[DIP v1.7]Delegate Incentive Program Questions and Feedback

[paulofonseca]

@SEEDGov

If we were to start assigning scores to some DIP-related contributions but not to others, it could easily be perceived as self-serving — as if we could be rewarding comments that “benefit” us.

well, it’s also obviously self-serving to you guys, the current service provider managing the DIP, to not reward contributions to improve/change the DIP, especially if those contributions show that delegates are not very happy with the way you’ve been running the DIP, like the negative Net Promoter Score that came from the survey I ran, shows:

@paulofonseca

There might be some bias on these results because people that are not satisfied with the DIP would be more likely to answer the survey, but either way you cut it, these results are pretty bad overall. A negative NPS score is always bad. If delegates currently participating and getting paid by the DIP not only don’t recommend their fellow peers to join the Arbitrum DIP and contribute to the DAO, but are active detractors, this is bad for our DAO.

but ok whatever… I knew from the get-go that my contributions to try to improve the DIP wouldn’t be rewarded because of this exception that you’ve created in the DIP rules.
but I had to dispute it because I think it’s unfair… especially because I bet if you ask all the other delegates that received bonus points for their contributions in september, they would say that this contribution of mine, by setting up and running the DIP survey, was potentially more impactful to the DAO than other contributions that were rewarded with BP, and definitely deserving of being rewarded. but please, @krst @Euphoria @TempeTechie @Tekr0x.eth @cp0x and @Curia tell me if I’m wrong in this bet here.

this is, in my opinion, just one of many ways the current DIP is failing our DAO.

but another, more scandalous way, is regarding the scoring of comments in the forum:

@SEEDGov

unfortunately, none of the four criteria for being considered a valid contribution in the assessment were met

since… may I remind you that for the month of August, the first month under these four tigher DIP 1.7 criteria for awarding DF points, you guys awarded the following comments, with 8.4 DF points each:

this comment from Olimpio got him an extra ~ $500 USD in rewards in the August results

@olimpio

I have voted in Favour. We have supported similar proposals in the past, and did not see any reason to reject it.

this comment from Areta also got them and extra ~$500 USD in rewards in August, but when it was posted in August, it didn’t even contained the reasoning for their August votes. that reasoning was added to the comment on September 3rd via an edit.

this comment from GFX Labs also got them an extra ~$500 USD in rewards in August.

this comment from Gauntlet also got them an extra ~$500 USD in rewards in August.

this comment from Arana Digital also got them an extra ~$500 USD in rewards in August.

this comment from Griff which is referring to their July votes, not even to their August votes, also got them an extra ~500 USD in rewards in August.

this comment from the UADP also got them an extra ~300 USD in rewards in August.

this comment from Karpatkey was also awarded with 8.4 DF points.

this comment from Tane was also awarded with 8.4 DF points.

and the worst example, Camelot, also got an extra ~$500 USD in rewards in August, from the same additional 8.4 DF points as all these comments above, while they haven’t published any comment on the forum during the month of August, as you can see in the official Karma Delegate Compensation dashboard.

they did publish this comment on September 1st, at 10:27 am UTC, but that was not in August, except if they are posting from Hawai or something.

so @SEEDGov, please tell me, how do you reconcile awarding these kinds of comments with 8.4 DF points each, spending at least an extra ~$5,000 USD from the DAO to reward them, and not reward my contributions to the DAO? does that feel neutral and fair to you? to anybody?