the necessary depth of analysis or relevance. These two criteria are key. While it is relatively easy to achieve good timing and clarity in communication, if the comment lacks meaningful content, questions aspects already addressed in the proposal or fails to provide any critique or suggestion, timing and clarity will matter little.
You can check your Delegate Feedback in the Karma Dashboard.
Additional Note
While working on data entry, we identified an error that affects delegations composed of more than one member. As a result, some delegates will not be able to view their rubrics on the Karma Dashboard.
The delegates affected by this issue are:
- Areta
- DAOPlomats
- L2BEAT
- Lampros DAO
- UADP
We are working to resolve this issue. In the meantime, affected delegates can check their scores in this sheet.
The sheet will be deprecated once the Karma dashboard resolves this conflict, and we expect delegates to review their evaluations directly on the dashboard moving forward.
November Results
You can see the dashboard with the results implemented by Karma here.
Of all the participating delegates, 41 were eligible to receive compensation.
- Tier 1: 19 delegates.
- Tier 2: 19 delegates.
- Tier 3: 3 delegates.
| Delegate | PUSD |
|---|---|
| L2Beat | 6,927.20 |
| Jojo | 6,766.20 |
| 404DAO | 6,633.20 |
| Bob-Rossi | 6,598.90 |
| cp0x | 6,598.90 |
| jameskbh | 6,596.80 |
| Argonaut | 6,577.90 |
| Lampros DAO | 6,575.80 |
| paulofonseca | 6,519.80 |
| Gauntlet | 6,517.00 |
| 0x_ultra | 6,471.50 |
| PGov | 6,421.10 |
| 0xDonPepe | 6,388.20 |
| Tane | 6,357.40 |
| pedrob | 6,325.20 |
| DAOplomats | 6,191.50 |
| Juanrah | 6,170.50 |
| GensDAO | 6,170.50 |
| Larva | 6,059.20 |
| Karpatkey | 6,058.50 |
| UADP | 6,057.10 |
| NathanVDH | 5,096.20 |
| GFXLabs | 4,940.00 |
| olimpio | 4,890.00 |
| Curia | 4,875.00 |
| BlockworksResearch | 4,828.00 |
| Gabriel | 4,801.40 |
| Ezr3al | 4,800.00 |
| Vertex Protocol | 4,800.00 |
| Kuiqian.eth | 4,759.20 |
| DisruptionJoe | 4,730.20 |
| 0xTALVO | 4,728.60 |
| Areta | 4,676.80 |
| mcfly | 4,600.00 |
| Griff | 4,590.00 |
| KuiClub | 4,426.60 |
| CastleCapital | 4,368.00 |
| Tekr0x.eth | 4,305.00 |
| TempeTechie | 4,305.00 |
| Frisson | 3,204.96 |
| StableLab | 3,095.24 |
Compensations in USD
Bonus Points
This month, Bonus Points were awarded to several delegates for their attendance at the call, as voted in v1.5:
This month, there were no GRCs. The two bi-weekly calls took place as usual, with a maximum possible score of 5% as a result.
Thirty delegates received Bonus Points for attending the Bi-weekly Governance Calls.
Incentives to delegates (November)
The total cost destined to the delegates this month will be 224,659.40 USD.
You can check our Public Table to see the detailed breakdown of delegates’ results.
Costs
We track all cost data for greater transparency in our Payment Distribution Thread
New Members of the Program
As we said in previous posts, any delegate can apply to the program anytime.
We have ten new participants who will be part of the program next month:
[CALL TO ACTION!] Dispute Period
As stated in the proposal, delegates have a timeframe to express their disagreement with the results presented by the Incentive Program Administrator.
To raise a dispute, delegates should do so by posting a message in the forum using the following template:
Title: Dispute
User name
Reason for dispute (please detail)
