[DIP v1.6] Delegate Incentive Program Results (April 2025)

[paulofonseca]

@MinistroDolar

The rationale during the assessment was:
“Okay, this single comment alone is not enough to qualify, so we’ll proceed to review the remaining comments since doing so causes no harm.”

From there, the intention behind validating a second comment was to acknowledge additional meaningful contributions, providing the delegate with relevant feedback for future rounds.

It’s important to note that if — based on our criteria — the top-scoring comment had been enough, we wouldn’t have considered the second one in order to avoid any potential negative impact. (This approach can be seen in other cases, such as JoJo’s, where other interesting contributions were made, but we chose to score only the top two.)

It’s important to note that this represents my personal response and not the final word from SEEDGov as the DIP Program Manager.

errr… this is a clear case of selection bias @MinistroDolar

The criteria for considering a comment valid or invalid should be the exact same criteria for all delegates, all of the time, and not be conditional to each delegate particular situation in each particular moment.

Then, all the valid comments should be scored according to the rubric.

The PMs can’t be selectively choosing which comments, from which delegates, at which time, are considered to count towards their average for the DF score (which is 40% of the total score) or not.

I think the criteria should be that, all comments are valid, and then there are cases where the comment should be considered invalid.

@SEEDGov Could you please clarify what are the criteria to classify a delegate comment as invalid to not count towards the DF metric in the DIP? And can you confirm that those criteria are being applied exactly the same to all delegates at the same time, or not?